Go to Windows 7 Insider Guide
Home audio & video: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies
I would probaly not have a "nice" repley for this.
by jcrobso - 11/14/07 1:04 PM In reply to: haha by masterying01"no plasma. they suck. you need to refill them every few years"
Most likely I would start laughing and start ROTF.
There is a reason I have service job instead of a sales job.
FYI: CRTs can emit a low level of X Rays. However keep in mind that this a very, very, very low level. There was a lot of FUD going around about this 40 years ago.
People will believe what they want to. John
Basis to the concern
by rrmram - 11/15/07 12:32 PM In reply to: I would probaly not have a "nice" repley for this. by jcrobsoThe reason for the concern about x-rays 40 years ago was because it carried over from the 40's and 50's, during which time the x-ray issue was genuine and TV's issued substantial amounts that were unhealthy when viewers were up close to the set - such as kids laying down and watching right at the base of the set..
That was the same time frame when most every shoe store had x-ray machines where you stuck your feet in and could see how well the shoes fit. Parents loved it to pick shoes for the kids that fit; kids loved them because they were just plain cool. Then researchers began to learn of the cancer causing effects and the govt. began regulating x-ray emission and products that emmitted x-rays.
(NT) Yes, I remember those days, yes I do. John
by jcrobso - 11/21/07 12:28 PM In reply to: Basis to the concern by rrmramBut what about burn ins?
by dgden - 11/13/07 6:04 PM In reply to: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies by gabereyesThe real reason I do not buy/recommend plasma is only the burn in issue. I had a bad experience few years ago, where the traces of fading images would apper on a plasma set.
I know that today the technology is much better and under NORMAL use the possibility of burn in is slim to none but I still want to ask all of your opinions:
Would you still buy/recommend plasma if the the requirments where as follows:
1) Fair amound of video gaming
2) Some use of a Laptop on your HDTV, still images, YouTube, web surfing etc.
3) Always watching regular TV content in it's original scale, meaning not full screen with black bars on the side.
How many of you would confidently say that this type of usage does not pose a burn in risk for plasma today?
Yes I would still buy a plasma
by gabereyes - 11/13/07 10:06 PM In reply to: But what about burn ins? by dgdenPlasma burn in is not a problem if you know what you are doing.
Plasma burn in should be the same as CRT burn in, the only diffrents is all TV's sold now are set higher and brighter then ever before, just turn the contrast down.
My ISF calibrated TV is set to only 30% contrast level and it seats in between a window and a full glass door.
plus with pixel shift tuned on burn in should never happen, we have a panasonic 50px700 hooked to PS3 at work and customers all day pause the game and leave the store and it still has no burn in.
dont know about your old bad experience few years ago, but it wont happen now with the new sets.
the only TV I stoped selling for a while was samsung DLP's when they first came out they had so many problems, plus two component video's that did diffrent resolutions that was the worse thing Ive ever seen, but they do much better now, not as many problems and all HD inputs do all resolutions.
And if you buy in HDTV you should get HD cable or sat with all the channels now you shouldnt be watching standard 4 by 3 channels, all channels in HD are the highest rated and watched channels I havent watched a standard channel in a long time now, I watch Discovery, Science, History, TNT, and Local broadcast from ABC, CBS and Fox. My wife watches HD HGTV, A&E, Animal planet, and she makes watch the stupid housewife show and grey's with ever it is all in widescreen.
sorry I have to go, Im using my CRT TV to make this message, I got to get off before I burn in the TV. lol
Low contrast and brightness is not suitable for everyone...
by dgden - 11/14/07 11:28 AM In reply to: Yes I would still buy a plasma by gabereyesThanks for the input, but not everyone watches the TV the same way. I, for one, watch television in well lit room with brightness and contrast (plus backlight on LCDs) set pretty high for a bright, vivid image (usually in a Standard factory mode). I always find Cinema or Custom too dim...there is no pop for me.
Also, since you sell TVs...what do the manufacturers say in their manuals...isn't there a paragraph that warns against possibility of burn ins with video games...is burn-in covered if you have extended warranty?
My previous experience was with Samsung plasma set (it was EDTV one). Within the first few weeks, we found that when switching the channel there was a white fading trace of previous images and channel logos. It would vanish but it was annoying and demonstrated to me that technology in prone to this problem. Btw, the set had pixel shift.
