Black levels in LCD tvs.

[bone crusher]

Just wondering if you guys think that LVD flat panels will catch up to plasma and CRT tvs in terms of deep blacks and detail in black.

My dad has a 51" 1080i Toshiba rear projection HDTV that's about 4 years old and I have a 34" CRT HDTV from Toshiba as well and they both have awesome black depths and detail.

Then my buddy's parents bought a new 52" Sharp Aquos 1080p LCD and I was blown away by how clear the PQ on that TV but I still thought the one area that my tv and my Dad's tv were better were in blacks. There was alot of detail loss on that Sharp IMO compared to our tvs when in came to the darker scenes. I coudl imagine if you demoed a dark movie like Underworld on something on both tvs side by side that it would be painfully obvious.

So back to my original question; will LCD catch up?

[stockstar1138]

new samsungs and sonys have.

[turboedguy]

Originally Posted by bone crusher

Just wondering if you guys think that LVD flat panels will catch up to plasma and CRT tvs in terms of deep blacks and detail in black.

My dad has a 51" 1080i Toshiba rear projection HDTV that's about 4 years old and I have a 34" CRT HDTV from Toshiba as well and they both have awesome black depths and detail.

Then my buddy's parents bought a new 52" Sharp Aquos 1080p LCD and I was blown away by how clear the PQ on that TV but I still thought the one area that my tv and my Dad's tv were better were in blacks. There was alot of detail loss on that Sharp IMO compared to our tvs when in came to the darker scenes. I coudl imagine if you demoed a dark movie like Underworld on something on both tvs side by side that it would be painfully obvious.

So back to my original question; will LCD catch up?

yup, you should see mine.

[DepTii]

I was actually in a local Best Buy earlier today, wanted to catch a glimpse of the new Samsung 81 series, with the LED backlighting. It was very difficult to tell in the store with all the bright lights around, but you could certainly tell a difference with the LED Smartlighting on and with it off. The black levels were really nice, and the contrast was very good. Snapped a few pictures, and even though the quality sucks, it should give you a pretty good idea.

[stockstar1138]

one thing that i have realized is that plasma and lcd are getting really, really close to being exactly the same in terms of quality. plasma no longer has the burn-in problems, lcd no longer has the black level, ghosting problems, banding if you get a good one. OLED is where its going to be at in 2 years though.

[JimSD]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

one thing that i have realized is that plasma and lcd are getting really, really close to being exactly the same in terms of quality. plasma no longer has the burn-in problems, lcd no longer has the black level, ghosting problems, banding if you get a good one.

I agree. I went from a Panasonic plasma to a Sony LCD (had a Sharp LCD for a short time too) and most of the time I don't notice which technology I'm watching. I haven't had an issue with either LCD in getting what I consider accurate colors. I remember reading a review last year of the 52" Sharp 92 series (probably on UltimateAV site) and the reviewer thought it had a plasma look and the only TV he thought was better was a Pioneer Elite plasma.

[Kruzifixxion]

Yup i have seen it and it has to be Samsung and Sony.Ive Seen the Sony 52" 120 hrts at the store last week and i was blown away of how incredible the picture looked.Some guy was also looking at it and was clearly impressed,they also showed us a Sammy 52" 120 hrts that is supposdly
better than Sony.Quite honestly, me and that stranger just like the Sony better,Not to say that im hating on Sammy,i also thought it looked awsome.

I still think Crt is the best for color acccuracy and rich blacks.
I have a Sony HDTV 34" tube coulnt be any happier with the pq.
My bro has a Panny plasy looks nice but seems to suffer in color and not as sharp as crt still looks awsome and nice blacks too.


*Sony KDXBR970 1080I HDTV TUbe
*Sony HT-DDW790 5.1 Receiver
*60 GIG PS3
*Avion Tv Stand
*22 Blu Rays
*5 PS3 GAMES

*PSN: KRUZIFIXXION666

[MaleManGuy]

Originally Posted by bone crusher

Just wondering if you guys think that LVD flat panels will catch up to plasma and CRT tvs in terms of deep blacks and detail in black.

