OT - plasma/LCD what's the diff?

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Paul Lefebvre, Jun 3, 2004.

  1. Paul Lefebvre, Jun 3, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul Lefebvre

    TCS Guest

    On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 11:11:45 -0400, Paul Lefebvre <plefebvre@*removethis*wwdc.com> wrote:
    >Can someone please tell me what the difference is between a plasma and
    >an LCD tv? (in just a few words please) and which one is better?
    >thanks


    plasma displays use a electrified gas (plasma) to generate light and image

    LCD's use some other light source such as an electroluminescent panel or
    incadescent projector bulb and use a liquid crystal display to generate the
    image. When an electric field is applied to a liquid crystal, it "straightens
    out", changing the polarization of light through it. When combined w/
    polarized filters, the upshot is that the electric signal makes the
    LCD element either transparent or opaque.

    Plasma displays generally have a brighter image and a greater axis of
    vueability. Downside w/ plasma is that they are rather expensive and rather
    fragile. Give them another 3-5 years and that might get worked out.
     
    TCS, Jun 3, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul Lefebvre

    Ollie T Guest

    Plasmas are the most prone to burn-in. LCD's are not. You can read some
    FAQ's at http://www.hdtvarcade.com

    "Paul Lefebvre" <plefebvre@*removethis*wwdc.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Can someone please tell me what the difference is between a plasma and
    > an LCD tv? (in just a few words please) and which one is better?
    > thanks
    >
    > PL
    >
    > Paul Lefebvre
    > plefebvre@*removethis*wwdc.com
    > Visit my website!
    > http://www.geocities.com/joeyp99
     
    Ollie T, Jun 3, 2004
    #3
  4. Somebody else will explain the differences, I'm here to tell you not to
    waste your money on either. CRT still provides the best picture for the
    lowest price, no two ways about it.

    --
    "I like the cover: 'DON'T PANIC.' It's the first sensible thing I've
    heard all day."
    --Arthur Dent

    Grand Inquisitor
    http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Oost
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Jun 3, 2004
    #4
  5. Paul Lefebvre

    Justin Guest

    Paul Lefebvre wrote on [Thu, 03 Jun 2004 11:11:45 -0400]:
    > Can someone please tell me what the difference is between a plasma and
    > an LCD tv? (in just a few words please) and which one is better?
    > thanks


    In other words, "I'm too lazy to look this info up myself, so can you do
    it for me? Oh, and can you make it a nice and concise answer, as I'm too
    lazy to read more than a couple of sentences".
     
    Justin, Jun 3, 2004
    #5
  6. Paul Lefebvre

    Alan Figgatt Guest

    Grand Inquisitor wrote:
    > Somebody else will explain the differences, I'm here to tell you not to
    > waste your money on either. CRT still provides the best picture for the
    > lowest price, no two ways about it.


    By and large I agree, but if you want a bigger screen, then you are
    looking at a 200 or more lb TV which may be more than 2 ft deep for
    either direct view or rear projection (RPTV) CRT. And with the RPTV
    CRTs, you have the drawbacks of a limited viewing angle and screen
    brightness issues in daytime viewing if the room has windows.

    From what I have learned on the net and observed from a lot of window
    shopping these past few months, the better plasmas, such as Panasonic
    and the Fujitsu, provide excellent all-around pictures while not
    suffering from the sheer bulk, viewing angle and screen brightness
    limitations of CRTs. But, even with the nice drop in plasma prices this
    year, the 50" plasmas are still rather expensive. All a question of what
    tradeoffs one is willing to live with.

    Alan Figgatt
     
    Alan Figgatt, Jun 3, 2004
    #6
  7. Paul Lefebvre

    Java Jive Guest

    Semi-rubbish ...

    "Grand Inquisitor" <> wrote in message
    news:SrMvc.20375$...

