LCDs are garbage

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by RichA, Aug 27, 2005.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    "evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    replaced top quality.
    The colour, contrast, dyanmic range of LCD is rubbish.
    But, maybe novelty can replace the second-rate 2d presentation
    of LCDs?

    From http://www.physorg.com/printnews.php?newsid=6014
    Japanese Public Broadcasting Envisions 3D Future

    Japan’s national public broadcasting authority, Nippon Hoso Kyokai
    (NHK), is pursuing a Super Hi-Vision 3D television. NHK’s research has
    centered on the integral imaging (II) technique for creating 3D
    television. This avenue of research was chosen because the 3D image
    can be viewed without the use of special glasses. In addition, because
    an actual three-dimensional image is replicated, eyestrain caused by
    viewing “ghost” images is avoided.

    NHK researchers have refined their model heavily over the last 15
    years. Currently, the key component is a lens array composed of tens
    of thousands of tiny lenses, or “lenslets” arranged in a regular
    pattern. Each lenslet’s angle reveals a slightly different perspective
    on the scene to be recorded. An incredibly sensitive CMOS image
    sensor–over 16 times the sensitivity required for HDTV
    recording–records the reflected light rays. Then, the captured images
    are analyzed to create the original 3D image. To create live 3D HDTV
    feeds, NHK’s HDTV version of a 3-D camera records and analyzes data
    composed of over 410,000 pixels at a frame rate of 59.94Hz.

    To display the image, the recording process is reversed. An incredibly
    sharp LCD screen projects through a lenslet array to create a
    holographic image. Of course, using a lens reverses the image (much
    like looking through the bottom of a glass), so during the display
    process, a concave-convex converter is used. In order to convey
    scenery depth, NHK researchers devised an algorithm calculating the
    parallax of each lenslet’s reflected light, creating a hologram that
    is different in both size and position from the original object.

    Because current technology cannot create small enough pixels, much
    like older television sets, the display choices are either a big,
    fuzzy hologram, or a small, sharp hologram. Since the size and pixel
    pitch of the HD LCD restrict the viewing zone, current technology
    limits the size of the viewing zone to about 2.5” at 35” away. In
    addition, the coarseness of current LCD screens generates a “ghost”
    reverse image, which NHK is eliminating through computer processing of
    the recorded data. To increase holograph size, NHK is working with
    “extra” LCD light bent around the lenslets to fill in the “gaps” left
    between pixels.

    by Courtney Ostaff and Jason D'Aprile , Copyright 2005 PhysOrg.com


    "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood
    never gave us refunds for in the past"
     
    RichA, Aug 27, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    Java Jive Guest

    The colour balance of my current LCD is better than any CRT I've ever seen.

    The contrast ratio/dynamic ratio is a little less than some CRTs, but
    neither technology has sufficient contrast ratio to show dark scenes, such
    as the opening of "All The President's Men" or the starscapes in "Stephen
    Hawking's Universe", followed by normal scenes *both* to best effect without
    requiring intervening adjustment - with CRTs the problem is image noise
    from the brightness level for normal scenes being too bright for dark
    scenes, while with LCDs it's the brightness of the backlight.

    The title you chose demonstrates that you are being irrational - I suggest
    you crawl back into your hole.

    "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > The colour, contrast, dyanmic range of LCD is rubbish.
     
    Java Jive, Aug 27, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    Sean O'Hara Guest

    In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful RichA declared:
    > Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    > backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    > "evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    > replaced top quality.
    >


    So obviously you were never a college student who had to carry a 19"
    monitor up and down three flights of stairs at the begining and end
    of each semester.


    --
    Sean O'Hara | http://diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com
    Imagination is the one weapon in hate war against reality.
    --Jules de Gaultier
     
    Sean O'Hara, Aug 27, 2005
    #3
  4. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:08:13 -0400, Sean O'Hara <>
    wrote:

    >In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful RichA declared:
    >> Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    >> backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    >> "evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    >> replaced top quality.
    >>

    >
    >So obviously you were never a college student who had to carry a 19"
    >monitor up and down three flights of stairs at the begining and end
    >of each semester.


    And that has what to do with picture quality?
    -Rich


    "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood
    never gave us refunds for in the past"
     
    RichA, Aug 27, 2005
    #4
  5. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 20:10:00 +0100, "Java Jive" <> wrote:

    >The colour balance of my current LCD is better than any CRT I've ever seen.
    >
    >The contrast ratio/dynamic ratio is a little less than some CRTs, but
    >neither technology has sufficient contrast ratio to show dark scenes, such
    >as the opening of "All The President's Men" or the starscapes in "Stephen
    >Hawking's Universe", followed by normal scenes *both* to best effect without
    >requiring intervening adjustment - with CRTs the problem is image noise
    >from the brightness level for normal scenes being too bright for dark
    >scenes, while with LCDs it's the brightness of the backlight.
    >
    >The title you chose demonstrates that you are being irrational - I suggest
    >you crawl back into your hole.


