Over Sharp LED LCD - Discuss

Flukester · 23 Sep 2010 at 08:18

I thought this would be fun, as it's often a hot topic in any LED / LCD thread.

Plasma die hards argue that LED (full array) LCD look oversharp... I myself like this look.

What I propose is this sharpness is the actual sharpness in the video source, and not done by over processing in software by the set.

I think LED LCD by very design produces a crisper picture to the eye, if this was not the case and it was all software trickery, plasma manu's would also do this to wow joe average in the highsteet.

As it stands in high street stores the LED LCDs look far better and impressive.

I think the points above prove that plasma, with it's softer look is in fact the more artificial look (the softer look is created by the panels lighting method itself) ...and LED LCD is the more accurate reproduction of the video source.

I know a lot of plasma owners calibrate etc etc.. but as much as you get accurate colours / contrasts, the inherrant 'softness' of the picture is still there.. at least to the eye, which seems to be unable to cope with per pixel lit displays. If this wasn't a issue you would see desktop plasma for your PC.

If plasma doesn't have inherrant 'softness', then why does OLED look so much sharper ?. Is it all down to IR ?

The real world is sharp, at least if you have 20 / 20 vision, why would you not want that on your TV ?

Discuss

jellybeard999 · 23 Sep 2010 at 08:26

It's not down to software or lighting, it's down to the technologies used; the plasma and liquid crystal.

Flukester · 23 Sep 2010 at 08:30

jellybeard999 said:
It's not down to software or lighting, it's down to the technologies used; the plasma and liquid crystal.

Thats what my point is... the plasma panel is in fact softening the picture to the eye.

I can't understand why that would be something you want in a display ?

khrall · 23 Sep 2010 at 08:49

Flukester said:
The real world is sharp, at least if you have 20 / 20 vision, why would you not want that on your TV ?

Discuss

Imagining a 2D representation of a 3D world, to me LED/LCD with it's sharpness comes across as cardboard cut out items stacked on top of each other, with no representation or gradiant for curves. The edges are TOO defined, almost like everything having an outline. Which gives me an artifical image.

I don't have unaided 20/20 vision, not that it matters, the real world isn't that sharp.

However, I haven't looked at the current generation of TV's as I brought mine last year, I am unaware of any improvements that may have been made and there will always be arguement over the different technologies whilst posts are being made that X>Y.

DanF · 23 Sep 2010 at 09:34

It's not just the sharp edged issue of lcd, it's also the way colours come across. Most of the lcd screens I've seen come across as neon instead of realistic colours, usually over-saturated, too bright and not as smooth looking.

Nanoman · 23 Sep 2010 at 21:49

Have to agree, my house mate has recently been stuck on which TV to get, have demo'd a lot of the TVs and found that the Samsung LED LCDs definitely have the most vibrant and sharp image. Vibrancy is a little over saturated sometimes but you can calibrate them to look pretty amazing tbh. A lot of plasma owners will probably disagree. I personally feel that the latest generation of LED LCDs have overtaken Plasma now imo in terms of PQ and contrast.

lucid · 23 Sep 2010 at 22:53

Flukester said:
Thats what my point is... the plasma panel is in fact softening the picture to the eye.

I can't understand why that would be something you want in a display ?

If you know what to use and how to use it then there are test discs with patterns that can be used to look at the resolution of a display. The patterns can be used to find a neutral point for the sharpness control, then see if the set is displaying all the resolution possible from the video signal. There are patterns for HD and SD material, so both can be assessed independently.

I can't make a blanket statement for all plasmas, but all of those I have calibrated for clients all managed to display the full resolution of a 720p or 1080p signal as appropriate to the screen resolution. In short, I would strongly disagree that plasmas soften the image.