My dad has a 51" 1080i Toshiba rear projection HDTV that's about 4 years old and I have a 34" CRT HDTV from Toshiba as well and they both have awesome black depths and detail.

Then my buddy's parents bought a new 52" Sharp Aquos 1080p LCD and I was blown away by how clear the PQ on that TV but I still thought the one area that my tv and my Dad's tv were better were in blacks. There was alot of detail loss on that Sharp IMO compared to our tvs when in came to the darker scenes. I coudl imagine if you demoed a dark movie like Underworld on something on both tvs side by side that it would be painfully obvious.

So back to my original question; will LCD catch up?

There is more to a true picture than just contrast ratio though... you also have color accuracy issues on LCD's. Plasmas therefore tend to have better skin tones etc etc.
Of course true contrast ratio will be dependent on the lighting conditions in your room too.

[UKTruBlu]

I own the Samsung LE52m87bdx 51" 1080p, and ive never seen a picture like it. t even gives a great smooth finsh to standard def pictures.

[btf1980]

No, the black levels of LCD's are still not up to par with a quality plasma. It's inherent in the technology, and I doubt it will ever catch up. The LED Samsung models have good blacks for an LCD, but they still fall short. No videophile will choose an LCD over a plasma under any circumstances. I have an LCD in the bedroom for casual watching, but my main tv will always be a plasma. My main problem isn't just blacks with LCD's, it's the following below, especially in larger LCD's. I'm fine with smaller LCD's because alot of these issues are not problematic to me since I can't see them as easily.

My problems with LCD's....

1. Artifacting and dithering.
2. Motion problems, stuttering. TBE is a big problem with the 71 series Samsungs.
3. Poor viewing angles.
4. Too bright, almost jarring.
5. Clouding - Hello XBR series!!
6. Banding - Hello Sharp Aquous!!
7. Lacks the 3D, looking through a window feel that plasmas have.

Another thing i've noticed with many of the newer LCD's apart from blown out whites is the inaccuracy with rendering proper skin tones, even with ISF-Calibrated sets. Everything seems to have a slight orange hue, like an episode of CSI Miami. Now, many people like this bright visual style as it has "pop" to them, and when watching stuff like Crank, everything looks like a pack of skittles exploded all over the screen. This looks good to many at the local Best Buy and Circuit City with the 120hz sets and AMP on, but the problem is that it isn't accurate in the least. It just looks phony and detracting to me. Sadly, so many people are used to watching HD this way, it's what they have come to expect, and it's what they know.

I remember when I was at a hifi shop and there was a beautiful calibrated Fujitsu Aviamo Plasma, just fantastic. Deep blacks, depth like you were looking through a window, lush, vibrant, lifelike, and direct from it was a 52" Sharp Aquous LCD and a 52 XBR. It was no contest. If I were a Sony or Sharp rep, I would demand that they display my tv's in another room. Granted the Aviamo is $10K, but that depth, accuracy, fantastic viewing angles etc will never be seen in an LCD, at least not in the near future, certainly nothing on the market looks like that now. Even if there was, the uninformed will complain since it won't look like CSI Miami or Crank with AMP. Look how many people complain about 300, a beautiful stylized film!! Watch it on a Kuro, where dark films shine, then you won't complain at all. Anything that doesn't look like a botanical garden is bad to them. That's what people want to watch 24/7 all the time. Like a HD home movie.

[btf1980]

You guys should look through this Kuro picture thread on AVS. It's fantastic. Love the shots of 300 and Planet Earth by Cybertec. The depth is just not there with LCD's. And that's on a set that has not been calibrated professionally.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=920011

[Bobby Henderson]

Well... the 50" Kuro I am sure has the same picture... at $3600 or less.

And it has only half the pixel count as the 60" model sporting native 1080p (it's a 720p monitor). I've seen quite a bit of reviews that don't place its color quality in the class of the 60" Kuro either.

No, the black levels of LCD's are still not up to par with a quality plasma.

The key word is "quality" there.

I've seen quite a few affordable plasmas that don't look very good. Black levels are decent, but hardly great -like the difference between an OK quality CRT monitor and one with much better quality. And native resolution is often lower, such as 720p or set in those strangely odd resolutions like 1024 X 768. Yuck.