I've never seen a burn in on a CRT actually. In my opinion, plasma is more prone to burn in than a CRT set.
I am shelling out top dollar for high end television set. All I want is to have freedom and versatility to use it as I see fit without fear that a set is not well suited for certain types of usage.
well....
by masterying01 - 11/14/07 12:45 PM In reply to: Low contrast and brightness is not suitable for everyone... by dgdenCRT's have burn in. Plasma AND lcd have image retention. the thing you saw on your Samsung plasma is called image retention. LCD's can get that too believe it or not. (we have a philips 30" lcd from 4 years ago thats still on display with the same logos on it).
manufactorers also put warnings about how tv's can fall on children too.....but people dont look at that? they also tell you to unplug every tv from the wall during any lighting storms to prevent electrical surges, how many people actually do that? lcd's have a backlight that is VERY EXPENSIVE to replace. basically, there are downsides to all technologies.
the fear that you are talking about lies in many people, but these are fears for the myths that relate to a plasma.
Permanent Image Retention, AKA Burn-in
by markdoiron - 11/15/07 3:50 AM In reply to: well.... by masterying01"CRT's have burn in. Plasma AND lcd have image retention."
Image retention (actually called permanent image retention) is the technical term for the laymen's phrase burn-in. And no, LCDs don't suffer from burn-in or permanent image retention.
LCD's DO Burn-in
by lehesc - 11/15/07 8:26 AM In reply to: Permanent Image Retention, AKA Burn-in by markdoironHere is one of many articles/white papers on LCD "Burn-in"
http://www.plasma-usa.com/screen%20burn/White_Paper_onscreenburn_NEC.pdf
Unhh...I'll take plasma, thanks
by aceruser - 11/15/07 11:17 AM In reply to: well.... by masterying01After an appalling experience with a Philips 32" CRT, I took six months to decide over a flat screen. What decided me, was trying a standard DVD in a store. This was a black gangsta movie, and on plasma I could see the whole thing. With a Samsung LCD, half the guy's shaven head disappeared, and there was no detail in the dark background. I bought the plasma.
Since then, I have only found that pure HD DVD/LCD combos come near to plasma. HD is not yet available in New Zealand, and I can't afford to replace my DVD player and all my DVDs. I watch movies instead of transmission TV, as all channels put out juvenile crap certain to produce ADD in younger viewers. I have sufficient patience to explore the plot of a movie, anything shorter isn't really engaging.
In my eyes (not perfect vision) LCD offers a layered view, with sharp foreground "floating" in front of less clear mid and back ground. Colours appear pastelised, similar to inswufficient colour saturation with a digital camera.
Plasma gives a solid image similar to CRT. I have a EDTV plasma, and this is ideal for regular DVD viewing. To me it's as good as going to the movies. My EDTV looks better on DVD (same resolution) than higher res plasmas. Transmission TV does suffer a little, but it's good enough for me. I prefer a darkened room, they don't leave the lights on at the movies, do they?
If I had about $NZ20,000 I could invest in a BlueRay DVD player and discs, and a 50" plus HD LCD TV. I would then have a better viewing experience, no question. Unless someone is prepared to give me the money (for scientific purposes, to prove the point), I am happy with what I've got.
My Dad was an electronics technician (he built out first TV into the wall of our house 45 years ago) - he taught me to look critically at TVs. With plasma I have the best picture available at my price.
what do the manufacturers say in their manuals
by gabereyes - 11/14/07 9:45 PM In reply to: Low contrast and brightness is not suitable for everyone... by dgdenyes there's a paragraph that warns against possibility of burn ins with video games...is burn-in covered if you have extended warranty?
this is also true for CRT and CRT rear-projection its in the manual plus on the back of each TV, and the key word is POSSIBILITY, and the extended warranty does not cover any damage done by the customer.
plasma = bad technology
by armstrongx - 11/14/07 10:28 PM In reply to: Low contrast and brightness is not suitable for everyone... by dgdenDon't count on playing any video games, watching sports programming, or your TV guide with a Plasma - yes, even the most up to date super set - without lingering images. And keep in mind, it's not just the image on your set for a few minutes, it's every time you use, say your TV guide, those border burn in over time - sure, you can turn down your contrast and brightness and considerably degrade your picture, but those steps significantly reduce the quality of your experience with Plasma. The simple fact is, plasma technology is bad technology. I own a Pioneer plasma and no, burn in is not covered by the warranty or any extended warranty, in fact, they specifically state that burn in is not covered - because they know it's a real problem. If your an average customer, who might have a mother in law that likes to watch QVC for hours on end, for example, be wary of plasma technology. If I had to do it over again, I'd steer clear and buy an LCD - where there actually have been real improvements made to eliminate early gen problems.