Plasma uses phosphor pixels to create dots of light. The technology means that Plasma pixels produce a better blended image in the transition between pixels. By contrast LCD has hard transitions because of the technology. It can't blend pixels. That's often mistaken for "extra" sharpness, but it's nothing to do with the video image - it's a limit of the technology. jellybeard999 said this and is absolutely correct.

TONY · 24 Sep 2010 at 01:23

I like the sharp look that an LCD display has rather than the soft image from a plasma display.

Westyfield2 · 24 Sep 2010 at 16:06

Last year we bought two Panasonics. A V10 LCD (37") and a G10 Plasma (42").

Tbh, now they're both off Dynamic I really don't care about the difference between them. Yes of-course I can see the difference, but meh. Can't say I prefer one or the other.

I'm sure though that if the LCD was a cheapo cack one then I would prefer the G10 Plasma!

Fr0dders · 24 Sep 2010 at 21:48

Flukester said:
Thats what my point is... the plasma panel is in fact softening the picture to the eye.

I can't understand why that would be something you want in a display ?

because the blur in a plasma hides the flaws of a SD tv signal which you will most probably spend at least 50 % of your time watching.

Amp34 · 25 Sep 2010 at 13:22

To me a decent Plasma gives you a similar look to that of a decent cinema screen. That is what I want when watching films and TV programs etc.

LCD on the other hand has this rather annoying habit of almost stripping all of the post processing the film/TV producers put on and makes so much TV look like it was filmed on a cheap camcorder. Obviously not all LCD's are as bad as one another but I much prefer the cinema style Plasmas.

This is coming from someone with 20/15 vision (better than 20/20 vision), so it's not like I go round seeing the world in a fuzz...

Bossk128 · 27 Sep 2010 at 14:29

Amp34 said:
To me a decent Plasma gives you a similar look to that of a decent cinema screen. That is what I want when watching films and TV programs etc.

LCD on the other hand has this rather annoying habit of almost stripping all of the post processing the film/TV producers put on and makes so much TV look like it was filmed on a cheap camcorder. Obviously not all LCD's are as bad as one another but I much prefer the cinema style Plasmas.

This is coming from someone with 20/15 vision (better than 20/20 vision), so it's not like I go round seeing the world in a fuzz...

This, a bit. I like detail in games, but cinema is a different matter. I find plasmas do indeed look more like a cinema screen. The colours are also more accurate on a plasma IMO. LCDs do have that wow colour pop, but it's hardly real life. I'd be interested to know what ISF calibrators have to say about getting LCD vs plasma to D65.

juno_first · 27 Sep 2010 at 14:37

I have a sharp Sharp LED 46" only 650 ex display.
After MUCH calibration ive got 2 modes set for games (4ms) or better colours for movie tho not full contrast!

1080p looks stunning & i increase the tv sharpness until the x264 compression becomes visible, this does not look fake tho i have to sit within 2m to see the detail.

The LED colours can be very vibrant or correct, depends on your taste.

Although watching older divx or dvd sucks as the compression artifacts are very visible!
These low res videos look much better on an old CRT or i presume plaza, where the artifacts are soaked up in the blurred display.

I know there are many die hard plazma panasonic users but please give LED a chance.

thedoc46 · 27 Sep 2010 at 14:52

The problem I have with LCD / LED is motion.. Simply its ineffective abilty to handle motion. You can throw all the digital trickery you want such as 120hz blah blah blah, but the bottom line is it can't handle motion as effectivley as a Plasma. What it does to compensate makes movies look FAKE and like a documentary instead of a movie.

juno_first · 27 Sep 2010 at 15:21

Yeah motion is an issue with lcd/led. i dont know about plazma.
Im lucky my sharp has a film-mode for 24hz, so no 100hz processing.
This film-mode makes films very fluid, its actually called the soap opera effect.
At first this smooth motion made me feel sick, but now i much prefer it.
My older lcd is a basic 60hz & films look very stuttery in conparison, which i thought was normal! now it looks bad.

thedoc46 · 27 Sep 2010 at 16:07

juno_first said:
Yeah motion is an issue with lcd/led. i dont know about plazma.
Im lucky my sharp has a film-mode for 24hz, so no 100hz processing.
This film-mode makes films very fluid, its actually called the soap opera effect.
At first this smooth motion made me feel sick, but now i much prefer it.
My older lcd is a basic 60hz & films look very stuttery in conparison, which i thought was normal! now it looks bad.