    > CRT still provides the best picture


    Rubbish, LCDs and plasmas have less distortion, and my LCDs have better
    colour balance than any CRT that I can recall (and in response to another
    reply can be viewed, albeit inevitably foreshortened, from an angle of 85
    degrees to the side) ...

    > for the lowest price


    .... CRTs are certainly cheaper, so it comes down to whether you think the
    improvements of a newer technology are worth the extra money.

    When buying a TV, don't forget the simple basics, such as number of SCART
    connections, whether RGB, etc.

    To judge picture quality, try taking one or more DVDs (*1) with you round
    the stores and ask to see them played on the most promising sets. This will
    give you direct comparisons both between those in the shop and with your
    current set at home, then make *your* decision on what *your* eyes (and your
    wallet) tell you.

    *1 Hire some if necessary - I'd suggest getting a good mix of 3 - 5:
    underwater shots such as coral reef wildlife, action shots such as the
    latest blockbuster that takes your fancy, landscape shots, sitcoms or
    reality (to check normal flesh tones), sport, cartoons, etc.




    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.693 / Virus Database: 454 - Release Date: 31/05/2004
     
    Java Jive, Jun 3, 2004
    #7
  8. Paul Lefebvre

    Justin Guest

    Java Jive wrote on [Thu, 3 Jun 2004 22:45:35 +0100]:
    > Semi-rubbish ...
    >
    > "Grand Inquisitor" <> wrote in message
    > news:SrMvc.20375$...
    >
    >> CRT still provides the best picture

    >
    > Rubbish, LCDs and plasmas have less distortion, and my LCDs have better
    > colour balance than any CRT that I can recall (and in response to another
    > reply can be viewed, albeit inevitably foreshortened, from an angle of 85
    > degrees to the side) ...
    >
    >> for the lowest price

    >
    > ... CRTs are certainly cheaper, so it comes down to whether you think the
    > improvements of a newer technology are worth the extra money.
    >
    > When buying a TV, don't forget the simple basics, such as number of SCART
    > connections, whether RGB, etc.
    >
    > To judge picture quality, try taking one or more DVDs (*1) with you round
    > the stores and ask to see them played on the most promising sets. This will
    > give you direct comparisons both between those in the shop and with your
    > current set at home, then make *your* decision on what *your* eyes (and your
    > wallet) tell you.


    This assumes the store models are properly calibrated, right?
     
    Justin, Jun 3, 2004
    #8
  9. Paul Lefebvre

    Alan Figgatt Guest

    Paul, this is not an easy question to provide a short answer to and is
    the topic of many a heated debate on places such as www.avsforum.com. I
    am assuming you are asking about the direct view LCDs, BTW?

    Which is better? Depends on how you intend to use it. For example, for
    computer games, LCD is the better choice because of burn-in and
    maybe pixel resolution for plasmas. Also, while the plasma are seen more
    incremental improvements in screen quality, the new LCD TVS from Sharp
    (Aquos line), Sony, Toshiba have improved a lot in screen quality in the
    past year.

    Short answer:
    Plasma - Pro: better contrast, better black levels for the better
    quality makes, no motion smear concerns, life span now up to a rated
    50,000 to 60,000 hours to 1/2 brightness for the most recent generation,
    overall best picture in my opinion, prices are dropping nicely.
    Plasma - Con: burn-in a concern (some think it is overblown), pixel
    resolution for the smaller models (42" HDs limited to 768x1024 or
    1024x1024 Alis), power consumption, still pricey.

    LCD - Pro: good pixel resolution, no burn-in concerns, improving picture
    quality with each new model year.
    LCD - Con: contrast still not as good as the better plasmas, motion
    smear still present even with the new models, pixel "noise", still
    very expensive in the larger sizes although prices are coming down.

    If you are TV shopping, I would suggest you do some research on the
    net. With all the alternate display technologies - CRT, Plasma, LCD, LCD
    & DLP RPTVs - TV shopping will be complicated for the next few years.

