Samsung LED TVs

[rlpiii]

Originally Posted by oscar_in_fw

How about some examples on Blu-ray of video scenes which you think make the Samsung LEDs "shine" over all the other flat panels you've experienced ? I'm not at all convinced any LCD would be worthwhile next time I"m in the market for a flat panel. [Just gauging whether I should be recommending double kornea transplants for you as well. ]

You broke your eyes staring at your busted Toshiba RPTV for to long, so you can't be trusted.

[mgfarr]

To those of you who do not think the manufactures go to great lengths to get people to notice their tvs, let me tell you what happened when we got my son's new 42" LG hdtv home. We went thru the putting the stand on the bottom, hooked up the satellite connection and turned in on. The very first thing that came up was a menu with the following:

Where will you be using this tv
1. Showroom floor
2. Home use

Guess what happened when we chose showroom floor to see what would happen. That's right, we had a 42" flashlight on own hands. Everything was very bright and the color saturation was turned up. Do not be fooled by what you see up on the wall at Best Buy. You will not want to use that bright and over saturated picture all the time.

[kloneman]

Originally Posted by oscar_in_fw

How about some examples on Blu-ray of video scenes which you think make the Samsung LEDs "shine" over all the other flat panels you've experienced ? I'm not at all convinced any LCD would be worthwhile next time I"m in the market for a flat panel. [Just gauging whether I should be recommending double kornea transplants for you as well. ]

My personal opinion is that Samsung looks better on EVERYTHING, and a suggestion that a particular scene would illustrate this is pointless. Attempting to convince you of this is a waste of time, since this all about perceptions, and all we can agree on is the fact that we disagree. Rather than listen to people like us who are obviously biased, potential buyers should check the candidates out for themselves with the content/programming that they watch most often, to see how each performs. This viewing should ideally be done under lighting conditions that are similar to those where the display will be used. A viewing of candidates under identical conditions is a compromise, unless those conditions are similar to those at the intended location for the display. Customers should also ask questions about service and support, and any problems that have been observed or reported on each of the models they're interested in. Early adopters are the ones on the front-end of this, either benefitting from a technology/design rollout, or being victims of it, so delaying purchases will probably get those who can wait a better price and a product with some history behind it that can be checked.

Re: Your recommendation on sight and vision:

You could NOT see the rainbows in your Sharp projector. When I fisrt saw the display and commented on them, you were so surprised that you said "You can see that?!?". (Obviously you'd found out somewhere, that the artifact existed, and bought the projector anyway because you could not see it) Then I showed you how you could see it too (which occurred during my first viewing session). Now, you will neither confirm nor deny that you can see a similar artifact in the Kuro (again something I noticed on my initial viewing and discounted because I had confused it with a DLP rather than a plasma, but confirmed on subsequent viewings). I see these artifacts in both sources ALL THE TIME, and it would drive me crazy to watch them continuously.

You post question marks after the word "rainbow" in apparent attempt to dismiss the artifacts I see, in your posts here and other forums. No amount of question marks will make this particular RGB artifact disappear for those of us unfortunate enough to see it, whatever you want to call it. It exists, and others besides me have independently reported seeing it.

You claim in one post that the Samsung LED backlit LCD's colors are "oversaturated" to the point of being "cartoonish", and then, in the same post, claim they are "washed out." This apparent contradiction is actually based upon the off-axis behavior of LCD panels. I believe that you are exaggerating the magnitude of the effect. My observation has been and continues to be that the degradation in saturation (and contrast) does not reach objectionable levels until extreme viewing angles are encountered, and in most cases the saturation (and contrast) looked better than the plasma (again my opinion, rather than a measurement)

Back in 2005, getting saturated color from an LCD was a problem. In 2009 color saturation is not a problem, and you can TURN DOWN THE COLOR, if you want. Back in 2005, getting high contrast from an LCD was a problem, in 2009, it is not. Back in 2005, switching times were around 16 milliseconds for an LCD, which caused blur, in 2009 this is now claimed to be 2 milliseconds for my set. This duration should allow for any pixel to change state 500 times per second, which is more than fast enough to be compatible with any current video standard. The model I have is advertised as updating 240 times per second (10x the rate at which film images are displayed, 8x the old NTSC video, and 2x the rate of last year's models), so there is more capability present that is either untapped or is used for some other unstated purpose..

I noticed on more than one occasion and on more than one sample that the Kuro make's some people's faces appear like they had caked makeup on. This effect, which suggests compressing a continuous gradient of color into fewer shades did NOT appear on other displays that were showing the same image. This effectt is repeatable, and should be the subject of some measurements to see why it occurs, and if any steps can be taken to minimize it.