The 60" Pioneer Kuro is an excellent TV, but its excellence comes at a really high price. Panasonic has a good plasma that is less expensive, but it's still well over the $4000 price level.

Most people are looking for best value for the money. Very few people can afford to run out and spend several grand for a TV monitor alone. This is essentially why LCD-TVs are selling so much better than plasmas. For another analogy, I'd like to drive to work in a $80,000 Dodge Viper Coupe with 600 horse power. But I drive a Chevy pickup truck instead. It's a little more practical choice.

Now, many people like this bright visual style as it has "pop" to them, and when watching stuff like Crank, everything looks like a pack of skittles exploded all over the screen.

Crank, like so many modern action movies has cinematography that is deliberately screwed up and grungy looking. I saw this movie in a top notch 2K digital cinema movie theater whose image quality blows away anything in any flat panel TV monitor. And Crank looked crummy there too. Blown out highlights, under-exposed shadows, very muted color, etc. It's hardly a movie anyone should use as reference material to compare image quality on HDTV monitors.

[btf1980]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

And it has only half the pixel count as the 60" model sporting native 1080p (it's a 720p monitor). I've seen quite a bit of reviews that don't place its color quality in the class of the 60" Kuro either.



The key word is "quality" there.

I've seen quite a few affordable plasmas that don't look very good. Black levels are decent, but hardly great -like the difference between an OK quality CRT monitor and one with much better quality. And native resolution is often lower, such as 720p or set in those strangely odd resolutions like 1024 X 768. Yuck.

The 60" Pioneer Kuro is an excellent TV, but its excellence comes at a really high price. Panasonic has a good plasma that is less expensive, but it's still well over the $4000 price level.

Most people are looking for best value for the money. Very few people can afford to run out and spend several grand for a TV monitor alone. This is essentially why LCD-TVs are selling so much better than plasmas. For another analogy, I'd like to drive to work in a $80,000 Dodge Viper Coupe with 600 horse power. But I drive a Chevy pickup truck instead. It's a little more practical choice.



Crank, like so many modern action movies has cinematography that is deliberately screwed up and grungy looking. I saw this movie in a top notch 2K digital cinema movie theater whose image quality blows away anything in any flat panel TV monitor. And Crank looked crummy there too. Blown out highlights, under-exposed shadows, very muted color, etc. It's hardly a movie anyone should use as reference material to compare image quality on HDTV monitors.

Well, i'm comparing quality LCD's (Sony, Samsung Sharp) to quality plasmas (Pioneer Kuros, Panasonics) so I think it's a fair comparison. I'm not comparing Maxents and Olevias to Kuros here. The Aviamo was just my experience with a drool worthy panel. The non elite kuros are competively priced now. I just picked up a 5010 for a very competitive price. J&R has it for $3,299. That's puts it right there with the 81 series Samsungs (cheaper actually) and XBR5's etc.

I agree with everything you said, and like you agree that Crank was intentionally shot that way and i'm all for artistic liberties and directors intent, but many people do infact use that as a "reference" title, and refer to it as such. They do in fact want everything to look that way.

[MaleManGuy]

[QUOTE=Bobby Henderson;578294]And it has only half the pixel count as the 60" model sporting native 1080p (it's a 720p monitor). I've seen quite a bit of reviews that don't place its color quality in the class of the 60" Kuro either.

The 5010 is 1080p, 50", and $3600

[MaleManGuy]

I forgot about the banding... my old Aquos had banding issues... I am glad I got rid of that old LCD... LOL. Yup, viewing angle and many things suck about LCD... altho for the last 10 years I never gave it a thought... just believed blindly that plasma sucked... and I never even looked at them... actually glad to have a plasma now. Never thought I'd be saying that. My 46" Aquos LCD 62U had serious banding issues... drove me batty. Plus crappy contrast even tho it was the best at the time, 2000:1 (a tad more than a year ago). The Kuro is best. Hell, even my panasonic blows most LCD's away. I almost replaced my 62U aquos with the new 92U or I was considering the Sony XBR4... until I saw the plasmas.

JL