    Colour changes with viewing angle, crappy blacks, dead pixels, lack of
    visual "punch" and fixed resolution.
    -Rich


    "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood
    never gave us refunds for in the past"
     
    RichA, Aug 27, 2005
    #5
  6. RichA

    gaffo Guest

    RichA wrote:

    > On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 20:10:00 +0100, "Java Jive" <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>The colour balance of my current LCD is better than any CRT I've ever seen.
    >>
    >>The contrast ratio/dynamic ratio is a little less than some CRTs, but
    >>neither technology has sufficient contrast ratio to show dark scenes, such
    >>as the opening of "All The President's Men" or the starscapes in "Stephen
    >>Hawking's Universe", followed by normal scenes *both* to best effect without
    >>requiring intervening adjustment - with CRTs the problem is image noise

    >
    >>from the brightness level for normal scenes being too bright for dark

    >
    >>scenes, while with LCDs it's the brightness of the backlight.
    >>
    >>The title you chose demonstrates that you are being irrational - I suggest
    >>you crawl back into your hole.

    >
    >
    > Colour changes with viewing angle, crappy blacks, dead pixels, lack of
    > visual "punch" and fixed resolution.
    > -Rich
    >
    >
    > "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood
    > never gave us refunds for in the past"



    DLPs are better than LCD now.

    thay have a black level near CRT and a sharpness near LCD.


    - buy the next generation or the one after, (5-yrs?) I'm confident that
    the black levels will equal CRTs.


    I just bought a DLP front projection Optoma H31 (great pict). and a 32"
    3:4 CRT w/HD tuner built in for regular viewing.

    I would NEVER buy an LCD for a regualr TV. I would for something like a
    pocket TV maybe.

    only huge drawback is the fix-pixel area. But they use tricks which
    helps in the scalling of some signal sources.

    CRTs will always rule the roost in that one area.


    CRTs remain a proven high quality technology. I only use a 22" CRT for
    my PC also.

    --

    "Had we gone into Baghdad -- we could have done it,
    you guys could have done it, you could have been there
    in 48 hours -- and then what? Which sergeant, which
    private, whose life would be at stake in perhaps a
    fruitless hunt in an urban guerilla war to find the
    most-secure dictator in the world? Whose life would
    be on my hands as the commander-in-chief because I,
    unilaterally, went beyond the international law, went
    beyond the stated mission, and said we're going to show
    our macho? We're going into Baghdad. We're going to be
    an occupying power -- America in an Arab land
    -- with no allies at our side. It would have been
    disastrous."
    -- G. Bush 2/28/1998
     
    gaffo, Aug 28, 2005
    #6
  7. RichA

    afiggatt Guest

    RichA wrote:
    > Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    > backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    > "evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    > replaced top quality.
    > The colour, contrast, dyanmic range of LCD is rubbish.
    > But, maybe novelty can replace the second-rate 2d presentation
    > of LCDs?


    That is why you buy a plasma - primarily a Panasonic plasma. Has the
    best black levels of all the current brands, no motion smear, no viewing
    angle problems, resistance to burn-in equivalent to that of a direct
    view CRT (according to Panasonic but no one has step forward with
    burn-in problems on their new model Panny).

    If the upcoming next generation Pioneers have the much improved black
    levels that Pioneer is claiming, then they might take the lead as the
    best plasmas going.

    Alan F
     
    afiggatt, Aug 28, 2005
    #7
  8. RichA

    Stan Brown Guest

    On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:08:13 -0400, Sean O'Hara
    <> wrote:

    >In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful RichA declared:
    >> Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    >> backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    >> "evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    >> replaced top quality.
    >>

    >
    >So obviously you were never a college student who had to carry a 19"
    >monitor up and down three flights of stairs at the begining and end
    >of each semester.


    Not to mention a home TV viewer who kept rearranging the living room
    trying to avoid reflections of lamps and windows in the TV screen.
    (It's especially tough when you have lots of glass-framed pictures
    on the walls.)

    --
    Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
    http://OakRoadSystems.com/
    DVD FAQ: http://dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html
    other FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
     
    Stan Brown, Aug 28, 2005
    #8
  9. RichA

    Java Jive Guest

    "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:p...

    > Colour changes with viewing angle


    Not on my TVs, my guess is you're judging by laptop LCDs, which are
    obviously designed for a smaller viewing angle.

    > crappy blacks


    Like CRTs

    > dead pixels


    If you're stupid enough to buy an obviously faulty product with dead pixels,
    caveat emptor.

    > lack of visual "punch"


    In other words, a *realistic* image

    > fixed resolution.