You misinterpret what he's saying
by caseyws - 11/15/07 6:47 AM In reply to: Low contrast and brightness is not suitable for everyone... by dgdenWhen you bring any TV home these days, the contrast and brightness are usually set too high. They do this because this kind of image looks better to people at first glance. However, when the TV is properly calibrated so that you see the full range of contrast and colors, the contrast and brightness settings are generally much lower than from the factory. You're not compromising image quality for lower chance of burn-in - you are improving picture quality by properly calibrating your TV.
If burn-in is a big concern, then certainly LCDs are a better option. However, anything you would feel comfortable doing on a CRT, you can do on a plasma.
Motion Blur still a big issue
by jose_luis2006 - 11/15/07 12:29 AM In reply to: Yes I would still buy a plasma by gabereyesI agree that flat screens are the future. But they are too expensive for the moment (particularly plasma) and motion blur is still a big issue, even with modern TV sets.
It is not a problem of the screen itself, but poor (= cheap) A/D conversion speed and techniques and probably also memory capacity inside the TV set.
I am very happy with my analog Trinitron Sony; it is a modest 29", more than enough for the size of my living room and nas been with us for more than 12 years. I will keep it until it dies from natural death (I hope it will very long lived as was the case with my previous Trinitron tube).
I am not willing to spend thousands of US$ in a technology that is not mature and will probably change again in short time due to HDTV. This sets "HDTV ready" do not convince me either.
LCD is mature technology, and it can be inexpensive
by sdc100 - 11/15/07 5:54 AM In reply to: Motion Blur still a big issue by jose_luis2006jose_luis2006 wrote:
> and motion blur is still a big issue, even with modern TV sets
Motion blur is a non-issue with plasma, since each cell should react as fast as a CRT's phosphor. And generally speaking, blurring isn't an issue unless there is fast motion. In that case, I'd worry more about compression artifacts from digital sources (i.e. DVD, digital cable or satellite). Low bit rates result in blockiness during scene changes or fast motion.
> It is not a problem of the screen itself, but poor (= cheap) A/D
It results from the mechanical nature of LCDs. Electrical impulses makes the crystals physically twist or untwist, to either block or unblock the backlight. You can manually move one of these crystals by pressing on an LCD display. Note the dark patch where you pressed. The reason LCDs get worse in cold temperatures is because the liqud in which the crystals float become more viscous (or even freeze), making it tough for the crystals to twist -- resulting in major blurring. Try operating a normal LCD calculator in the freezing cold. The need for LCDs to physically twist takes more time than the purely chemical reaction of plasmas or CRTs.
> conversion speed and techniques and probably also memory capacity
> inside the TV set
They contribute to blurring but the A/D converters are the same no matter if you use LCD, plasma or a CRT. You're referring more to the tuner or input of the TV than the display technology.
> I am very happy with my analog Trinitron Sony... will keep it
> until it dies from natural death
Keep in mind than you won't be able to receive any broadcasts once the US goes digital next year, as mandated by Congress. Unless you buy a converter box (or have cable or satellite).
> I am not willing to spend thousands of US$ in a technology that
> is not mature and will probably change again in short time
> due to HDTV. This sets "HDTV ready" do not convince me either.
Thousands? You can get a decent 32" LCD set for about $500-$600. The Olevias have been getting rave reviews. My neighbor bought a HiDef CRT TV for $360. Being a CRT, it had no blurring and excellent contrast. But it was also as big as non-flatscreens.
As for not being mature, you're confusing display technology (LCD, plasma, OLED, laser, CRT, etc) with tuner technology (SDTV, DTV, HDTV, 720p, 1080i, 1080p, etc). LCD is very mature; just look at all the laptop monitors out there. As for broadcast standards, the emergence of better standards, i.e. 1080p, doesn't mean that current standards won't be supported -- unless it gets in the way of progress, i.e. analog broadcasts. Technology will always progress.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
