Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

new tv's look like s#@T

Zakaree Sandberg

Zakaree Sandberg

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
4,260
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
43
Location
Los Angeles, CA
whats the deal...

walking through best buy the other day and all the tv's looked terrible..
super VIDEO looking..

movies ive seen before that looked great! "film look.. 24p"
are now looking like terrible video!

what are they converting the signal too.. because it SUCKS!

im not digging this video trend.
im also sick of all the 3d movies coming out.. please kill that trend someone
 
it's all the 240Hz stuff that makes a bunch of extra frames. Somehow the newest TV's set to auto everything actually make the acting worse. I swear to God. Robert Deniro is a joke on the new tv's I'm not being facetious. I watched Casino for the 5th time the other day but on a new tv and suddenly it sucked.
 
Zakaree, you are unfortunately correct.

Graeme
 
From what I understand, it's not that the refresh rate is inherently causing this "look," but rather interpolation that the manufacturers implement to fill in those extra frames. You can turn this off (usually) and just have a high-refresh-rate display without the weird motion.

Case in point: This article (and the subsequent one it links to) do a pretty good job of explaining it.

In short: don't blame the TV, blame the manufacturer (and the stores).
 
the new tvs have software that creates "new frames" between the real frames in order to smooth out the motion. Yes, it's blasphemous, but that what they're doing.

BTW, you can turn that function off ;)
 
The "motionflow" and all the other frame interpolation techniques they use actually make me nauseated. I can tell its on instantly and i absolutely hate it. it drives me bonkers that they do that.... what was wrong with 24p? why when you get such a great refresh rate that gives you both nice 24p and 60p do you need to go and destroy it by allowing morons at the local electronics store tell you "it's a feature!" that the tv makes you sick?
 
Alexander Alexandrov said:
i doubt they care that much about proper settings in those stores
Click to expand...

That's right, they don't. I chatted up a salesman or two at the local Big Box store, you know the ones with their own Dork Squad who do installs and tech shit. The conscientious salesmen couldn't understand why a store with it's own in house tech people who allegedly do set ups and calibrations for a living can't be bothered to properly set up and maintain their own showroom. It doesn't seem to keep people from buying TVs there, so I guess there's no need to bother.
 
I really can't believe how terrible the motion interpolation looks - and it's mainly an attempt to make the customer want to buy it because it has a big number attached to it (ohhh, the first 600Hz TV - that must be good!)...

I was watching a bit of one of the Narnia movies on Blu-Ray in a department store a few weeks ago, and it just looked incredibly bad. Whenever a character moved slowly, there was this horrible artifacting behind them that looked (not surprisingly) like when you try to slow something down too far with optical flow... I also get this strange feeling that everything moves slightly faster, making it look unnatural... I'm pretty sure it's the interpolation, because I never get that watching things at the cinema, on TV or on the computer...

And then they have the demos that show 24 fps slowed down compared to perfect slow motion (probably shot with a high speed camera, because the interpolation looks like crap). Like that proves anything...
 
With any of major brands you can turn off all the crap consumer features: Motion interpolation, dynamic gain, dynamic contrast etc. Do a basic greyscale and color calibration and it will look completely different.
 
[rant] I totally agree that TVs in Stores look like s**t, and they even look worse on exhibitions. This has bothered me for a while. They want to show how much "better" they are, even on OLED screens. Its the same thing as with the loudness war. It depends on the manufacturer though. At IFA Berlin, some agree and even let me play with the settings while others continued to state how much better their "enhanced" image looks.

How to botcher a nice image:
* Overscan (10-15% resolution loss + Skaling loss)
* Edge "enchancement" (Tripple halos)
* Motion "enchancement" (Soap opera)
* Color "enchancement" (Mars skin tones)
* deNoise (cheap mobile phone shot lookalike contest)
and others.

Pro-Plasmas and similar aside, turning it off isn't allways that easy.
In the end, the only thing that helps is to increase consumer awareness, and a push to offer a simple "all enchancements off" setting.
[/rant]

Regards, Matt
 
Stephen Gentle said:
I really can't believe how terrible the motion interpolation looks - and it's mainly an attempt to make the customer want to buy it because it has a big number attached to it (ohhh, the first 600Hz TV - that must be good!)...

I was watching a bit of one of the Narnia movies on Blu-Ray in a department store a few weeks ago, and it just looked incredibly bad. Whenever a character moved slowly, there was this horrible artifacting behind them that looked (not surprisingly) like when you try to slow something down too far with optical flow... I also get this strange feeling that everything moves slightly faster, making it look unnatural... I'm pretty sure it's the interpolation, because I never get that watching things at the cinema, on TV or on the computer...

And then they have the demos that show 24 fps slowed down compared to perfect slow motion (probably shot with a high speed camera, because the interpolation looks like crap). Like that proves anything...
Click to expand...

Despite the high refresh rates, LCD's are slow. Average dynamic gray to gray pixel response time is in the 20ms+ range. This is not the same thing as the published off/on pixel spec times. They don't talk about it. This is why you see a lot of subtle motion artifacts. The most annoying to me is seeing areas of fine detail in low contrast scenes moving independently of their surroundings.
Plasmas are much better in this respect. That 600hz sub-field response for plasmas makes it the fastest gray to gray pixel response of any flat panel technology by a very large factor. Only OLED's have the potential to better it among current technologies.
 
Brandon Fraley said:
the new tvs have software that creates "new frames" between the real frames in order to smooth out the motion. Yes, it's blasphemous, but that what they're doing.

BTW, you can turn that function off ;)
Click to expand...

Oh thanks God we can turn it off!!!!

You're right Stephen,

"... it's mainly an attempt to make the customer want to buy it because it has a big number attached to it (ohhh, the first 600Hz TV - that must be good!)..."

...nothing more than numbers bullshit.


Antoine
 
Man, I hope Red is working on a 4K TV of their own.... hell, even a 1080p TV but with Red's attention to image quality and professional calibration options would be a hot seller IMHO!

Paul
 
For my house, I bought one of the last HD CRT's sony made before they discontinued. It's the Sony 34XBR960. It looks better than any LCD or Plasma I've ever seen. Black is black. Colors are rich and natural & no artifacts. The only problem is that it weighs about 200 lbs. and the geometry gets a little weird every 6 months or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top