Plasma Vs. LCD : Working with a stubborn person

Discussion in 'Displays' started by DanielKellmii, Jul 30, 2006.

  1. DanielKellmii

    DanielKellmii Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I work with somebody who can't stop saying how much better the current generation of flat panel LCDs are better than the current generation of Plasmas. He claims that flat panel LCDs have much less glare than Plasmas. I haven't really been paying that much attention lately, but is that really the case? He also claims that Plasmas are grainy? Yes, they are both HD, so I mentioned something about calibration. That fell on deaf ears. The only thing that I have noticed is that LCDs seem to be getting cheaper faster than the Plasmas.
    Is one technology really a clear cut winner now? I don't think so, but I can't seem to get through to this guy.
     
  2. ChrisWiggles

    ChrisWiggles Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    4,791
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't like either plasmas or LCDs at all. So there. [​IMG]
     
  3. Michael TLV

    Michael TLV THX Video Instructor/Calibrator

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2000
    Messages:
    2,909
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta
    Real Name:
    Michael Chen
    Greetings

    LCDs ... more pixels in the image at similar tv size ...
    Less Glare as they tend not to have glass fronts.

    Weakness ...

    Viewing angles
    Black levels (aka contrast ratio)

    Plasma:

    Weakness:
    Fewer pixels than LCD at same size
    Glass front ... reflective ... a lot like CRT
    Burn in ... unevenwear ... but that gets less likely with each generation.

    Strengths
    Viewing angles
    Contrast ratios (black levels)

    Currently LCD costs more than plasma at similar sizes.

    Regards
     
  4. DanielKellmii

    DanielKellmii Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Messages:
    524
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks
     
  5. Leo Kerr

    Leo Kerr Screenwriter

    Joined:
    May 10, 1999
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've seen fantastic plasmas, and I've seen fantastic LCDs. They have different "looks." All of the good ones are expensive. (The Panasonic commercial 65" -9 series screen is stunning with 1080p. I've heard it's about $10k, but haven't looked, myself. Likewise, Toshiba has a 56" or so LCD that requires 4 DVI-D connectors to drive it, and claims 10bit gray-scales.)
     
  6. Ronn.W

    Ronn.W Second Unit

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2002
    Messages:
    333
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've got a 42" plasma, and a couple of 20" LCD's. When it's time to replace the plasma, I'll probably do it with an LCD. Why? I like the picture better, there's no other rhyme or reason to it. Just an opinion after viewing both.
     
  7. Philip Hamm

    Philip Hamm Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 1999
    Messages:
    6,873
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    [​IMG] Me neither. They both look great for what they are, but neither looks as good as my DLP projector or a tube. If I had to choose between the two I'd take LCD for the lower power consumption and heat generation.
     
  8. Steve Berger

    Steve Berger Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2001
    Messages:
    973
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    110
    As a TV repairman I hate unrepairable technologies. These are repairable only so long as someone else is paying for the extraordinarily expensive boards and panels. (two years: one year factory warranty, one year extended warranty; next three years extended warranty replacement sets because the boards are no longer available)

    In my opinion these sets only do one thing better than any previous big-screen set. They look good in the store.
     
  9. Joseph Bolus

    Joseph Bolus Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 1999
    Messages:
    2,571
    Likes Received:
    274
    Trophy Points:
    4,110

    Probably the most exciting new technology available in a big-screen-box configuration (as opposed to a projector) is the new "LED-powered" DLP-based RPTV:

    http://www.cnet.com/4831-11405_1-6413134.html


    The three high-powered LED's take the place of both the lamp and the color wheel that are required in traditional one-chip DLP setups. In one fell swoop every disadvantage of DLP (Rainbow artifacts, bulb replacement) is done away with and you're left with a near-perfect display: Outstanding black levels, tremendous pixel-fill, no convergence issues, no LCD-"banding" effects, no fan, and no mechanical parts. Oh, and the total power consumption is less than a typical ceiling light bulb! All this, and the picture it provides should look just as good four years after you purchase it as it looked out-of-the-box!

    This is the display technology that I'm investing in when my current Infocus DLP projector bites the dust!
     
  10. Joseph DeMartino

    Joseph DeMartino Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    8,311
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Florida
    Real Name:
    Joseph DeMartino
    Unless you absolutely, positively, have to hang it on the wall, I wouldn't do either LCD or Plasma. DLP or LCoS microdisplays offer a better price-performance mix, and things like the LED light engine mentioned above are apt to make both even better. The same goes for those technologies in front-projection systems - which always gets you a much flatter screen. [​IMG]

    Regards,

    Joe
     
  11. ChrisCAB

    ChrisCAB Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "Unless you absolutely, positively, have to hang it on the wall, I wouldn't do either LCD or Plasma. DLP or LCoS microdisplays offer a better price-performance mix, and things like the LED light engine mentioned above are apt to make both even better. The same goes for those technologies in front-projection systems - which always gets you a much flatter screen."

    Along with a very loud fan, inability to watch in anything other than total darkness and frequent calibration.
     
  12. Hartwig Hanser

    Hartwig Hanser Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 1998
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    110

    This is incorrect: Many of todays front projectors have almost inaudible fans and sufficient light output to be watchable even if there is not total darkness (although contrast will suffer). And normally they have to be calibrated just once. I have a Panasonic LCD projector (ca 1800 $) plus a ca. 300$ white screen (2,3 meters wide) and would never go back to anything smaller. Sorry for being OT, but I could not stand the statement above uncorrected.
     
  13. ChrisCAB

    ChrisCAB Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2006
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "but I could not stand the statement above uncorrected."

    try "but I could not let the above statement stand uncorrected."
     
  14. TonyD

    TonyD Who do we think I am?
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 1999
    Messages:
    17,445
    Likes Received:
    538
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Gulf Coast
    Real Name:
    Tony D.
    more please
     
  15. Nick:G

    Nick:G Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2006
    Messages:
    200
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    The answer is actually quite simple. New generation technologies such as LCD and plasma just don't have the same color accuracy as good old fashioned CRTs do. In addition, HD plasmas and LCDs are limited to a fixed native resolution, meaning that when you feed them standard definition material, their built-in scalers have to upsample that information to fit it all on the screen, which often adds artifacting and other noise to the picture. You can have the best video scaling hardware in the world and these technologies still won't look as good as CRT. At least not yet.....

    So like said before, if you absolutely HAVE to have a flat panel TV, then I would evaluate your viewing conditions first and then pick out what will suit your needs the best. Otherwise, a good DLP or LCoS microdisplay offers far more value for the money.
     
  16. ChrisWiggles

    ChrisWiggles Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    4,791
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0

    That's not my reasons, really. In fact I disagree with a couple (such as color accuracy). It's true that a fixed resolution can require scaling, but so too do most consumer CRTs require some scaling because they aren't multisync. The on-board scaling is, however, usually lackluster, which means it's best to use outboard scaling to bypass the internal processing if possible. This is also true of many CRTs.

    Regardless, my reasons have mostly to do with small size and poor contrast ratios. In addition, many plasma displays and LCDs have serious bit-depth problems which causes nasty banding problems which really irritates me. Many do not, but still. That, and the fact that relative to other technologies, they are more expensive for what some may consider inferior image quality, or at the very least not superior image quality.

    They do, however, do one thing extremely well that CRTs do not, and that is ANSI contrast.
     

Share This Page