According to the research I've done from sources on the internet, plasmas use essentially the same phosphors as CRTs which is why there is a good correlation to the full "On" color between them. Phosphors are poor reproducers of the full color range (gamut) and manufacturers have to play switching games to reproduce the range of colors from what amounts to a fluorescent discharge cell that does not support proportional dimming the way a CRT can. Plasma manufacturers have to play games to keep the phosphor from burning in too. LCDs, however, can accomplish proportional control by electrically adjusting drive voltages that vary the amount of "polarization twist" that the light undergoes as it travels through the liquid. Prior to the LED light sources, the LCD's color range suffered because the compact fluorescent tubes that illuminated them did not have a rich enough spectrum. LCDs, including those drive by LEDs don't have burn-in problems

The following was exerpted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamut#C...arious_systems:

CRT and similar video displays have a roughly triangular color gamut which covers a significant portion of the visible color space. In CRTs, the limitations are due to the phosphors in the screen which produce red, green, and blue light.

Liquid crystal display (LCD) screens filter the light emitted by a backlight. The gamut of an LCD screen is therefore limited to the emitted spectrum of the backlight. Typical LCD screens use cold-cathode fluorescent bulbs (CCFL's) for backlights. LCD Screens with certain LED or wide-gamut CCFL backlights yield a more comprehensive gamut than CRTs.

There is a "fire sale" going on with Pioneer Kuro's. Every Pioneer dealer and factory representative I've spoken to has acknowledged that the company is getting out of the display business. Contrast this "end-of life" scenario for the best plasma display with the consistently improved quality of LCD technology and its growing market share. Add in the LCD's reduced power consumption, reduced heat generation, reduced weight (easier to mount) and its ability to function acceptably as a display in a variety of ambient lighting conditions (the Kuro screen is GREY, not BLACK, and any edge in black level it may have had is eliminated in anything approaching normal room lighting) made it a compelling compromise, at least for me.

LCD displays are not perfect - I've already stated that I see what I call "light pumping" where the whole display brightness is altered by the amount of bright content displayed in the current image, and I want something bigger. I think the three (or more) color laser projector (preferably using a solid state technology) to be the end game technology here, but so far, I have not seen one (other than the Mitsubishi LaserVue that uses a DLP) at the size (the current LaserVue model is too small for the "wall-sized l" display I really want, and think the next one will be also.) and price point (high for a small display that should actually be much cheaper than its competition, because it should be simpler from a design standpoint) where I'd pull the trigger on one.

You claim I and others who see these need eye surgery? Smiley faces aside, perhaps a lifetime of viewing displays of limited capability has "colored" your perception, more than age has degraded my ability to focus on close-in small sized text You will neither confirm nor deny that you see the artifacts that I've seen, and I wonder why anyone would consider recommendations made under such circumstances.

[kloneman]

Originally Posted by mgfarr

To those of you who do not think the manufactures go to great lengths to get people to notice their tvs, let me tell you what happened when we got my son's new 42" LG hdtv home. We went thru the putting the stand on the bottom, hooked up the satellite connection and turned in on. The very first thing that came up was a menu with the following:

Where will you be using this tv
1. Showroom floor
2. Home use

Guess what happened when we chose showroom floor to see what would happen. That's right, we had a 42" flashlight on own hands. Everything was very bright and the color saturation was turned up. Do not be fooled by what you see up on the wall at Best Buy. You will not want to use that bright and over saturated picture all the time.

I missed the initial turn on of my Samsung (wife and kids turned it on while I was out shopping for an HDMI cable), but from looking at the manual, it does something similar. I haven't yet figured out how to emable it now to see how bad it is. My set came with the base installed. I would bet that the "Show Room Floor" mode would work well in a brightly lit environment such as a restaurant.

I think there is is some kind of demo mode that shows the virtues of the 240 Hz update rate and the processing that smoothes out the motion in the image. I would still sat that the most important thing is how it looks in the "Home use" mode.

[rlpiii]

Originally Posted by kloneman

My personal opinion is that Samsung looks better on EVERYTHING, and a suggestion that a particular scene would illustrate this is pointless. Attempting to convince you of this is a waste of time, since this all about perceptions, and all we can agree on is the fact that we disagree. Rather than listen to people like us who are obviously biased, potential buyers should check the candidates out for themselves with the content/programming that they watch most often, to see how each performs. This viewing should ideally be done under lighting conditions that are similar to those where the display will be used. A viewing of candidates under identical conditions is a compromise, unless those conditions are similar to those at the intended location for the display. Customers should also ask questions about service and support, and any problems that have been observed or reported on each of the models they're interested in. Early adopters are the ones on the front-end of this, either benefitting from a technology/design rollout, or being victims of it, so delaying purchases will probably get those who can wait a better price and a product with some history behind it that can be checked.

