New TV!?

PostmanPot said:
100Hz, 200 CMR.

NOT 200Hz, no need to bolster your LED-LCD TV by inflating numbers.
Click to expand...
Typical response from someone who's so clueless they only know how to argue about the semantics of paper specs.

All motion resolution tests are based on this standard test pattern ...

http://www.sendspace.com/file/p24isq

On my D6000 with Motion Plus & LED Motion Plus disabled, anything below 300 lines is a blurred mess. Turn on Motion Plus and the moving lines are resolvable to 1080, but they aren't stable below ±600 lines, flickering at some shades. Turn on LED Motion Plus as well and all moving lines are solid & fluid up to 1080.

I don't have and older 200Hz CCFL model without backlight scanning (strobing) to compare it to, but I don't believe they'd be able to achieve 1080 lines of motion resolution purely with the engine alone.

So why should one care if a TV is based on the newer 200Hz CMR rating, since in practice its actually superior to the old 200Hz engine only rating.
 
Last edited:
Roman4604 said:
Typical response from someone who's so clueless they only know how to argue about the semantics of paper specs.

All motion resolution tests are based on this standard test pattern ...

http://www.sendspace.com/file/p24isq

On my D6000 with Motion Plus & LED Motion Plus disabled, anything below 300 lines is a blurred mess. Turn on Motion Plus and the moving lines are resolvable to 1080, but they aren't stable below ±600 lines, flickering at some shades. Turn on LED Motion Plus as well and all moving lines are solid & fluid up to 1080.

I don't have and older 200Hz CCFL model without backlight scanning (strobing) to compare it to, but I don't believe they'd be able to achieve 1080 lines of motion resolution purely with the engine alone.

So why should one care if a TV is based on the newer 200Hz CMR rating, since in practice its actually superior to the old 200Hz engine only rating.
Click to expand...

It's seperate from refresh rate. Refresh rate determines the number of frames drawn per second, the clear motion rate refers to the TV's ability to draw those frames correctly.

Clear Motion Rate is a marketing ploy so that they can imply a higher panel refresh rate than there actually is. That said, having a high graphics processing rate as well as a high refresh rate does help, you seem to think I am denying this.

Remember that most HD sources are only 24Hz so even a 50Hz TV would be doing some smoothing/redrawing...

First they advertised Hz, then Hz and CMR, and now they've scrapped Hz and have given us Hz CMR. Inflating numbers as per usual.
 
http://forums.liveleak.com/showpost.php?p=1471820&postcount=4

It's not a product measurement (as such), it's a marketing strategy.

Response time for individual pixels is far less important than overall refresh rate, but if you're watching a white dot go spaz on a black screen, having a high CMR is vital.

It probably makes a "Matrix" styled screensaver look good too ... I was unfair offering a lonely star field as the only possible reason for caring.

If CMR gets' traction in the market, and Samsung refuse to license the (very likely) patented technique to rivals ... Samsung will have something their competitors don't ... meaningless numbers that people worry about.

Just like Wall Street.
Click to expand...

:D
 
Last edited:
Roman4604 said:
And your only real response it to link to someone as clueless as you. It still astounds me how some ppl consider you an expert?
Click to expand...

I don't need to be an expert to understand the difference between panel Hz and CMR, nor to understand the 1) marketing gimmick which falsely misleads people into thinking they're now getting panels with higher Hz than they actually are, and 2) that a higher Hz/CMR provides better picture quality. It would be quite nice if companies would make consumers aware they aren't necessarily going to want 400Hz CMR when watching their movies/series/doccies. :rolleyes:
 
PostmanPot said:
waffle
Click to expand...
Well, you're perfectly within your rights to stay clueless, even though there are practical methods (as I've described above) to prove to yourself the benefits of the CMR ratings are real and tangible.
 
Last edited:
Roman4604 said:
Well, you're perfectly within your rights to stay clueless, even though there practical methods (as I've described above) to prove to yourself the benefits of the CMR ratings are real and tangible.
Click to expand...

Did you leave the settings the same after your tests? Could you elaborate on your answer.
 