    Not a problem
     
    Java Jive, Aug 28, 2005
    #9
  10. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 00:09:20 -0400, Stan Brown
    <> wrote:

    >On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:08:13 -0400, Sean O'Hara
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful RichA declared:
    >>> Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    >>> backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    >>> "evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    >>> replaced top quality.
    >>>

    >>
    >>So obviously you were never a college student who had to carry a 19"
    >>monitor up and down three flights of stairs at the begining and end
    >>of each semester.

    >
    >Not to mention a home TV viewer who kept rearranging the living room
    >trying to avoid reflections of lamps and windows in the TV screen.
    >(It's especially tough when you have lots of glass-framed pictures
    >on the walls.)


    I wouldn't know about that. I have a home theatre room with sealed
    off windows and the correct colour walls, ceiling and floor. It's
    also sound controlled and there are ZERO pieces of junk in it to
    rattle, no pictures on the walls, etc. However, with a bedroom TV,
    you have a point. But the "average" homeowner paints their walls
    eggshell white and so they are braindead. Who cares what they do?
    -Rich


    "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood
    never gave us refunds for in the past"
     
    RichA, Aug 28, 2005
    #10
  11. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 00:07:38 -0400, afiggatt <>
    wrote:

    >RichA wrote:
    >> Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    >> backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    >> "evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    >> replaced top quality.
    >> The colour, contrast, dyanmic range of LCD is rubbish.
    >> But, maybe novelty can replace the second-rate 2d presentation
    >> of LCDs?

    >
    > That is why you buy a plasma - primarily a Panasonic plasma. Has the
    >best black levels of all the current brands, no motion smear, no viewing
    >angle problems, resistance to burn-in equivalent to that of a direct
    >view CRT (according to Panasonic but no one has step forward with
    >burn-in problems on their new model Panny).
    >
    > If the upcoming next generation Pioneers have the much improved black
    >levels that Pioneer is claiming, then they might take the lead as the
    >best plasmas going.
    >
    > Alan F


    I've not issue with Plasmas. I think LCDs are one tiny notch above
    the old back projected pieces of trash with those corrugated plastic
    screens and worthless optics.
    -Rich


    "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood
    never gave us refunds for in the past"
     
    RichA, Aug 28, 2005
    #11
  12. RichA

    Sean O'Hara Guest

    In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful RichA declared:
    > On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:08:13 -0400, Sean O'Hara <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful RichA declared:
    >>
    >>>Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    >>>backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    >>>"evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    >>>replaced top quality.
    >>>

    >>So obviously you were never a college student who had to carry a 19"
    >>monitor up and down three flights of stairs at the begining and end
    >>of each semester.

    >
    > And that has what to do with picture quality?
    >


    Nothing. I'm refuting your point that people are only interested in
    LCDs because of the novelty. You may not find thin, light-weight
    screens a selling point, but other people do.

    --
    Sean O'Hara | http://diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com
    Zapp Brannigan: So, crawling back to the Big Z like a bird on its belly.
    -Futurama
     
    Sean O'Hara, Aug 28, 2005
    #12
  13. RichA

    Bill Guest

    "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    > backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    > "evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    > replaced top quality.
    > The colour, contrast, dyanmic range of LCD is rubbish.
    > But, maybe novelty can replace the second-rate 2d presentation
    > of LCDs?
    >


    I returned a $500 LCD monitor from LG to Best Buy last year, after one
    agonizing evening of tweaking/re-tweaking, in a vain attempt to get the
    display to my liking. No amount of tweaking could compensate for the
    color/brightness shifting that occurred each time I moved my head more than
    slightly though. Sure, the monitor had a beautiful, high tech appearance.
    The space it took up on the desk was incredibly small...but the image was
    impossible to deal with. I took it back and went with a Samsung 793MB CRT
    instead. CRT choices were meager in that store, and the Samsung's image
    quality is less than stellar in a couple of ways. It was, however, the best
    of the CRTs that they continued to stock, and image quality is
    head/shoulders above the LCD monitor that it was swapped for. Digital
    technology isn't always better technology.
     
    Bill, Aug 28, 2005
    #13
  14. RichA

    Biz Guest

    "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most


    Your posts are garbage....
     
    Biz, Aug 28, 2005
    #14
  15. RichA

    Java Jive Guest

    "Bill" <> wrote in message news:mfjQe.1939$rj.862@lakeread07...

    > I returned a $500 LCD monitor from LG to Best Buy last year


    I don't doubt there are some bad desktop monitors around, because some
    laptop LCDs have a very poor viewing angle, and if any desktop monitors are
    built to the same spec, they will have as well. However, I've used a
    Philips and now use a Viewsonic, and I have had no trouble with viewing
    angle on either.

    > Digital technology isn't always better technology.