    Alan Figgatt



    Paul Lefebvre wrote:

    > Can someone please tell me what the difference is between a plasma and
    > an LCD tv? (in just a few words please) and which one is better?
    > thanks
    >
    > PL
    >
    > Paul Lefebvre
    > plefebvre@*removethis*wwdc.com
    > Visit my website!
    > http://www.geocities.com/joeyp99
     
    Alan Figgatt, Jun 3, 2004
    #9
  10. Paul Lefebvre

    Java Jive Guest

    "Justin" <> wrote in message
    news:2go.com...

    > This assumes the store models are properly calibrated, right?


    Presumably, if all other things were equal, all the technologies would have
    an equal chance of being badly calibrated, though it may well be that the
    more expensive LCD and plasma technologies have more care lavished on them
    at that stage. BTAIM, *if* they'll sell it to you which they may not, then
    at least you know, because you've seen it, that you're happy with the one
    you're buying.



    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.693 / Virus Database: 454 - Release Date: 31/05/2004
     
    Java Jive, Jun 3, 2004
    #10
  11. Paul Lefebvre

    poldy Guest

    In article
    <>,
    TCS <> wrote:

    > On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 11:11:45 -0400, Paul Lefebvre
    > <plefebvre@*removethis*wwdc.com> wrote:
    > >Can someone please tell me what the difference is between a plasma and
    > >an LCD tv? (in just a few words please) and which one is better?
    > >thanks

    >
    > plasma displays use a electrified gas (plasma) to generate light and image
    >
    > LCD's use some other light source such as an electroluminescent panel or
    > incadescent projector bulb and use a liquid crystal display to generate the
    > image. When an electric field is applied to a liquid crystal, it
    > "straightens
    > out", changing the polarization of light through it. When combined w/
    > polarized filters, the upshot is that the electric signal makes the
    > LCD element either transparent or opaque.
    >
    > Plasma displays generally have a brighter image and a greater axis of
    > vueability. Downside w/ plasma is that they are rather expensive and rather
    > fragile. Give them another 3-5 years and that might get worked out.


    By which time there might be a better flat-panel technology out on the
    market.
     
    poldy, Jun 4, 2004
    #11
  12. Paul Lefebvre

    TCS Guest

    On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 23:52:36 GMT, poldy <> wrote:
    >In article
    ><>,
    > TCS <> wrote:


    >> On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 11:11:45 -0400, Paul Lefebvre
    >> <plefebvre@*removethis*wwdc.com> wrote:
    >> >Can someone please tell me what the difference is between a plasma and
    >> >an LCD tv? (in just a few words please) and which one is better?
    >> >thanks

    >>
    >> plasma displays use a electrified gas (plasma) to generate light and image
    >>
    >> LCD's use some other light source such as an electroluminescent panel or
    >> incadescent projector bulb and use a liquid crystal display to generate the
    >> image. When an electric field is applied to a liquid crystal, it
    >> "straightens
    >> out", changing the polarization of light through it. When combined w/
    >> polarized filters, the upshot is that the electric signal makes the
    >> LCD element either transparent or opaque.
    >>
    >> Plasma displays generally have a brighter image and a greater axis of
    >> vueability. Downside w/ plasma is that they are rather expensive and rather
    >> fragile. Give them another 3-5 years and that might get worked out.


    >By which time there might be a better flat-panel technology out on the
    >market.


    Maturity is worth something. Whatever "better flat-panel" technology might
    arrive in 5 years will still be very new, very unreliable, and very expensive.
     
    TCS, Jun 4, 2004
    #12
  13. Paul Lefebvre

    3W Guest

    "Justin" <> wrote in message
    news:2go.com...
    > Paul Lefebvre wrote on [Thu, 03 Jun 2004 11:11:45 -0400]:
    > > Can someone please tell me what the difference is between a plasma and
    > > an LCD tv? (in just a few words please) and which one is better?
    > > thanks

    >
    > In other words, "I'm too lazy to look this info up myself, so can you do
    > it for me? Oh, and can you make it a nice and concise answer, as I'm too
    > lazy to read more than a couple of sentences".