Well that's just it.. It can either do stuttery or an unnatural fluidity.. Which isn't how the director intended.. As for your set, I'm sure you mean 240hz, which is marketing pap to lure the un-educated into thinking their sets are twice as good as the typical LCD 120hz sets. True film mode 24hz would produce too much flicker on todays LCD's and Plasma's, hence the 3:2 pulldown for non capable 96hz sets. Since all movies are shot in 24fps.

juno_first · 27 Sep 2010 at 16:52

My tv is a Sharp LC46LE700E.

Some educating needed if you're unaware of how 24hz works:
Most films are 23.976 fps & if the TV supports 24hz properly with a film-mode to smooth out the motion, then the playback will be completely judder free! Which is a lot better than stuttering. CRT naturally does this as the image is not redrawn, it overwritten (I think).

Anyway, a LCD at 24hz has no more a noticeable refresh rate flash than at 60hz, UNLIKE a CRT monitor. Though at 24hz the mouse pointer kinda stutters; I use a refresh rate changer in WMC to switch refresh rates, XBMC even auto changes the refresh rate for the film fps though requires messing with config files.

When watching tv I change the refresh rate to 50hz, as the broadcast is 25fps, so the tv smooths it out, just like the tv's in-built freeview smooths out tv, you can test this on the news channel where the text scrolls across the bottom.
Also watching eg football on ITVHD looks really good & the football does not streek across the screen in a blur, its smooth & identifiable. I think some plazmas use a local 600hz screen refresh to iron out such motion blur?

Anyway I think 'smoothvision' as I call it is really good once you get used to it & is just like watching a CRT tv. Only thing is with a LED/LCD panel there may be ghosting of some tones, which is due to the LCD tech. Dunno about OLED or plazma.

SpeedFreak · 27 Sep 2010 at 19:37

thedoc46 said:
The problem I have with LCD / LED is motion.. Simply its ineffective abilty to handle motion. You can throw all the digital trickery you want such as 120hz blah blah blah, but the bottom line is it can't handle motion as effectivley as a Plasma. What it does to compensate makes movies look FAKE and like a documentary instead of a movie.

quoted for the truth. I do not dislike LCDs at all and in fact look forward to when they can match plasmas in terms of accuracy and black levels (without the side effects of local dimming). What I cannot stand is the motion resolution of LCD. Even in HD I find that sport and most notably football looks far crisper and more natural on my plasma than on my mate's Samsung C750 I believe it is.

Amp34 · 27 Sep 2010 at 19:39

juno_first said:
I have a sharp Sharp LED 46" only 650 ex display.
After MUCH calibration ive got 2 modes set for games (4ms) or better colours for movie tho not full contrast!

1080p looks stunning & i increase the tv sharpness until the x264 compression becomes visible, this does not look fake tho i have to sit within 2m to see the detail.

The LED colours can be very vibrant or correct, depends on your taste.

Although watching older divx or dvd sucks as the compression artifacts are very visible!
These low res videos look much better on an old CRT or i presume plaza, where the artifacts are soaked up in the blurred display.

I know there are many die hard plazma panasonic users but please give LED a chance.

I am going to give LED a chance, in fact it may well be my next TV, unfortunately that is a few years away yet as we haven't got much bigger than 11" or so.

LED backlit LCD is not LED.

juno_first · 27 Sep 2010 at 20:47

Backlit LED has a 2m or 3m contrast ratio like plazma, not 70000 like LCD.
True LED is just not feasible atm, except in a phone