    An LCD monitor isn't necessarily a digital monitor - many still use the
    same analogue connector - but taking your point as I think you meant it,
    LCDs have the potential to provide as good a picture as any CRT, but as with
    anything else, there are bad ones and good ones. Getting a bad one doesn't
    make the whole technology bad. One should always research one's purchases.

    A very good reason for buying an LCD is that, as an inevitable consequence
    of the technology, CRTs are low-level X-ray sources. This is particularly
    important wrt monitors because, depending on eyesight, screen res, etc, one
    puts one's face relatively close to it compared with a TV. My eyes used to
    tire with CRT monitors, they don't with LCDs - I can work at them happily
    for hours.

    Also, I have sometimes found houses where children sit right in front of CRT
    TVs, and have explained to the parents why this is not a good idea.
     
    Java Jive, Aug 28, 2005
    #15
  16. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:53:07 GMT, "Biz" <> wrote:

    >"RichA" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most

    >
    >Your posts are garbage....
    >
    >
    >


    Your mother is a fine woman.


    "Bittorrents are REFUNDS for all the BAD movie products Hollywood
    never gave us refunds for in the past"
     
    RichA, Aug 29, 2005
    #16
  17. RichA

    maiet Guest

    "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:53:07 GMT, "Biz" <> wrote:
    >
    > >"RichA" <> wrote in message
    > >news:...
    > >> Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most

    > >
    > >Your posts are garbage....
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Your mother is a fine woman.


    ????
     
    maiet, Aug 29, 2005
    #17
  18. RichA

    TokaMundo Guest

    On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 03:26:33 GMT, gaffo <> Gave us:

    >DLPs are better than LCD now.
    >
    >thay have a black level near CRT and a sharpness near LCD.


    And more anomalous artifacts than any monitor I have ever seen in my
    life. The image gets converted, and quite badly at that. The systems
    have all the motion processing of a snail.

    CRTs are STILL top dog on image quality. Zero artifacts is the
    number one reason that they will always beat DLPs too. Until folks
    complain, the DLP boys won't upgrade their compromise on quality
    either. Y'all gotz poor taste, and poor observational aptitude.

    IBMs 19 million pixel OLED monitor comes in a close second.

    Until OLED is mainstream, you won't see any monitor designs coming
    anywhere close to CRT performance.
     
    TokaMundo, Aug 29, 2005
    #18
  19. RichA

    TokaMundo Guest

    On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 06:24:53 -0400, Sean O'Hara <>
    Gave us:

    >In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful RichA declared:
    >> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:08:13 -0400, Sean O'Hara <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful RichA declared:
    >>>
    >>>>Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    >>>>backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    >>>>"evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    >>>>replaced top quality.
    >>>>
    >>>So obviously you were never a college student who had to carry a 19"
    >>>monitor up and down three flights of stairs at the begining and end
    >>>of each semester.

    >>
    >> And that has what to do with picture quality?
    >>

    >
    >Nothing. I'm refuting your point that people are only interested in
    >LCDs because of the novelty. You may not find thin, light-weight
    >screens a selling point, but other people do.


    Wussy boy! HEFT that CRT! A little exercise will do your geek ass
    some good.
     
    TokaMundo, Aug 29, 2005
    #19
  20. RichA

    TokaMundo Guest

    On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 00:09:20 -0400, Stan Brown
    <> Gave us:

    >On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:08:13 -0400, Sean O'Hara
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>In the Year of the Cock, the Great and Powerful RichA declared:
    >>> Getting away from high quality CRTs is probably the most
    >>> backward step ever completed in computer screen and television screen
    >>> "evolution." Essentially, the novelty of flatness size has
    >>> replaced top quality.
    >>>

    >>
    >>So obviously you were never a college student who had to carry a 19"
    >>monitor up and down three flights of stairs at the begining and end
    >>of each semester.

    >
    >Not to mention a home TV viewer who kept rearranging the living room
    >trying to avoid reflections of lamps and windows in the TV screen.
    >(It's especially tough when you have lots of glass-framed pictures
    >on the walls.)


    Ever heard of a coated screen? Must be a seventies circa toob!
     
    TokaMundo, Aug 29, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Richard Kaszeta

    Do photos simply look better on CRTs/LCDs than on print ?

    Richard Kaszeta, Apr 15, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    540
    Paul H.
    Apr 16, 2004
  2. John Wesley Hardin

    Cleaning LCDs

    John Wesley Hardin, May 8, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    374
    stewy
    May 9, 2004
  3. bob

    valid specs for 17" flatscreen LCDs?

    bob, Apr 25, 2006, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    357
    Dr Nick
    Apr 25, 2006
  4. Mike Henley

    Samsung's unprotected LCDs

    Mike Henley, Jun 11, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    296
    Mike Henley
    Jun 12, 2005
  5. Don Stauffer

    I'm not really against LCDs

    Don Stauffer, Aug 14, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    292
    Bill Tuthill
    Aug 17, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page