PostmanPot said:
Could you elaborate on your answer.
Click to expand...
Why, just download the .mp4 test pattern, put it on a flash drive and play it on the TV in question's media player. Play around with the motion related settings while viewing the file and check for the differences, its no harder than that.
 
Spartaniz said:
Hi

Im looking for a new tv- for gaming, movies and so, im looking at the JVC PD-43N30

Is this tv any good???
Click to expand...

I actually bought this TV on the weekend (R4500 at Game - last few they were getting rid off) and so far I am VERY happy.

XBox games are great, DSTV SD content looks much better than my old very samsung 40" syncmaster that died. HD movies look absolutely stunning!! Blacks are really black and colour is very accurate. The thing that impresses me most is the how visible detail is in very bright or dark areas even when both are on the screen at the same time.

Comparing with my friend's 4 month old Bravia 40" LCD: HD Movies and SD content: JVC better. Games: Tie

So if you have not bought a TV already this is definitely one to consider.
 
lestoran said:
I actually bought this TV on the weekend (R4500 at Game - last few they were getting rid off) and so far I am VERY happy.

XBox games are great, DSTV SD content looks much better than my old very samsung 40" syncmaster that died. HD movies look absolutely stunning!! Blacks are really black and colour is very accurate. The thing that impresses me most is the how visible detail is in very bright or dark areas even when both are on the screen at the same time.

Comparing with my friend's 4 month old Bravia 40" LCD: HD Movies and SD content: JVC better. Games: Tie

So if you have not bought a TV already this is definitely one to consider.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected but that plasma is not 1920x1080. It accepts 1920x1080 but downsclaes to 1024x768 (4:3 with horizontal pixels for 16:9 aspect ratio). That's the problem, gaming would be better on 1366x768 or 1920x1080 for true 720p/1080p 16:9. You are effectively losing about 10 - 20% because of the downscaling.

Don't get me wrong, 42/43" 1024x768 plasmas are the best for SD TV (and HD combination), and there is nothing wrong with lower resolution once you're sitting a few meters back. I have a 42" Samsung plasma myself (and a 32" FHD LCD). The picture quality, contrast ratio, colours, blacks, beat any entry - mid LCD I've seen.
 
90% sure that you are correct about the resolution - the pixels are just too big for 1920x1080 and text from a PC is not very readable. XMBC and XBOX text are perfect. Not an issue for me as I have never been able to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p for media at these sizes anyway.

I expected SD content to be better than an LCD but the surprise is how much obviously better HD content is than a more expensive Bravia (not sure of the model). Contrast and colour accuracy is just in another class. I can tell that the image is not as sharp (especially on the XBOX) but the moment I sit down on my couch it looks better.

I certainly hope the demise of plasma is exaggerated as I don't see myself going back to LCD - the ones that compete are 2-3 times the price.
 
lestoran said:
I certainly hope the demise of plasma is exaggerated as I don't see myself going back to LCD - the ones that compete are 2-3 times the price.
Click to expand...

Hope so too. Not too worried until Samsung and LG throw in the towel which doesn't seem likely esp. with Samsung focussing on OLED and plasma in the future. LCD fanbois who have this peculiar grievance against plasma have lately been focussing on Panasonic's drop in plasma sales. Doesn't phase me, let Samsung/LG mop up.

What we need is more educated consumers to stop the judging of TVs by their high numbers marketing gimmicks, on bright showroom floors, and then having these laymen thinking their crappy entry LED-LCDs are better because they looked brighter at Game/Makro. Always amuses me when people wonder why their TVs look different at home compared to in store. Torch Mode FTL. :D
 
PostmanPot said:
What we need is more educated consumers to stop the judging of TVs by their high numbers marketing gimmicks, on bright showroom floors, and then having these laymen thinking their crappy entry LED-LCDs are better because they looked brighter at Game/Makro
Click to expand...

Tremayn said:
Get an LED/LCD gaming looks much better on those tv then a plasma
Click to expand...

Hahahahahaha... I think you may be right PostmanPot
 
Hi ALL

Which is a better tv ? Samsung D7000 or the ES6600 ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X