    Right. Let's cancel Usenet.
     
    3W, Jun 4, 2004
    #13
  14. Paul Lefebvre

    Karl S Guest

    On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 21:09:06 GMT, Grand Inquisitor
    <> wrote:

    >Somebody else will explain the differences, I'm here to tell you not to
    >waste your money on either. CRT still provides the best picture for the
    >lowest price, no two ways about it.


    But the picture is too small.
     
    Karl S, Jun 4, 2004
    #14
  15. Alan Figgatt wrote:
    > By and large I agree, but if you want a bigger screen, then you are
    > looking at a 200 or more lb TV which may be more than 2 ft deep for
    > either direct view or rear projection (RPTV) CRT. And with the RPTV
    > CRTs, you have the drawbacks of a limited viewing angle and screen
    > brightness issues in daytime viewing if the room has windows.
    >


    He could go for front-projection. Besides, the family or living room is
    not always the place to put the biggest tv, despite what our culture is.
    TVs were meant to be watched with little ambient light, it's best to
    have a separate theater or media room with either no windows or heavy
    shades/blinds.

    --
    "I like the cover: 'DON'T PANIC.' It's the first sensible thing I've
    heard all day."
    --Arthur Dent

    Grand Inquisitor
    http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Oost
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Jun 4, 2004
    #15
  16. Java Jive wrote:
    >>CRT still provides the best picture

    >
    >
    > Rubbish, LCDs and plasmas have less distortion, and my LCDs have better
    > colour balance than any CRT that I can recall (and in response to another
    > reply can be viewed, albeit inevitably foreshortened, from an angle of 85
    > degrees to the side) ...
    >


    Even a modestly priced CRT display has a higher resolution than a costly
    LCD or plasma display. It also has *far* better contrast, black levels,
    and color reproduction, especially over LCD which always has a kind of
    bluish tint no matter how careful your calibrations.

    > To judge picture quality, try taking one or more DVDs (*1) with you round
    > the stores and ask to see them played on the most promising sets. This will
    > give you direct comparisons both between those in the shop and with your
    > current set at home, then make *your* decision on what *your* eyes (and your
    > wallet) tell you.
    >


    This test is no good because stores don't calibrate their tvs.

    --
    "I like the cover: 'DON'T PANIC.' It's the first sensible thing I've
    heard all day."
    --Arthur Dent

    Grand Inquisitor
    http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Oost
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Jun 4, 2004
    #16
  17. Java Jive wrote:
    >>This assumes the store models are properly calibrated, right?

    >
    >
    > Presumably, if all other things were equal, all the technologies would have
    > an equal chance of being badly calibrated, though it may well be that the
    > more expensive LCD and plasma technologies have more care lavished on them
    > at that stage.


    Heh.

    --
    "I like the cover: 'DON'T PANIC.' It's the first sensible thing I've
    heard all day."
    --Arthur Dent

    Grand Inquisitor
    http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Oost
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Jun 4, 2004
    #17
  18. Karl S wrote:
    >>Somebody else will explain the differences, I'm here to tell you not to
    >>waste your money on either. CRT still provides the best picture for the
    >>lowest price, no two ways about it.

    >
    >
    > But the picture is too small.
    >
    >
    >


    *What*? A 65" CRT display goes for less than three thousand, expect to
    spend AT LEAST twice that on a similarly-sized plasma display. And
    front-projection CRT displays can give you a picture of any adjustable
    size (which sizes are possible depends on the model, the bulb, your
    space, etc.).

