Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Dposcorp, SpotTheCat
keshman87 wrote:Depends on the person. I can notice blurring/loss of resolution on 8ms screens if I look for it.your right, the screen i was looking at has a response time of 8ms... i mean to me thats just a number, so i need people's real experience of playing games on large LCD screens
keshman87 wrote:If you're that concerned, get a plasma or a DLP.I dont mind some blurring, just dont want it to ruin the experience really
derFunkenstein wrote:Not that I've heard. Color bleeding is usually a source issue, not a display issue. They probably just don't have the TV set up right.aren't DLP's prone to more debilitating problems, like colors bleeding? My cousin and her husband have a 62" DLP that looks like **** - might just be their TV, though...unsure of the model. But it put me off of DLP's altogether.
Macgyver wrote:I could not possibly disagree more.If the screen will play it, and it has the right digital input all the televisions are the pretty much the same.
Macgyver wrote:Have a Akai DLP hooked up to a PS3. Got the PS3 for my kids for Christmas. Let them hook it up and noticed the picture was blurry. Told my oldest son he ought to hook it up through the HDMI. (They had it hooked up S-video.) He told me it WAS HDMI. I say to myself, Yea right, you need to study more and skateboard less. So I took all the crappy picture I could stand and hooked it up HDMI. The picture was horrible. Then the PS3 siad, you want me to optimize it for the correct settings? I said YES! And BAM! 1080i nervania :=O. I had to get the squeege out and clean the screen. Next,it was where is the Blu-ray disc, Spiderman3. Threw that in the PS3 and WOW! One of my kids came down stairs and saw the picture and just sat down on the sofa, silent. Next one came down stairs and did the same thing. They couldn't believe the picture. Use the HDMI connection.
I said all this to point out, It's Digital!!! If the screen will play it, and it has the right digital input all the televisions are the pretty much the same. Seen this at Costco to. They pipe in 1080i or p to the sets on display. Thought that I ought to get me a new set. Said when I get home I'm a gonna do a compare. Switched the U-verse to the HD channels for the compare. Same thing. 1080i is 1080i. HD is HD. What you may see, is some picture difference towards the contrast end of the spectrum. Differences when the colors turn darker, but it's still a digital signal.
Looking for Knowledge wrote:When drunk.....
I want to have sex, but find I am more likely to be shot down than when I am sober.
JustAnEngineer wrote:I thought that 120 Hz refresh was about eliminating the 3:2 pulldown Telecine issues with 24 Hz movies? A video display with 120 Hz refresh should be able to play back 24 Hz (or 23.976 Hz) Blue-ray discs with minimal juddering, since each frame (or field) can be displayed an even 5 times.
Vrock wrote:Nearly all 120hz televisions have some kind of frame interpolation algorithm that can be turned on and off. It's supposed to smooth out 24p sources like movies. In my experience, some implementations of this technology can cause the picture to look unnaturally smooth and make motion look unnatural. There are also other artifacts that can crop up (google "triple ball effect).
Sony's tech is called Motionflow and it's pretty good, but it best left on the low setting (or turned off) IMO.
VILLAIN_xx wrote:making a 1000k investment
Flying Fox wrote:VILLAIN_xx wrote:making a 1000k investment
One miiiiiiillion dollars? /dr.evil
Vrock wrote:Don't be fooled by the marketing buzz, the 120hz screens don't reduce blurring a whit. Refresh rate and response time are two different things.
GokuSS2 wrote:I don't give a damn what the engineers say. Yes, I know in theory it should reduce blurring, but in reality it's a different story. Turn off all the mumbo-jumbo frame interpolation and watch two identical 8ms LCD sets: one at 60hz and one a 120hz. Tell me what your eyes see. I know what mine see.Vrock wrote:Don't be fooled by the marketing buzz, the 120hz screens don't reduce blurring a whit. Refresh rate and response time are two different things.
Technically while 120hz screens were made mainly to eliminate motion jitter they CAN help with motion blur (depends on the response rate of the panel). So as for you saying "120hz screens don't reduce blurring a whit" you could goto NAB and talk to some engineers + see for yourself ( and try and disprove it). You could also read this
http://hometheatermag.com/gearworks/707gear/
they mostly get it right.
In the end though these are first generation screens and dont show the benfits enough. Not to mention they havent hit a good price point yet.
Vrock wrote:GokuSS2 wrote:I don't give a damn what the engineers say. Yes, I know in theory it should reduce blurring, but in reality it's a different story. Turn off all the mumbo-jumbo frame interpolation and watch two identical 8ms LCD sets: one at 60hz and one a 120hz. Tell me what your eyes see. I know what mine see.Vrock wrote:Don't be fooled by the marketing buzz, the 120hz screens don't reduce blurring a whit. Refresh rate and response time are two different things.
Technically while 120hz screens were made mainly to eliminate motion jitter they CAN help with motion blur (depends on the response rate of the panel). So as for you saying "120hz screens don't reduce blurring a whit" you could goto NAB and talk to some engineers + see for yourself ( and try and disprove it). You could also read this
http://hometheatermag.com/gearworks/707gear/
they mostly get it right.
In the end though these are first generation screens and dont show the benfits enough. Not to mention they havent hit a good price point yet.