Re: Your recommendation on sight and vision:

You could NOT see the rainbows in your Sharp projector. When I fisrt saw the display and commented on them, you were so surprised that you said "You can see that?!?". (Obviously you'd found out somewhere, that the artifact existed, and bought the projector anyway because you could not see it) Then I showed you how you could see it too (which occurred during my first viewing session). Now, you will neither confirm nor deny that you can see a similar artifact in the Kuro (again something I noticed on my initial viewing and discounted because I had confused it with a DLP rather than a plasma, but confirmed on subsequent viewings). I see these artifacts in both sources ALL THE TIME, and it would drive me crazy to watch them continuously.

You post question marks after the word "rainbow" in apparent attempt to dismiss the artifacts I see, in your posts here and other forums. No amount of question marks will make this particular RGB artifact disappear for those of us unfortunate enough to see it, whatever you want to call it. It exists, and others besides me have independently reported seeing it.

You claim in one post that the Samsung LED backlit LCD's colors are "oversaturated" to the point of being "cartoonish", and then, in the same post, claim they are "washed out." This apparent contradiction is actually based upon the off-axis behavior of LCD panels. I believe that you are exaggerating the magnitude of the effect. My observation has been and continues to be that the degradation in saturation (and contrast) does not reach objectionable levels until extreme viewing angles are encountered, and in most cases the saturation (and contrast) looked better than the plasma (again my opinion, rather than a measurement)

Back in 2005, getting saturated color from an LCD was a problem. In 2009 color saturation is not a problem, and you can TURN DOWN THE COLOR, if you want. Back in 2005, getting high contrast from an LCD was a problem, in 2009, it is not. Back in 2005, switching times were around 16 milliseconds for an LCD, which caused blur, in 2009 this is now claimed to be 2 milliseconds for my set. This duration should allow for any pixel to change state 500 times per second, which is more than fast enough to be compatible with any current video standard. The model I have is advertised as updating 240 times per second (10x the rate at which film images are displayed, 8x the old NTSC video, and 2x the rate of last year's models), so there is more capability present that is either untapped or is used for some other unstated purpose..

I noticed on more than one occasion and on more than one sample that the Kuro make's some people's faces appear like they had caked makeup on. This effect, which suggests compressing a continuous gradient of color into fewer shades did NOT appear on other displays that were showing the same image. This effectt is repeatable, and should be the subject of some measurements to see why it occurs, and if any steps can be taken to minimize it.

According to the research I've done from sources on the internet, plasmas use essentially the same phosphors as CRTs which is why there is a good correlation to the full "On" color between them. Phosphors are poor reproducers of the full color range (gamut) and manufacturers have to play switching games to reproduce the range of colors from what amounts to a fluorescent discharge cell that does not support proportional dimming the way a CRT can. Plasma manufacturers have to play games to keep the phosphor from burning in too. LCDs, however, can accomplish proportional control by electrically adjusting drive voltages that vary the amount of "polarization twist" that the light undergoes as it travels through the liquid. Prior to the LED light sources, the LCD's color range suffered because the compact fluorescent tubes that illuminated them did not have a rich enough spectrum. LCDs, including those drive by LEDs don't have burn-in problems

The following was exerpted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamut#C...arious_systems:



There is a "fire sale" going on with Pioneer Kuro's. Every Pioneer dealer and factory representative I've spoken to has acknowledged that the company is getting out of the display business. Contrast this "end-of life" scenario for the best plasma display with the consistently improved quality of LCD technology and its growing market share. Add in the LCD's reduced power consumption, reduced heat generation, reduced weight (easier to mount) and its ability to function acceptably as a display in a variety of ambient lighting conditions (the Kuro screen is GREY, not BLACK, and any edge in black level it may have had is eliminated in anything approaching normal room lighting) made it a compelling compromise, at least for me.

LCD displays are not perfect - I've already stated that I see what I call "light pumping" where the whole display brightness is altered by the amount of bright content displayed in the current image, and I want something bigger. I think the three (or more) color laser projector (preferably using a solid state technology) to be the end game technology here, but so far, I have not seen one (other than the Mitsubishi LaserVue that uses a DLP) at the size (the current LaserVue model is too small for the "wall-sized l" display I really want, and think the next one will be also.) and price point (high for a small display that should actually be much cheaper than its competition, because it should be simpler from a design standpoint) where I'd pull the trigger on one.

You claim I and others who see these need eye surgery? Smiley faces aside, perhaps a lifetime of viewing displays of limited capability has "colored" your perception, more than age has degraded my ability to focus on close-in small sized text You will neither confirm nor deny that you see the artifacts that I've seen, and I wonder why anyone would consider recommendations made under such circumstances.

[lisa.royal81]

I've been hearing and seeing a lot about these new LED TV models from Samsung. How are these different from LCD and plasma flat panel HDTV televisions?
Is it really a "new species of TV" as they are claiming? And how does this relate to OLED TVs?
Are they the same thing?