    --
    "I like the cover: 'DON'T PANIC.' It's the first sensible thing I've
    heard all day."
    --Arthur Dent

    Grand Inquisitor
    http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Oost
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Jun 4, 2004
    #18
  19. 3W wrote:

    > "Justin" <> wrote in message
    > news:2go.com...
    >
    >>Paul Lefebvre wrote on [Thu, 03 Jun 2004 11:11:45 -0400]:
    >>
    >>>Can someone please tell me what the difference is between a plasma and
    >>>an LCD tv? (in just a few words please) and which one is better?
    >>>thanks

    >>
    >>In other words, "I'm too lazy to look this info up myself, so can you do
    >>it for me? Oh, and can you make it a nice and concise answer, as I'm too
    >>lazy to read more than a couple of sentences".

    >
    >
    > Right. Let's cancel Usenet.
    >
    >


    Heh heh heh.

    --
    "I like the cover: 'DON'T PANIC.' It's the first sensible thing I've
    heard all day."
    --Arthur Dent

    Grand Inquisitor
    http://www.dvdprofiler.com/mycollection.asp?alias=Oost
     
    Grand Inquisitor, Jun 4, 2004
    #19
  20. Paul Lefebvre

    David G. Guest

    TCS wrote:
    > On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 23:52:36 GMT, poldy <> wrote:
    >> In article
    >> <>,
    >> TCS <> wrote:

    >
    >>> On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 11:11:45 -0400, Paul Lefebvre
    >>> <plefebvre@*removethis*wwdc.com> wrote:
    >>>> Can someone please tell me what the difference is between a plasma
    >>>> and an LCD tv? (in just a few words please) and which one is
    >>>> better? thanks
    >>>
    >>> plasma displays use a electrified gas (plasma) to generate light
    >>> and image
    >>>
    >>> LCD's use some other light source such as an electroluminescent
    >>> panel or incadescent projector bulb and use a liquid crystal
    >>> display to generate the image. When an electric field is applied
    >>> to a liquid crystal, it "straightens
    >>> out", changing the polarization of light through it. When combined
    >>> w/ polarized filters, the upshot is that the electric signal makes
    >>> the
    >>> LCD element either transparent or opaque.
    >>>
    >>> Plasma displays generally have a brighter image and a greater axis
    >>> of vueability. Downside w/ plasma is that they are rather
    >>> expensive and rather fragile. Give them another 3-5 years and that
    >>> might get worked out.

    >
    >> By which time there might be a better flat-panel technology out on
    >> the market.

    >
    > Maturity is worth something. Whatever "better flat-panel" technology
    > might arrive in 5 years will still be very new, very unreliable, and
    > very expensive.


    I am of the mindset that plasma's only advantage is form-factor. Pricing
    is still way too high and burn-in still an issue. Addmittedly, the
    picture is great, but the price is so high that most of us can't or
    won't pay for them. And pricing hasn't come down in any significant way
    over the last 3 years.

    I predict LCD RPTVs will be gone in the next three years. DLP will
    advance significantly over that time and get cheaper as we'll soon see
    with the HD3 chipsets from TI. LCD direct-view sets are still priced way
    too high for the picture quality they offer. I would only consider
    getting a 17" for a bedroom or kitchen since they are priced reasonably.

    I think the next great technology is LCoS and that will replace LCD
    RPTVs. Sony is moving in that direction for their sets with their SxRD
    technology. I doubt we'll see any new LCD sets from Sony.


    --
    David G.
     
    David G., Jun 4, 2004
    #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. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    805
    unholy
    Jul 11, 2005
  2. Robert Kim

    OT: LCD vs. Plasma flat screen TV?

    Robert Kim, May 16, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    5,835
    charlene93727
    Aug 27, 2008
  3. Bill Warren

    DLP, LCD, LCOS, Plasma, Projection TV'S

    Bill Warren, Sep 27, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    442
    Bill Warren
    Sep 27, 2004
  4. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    596
    Jordan
    Feb 25, 2006
  5. Little Green Eyed Dragon

    TV screens big versus Small LCD versus Plasma.

    Little Green Eyed Dragon, Mar 2, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    400
    Little Green Eyed Dragon
    Mar 2, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page