LCD tv picture quality

Last night we picked up a Samsung 40" LCD tv. The picture looks fine with
HD content, though it doesn't have the impact as out 42" ED plasma. More
importantly though, on SD content channels the LCD picture looks poorly.
Faces seem be "smeared" and the picture looks unnatural, and in general it's
not as good as our plasma. Up close you can see blockiness in the picture.
We noticed this same "blockiness" on a 40" Sony LCD that was being fed HD
content. The salesman blamed it on the video feed but I think he was making
that up.

Do LCD tv's suffer from bad SD pictures in general? Or is it that it's a HD
tv trying to convert the SD signal to the screen that makes it look bad?
Our plasma does so much better at SD, but is it because it's and ED tv or
becuase it's a plasma?

We wanted to get a LCD for tow reasons. The location where it will go is
bright and the non-refelctive surface would be ideal for it. Also, we would
probably use it more for video games and didn't want to have to worry about
burning the screen. However, I just don't know if the pros outweigh the cns
right now so I would appreciate your feedback. Thanks!

FDR wrote:
Last night we picked up a Samsung 40" LCD tv. The picture looks fine with
HD content, though it doesn't have the impact as out 42" ED plasma. More
importantly though, on SD content channels the LCD picture looks poorly.
Faces seem be "smeared" and the picture looks unnatural, and in general it's
not as good as our plasma. Up close you can see blockiness in the picture.
We noticed this same "blockiness" on a 40" Sony LCD that was being fed HD
content. The salesman blamed it on the video feed but I think he was making
that up.

Do LCD tv's suffer from bad SD pictures in general? Or is it that it's a HD
tv trying to convert the SD signal to the screen that makes it look bad?
Our plasma does so much better at SD, but is it because it's and ED tv or
becuase it's a plasma?

We wanted to get a LCD for tow reasons. The location where it will go is
bright and the non-refelctive surface would be ideal for it. Also, we would
probably use it more for video games and didn't want to have to worry about
burning the screen. However, I just don't know if the pros outweigh the cns
right now so I would appreciate your feedback. Thanks!


I've had a Sony 42-inch DLP for the living room for almost a year. We
can make the room semi-dark when we want to watch television during the
day. We are quite pleased with it.

Two weeks ago I visited friends who have two HDTVs, a 42-inch plasma in
their living room and a 26-inch LCD in their bedroom. They are "no
names" sold by Costco. I sort of liked the 26-inch in his bedroom but
we then went to the local Costco store and saw the same set on a better
HD feed. I was impressed, especially for the price: $750.

We have had it about 10 days now and like it a lot as a second set. It
certainly does not have the spectacular picture of our DLP but it is
quite good. It also doesn't autoswitch to 4 x 3 on analog channels but
it does on digital channels, at least those that have part-time HD
content. When operated at 4 x 3 the SD video is quite decent, although
not as good as a high-end, standalone NTSC set.

I think I'd rather have the manufacturer's other LCD set of the same
type, a 32-inch, for the bedroom. But, Costco, being what they are,
doesn't carry that model.

I don't observe any negative issues with the HD video, other than it's
not as spectular as the Sony DLP, and the side fall off is greater than
the Sony. Plus, the fall off lightens the picture rather than darkens
it. But, this is a non-issue in our bedroom. The set is on a swivel
base as well, and weights only 28 pounds.

you might check out the options on the menu source list by stinking the
a/v button
on the remote control, and select the one peculiar to your immediate
needs.

and the tv screen is best viewed when the eyes are at mid-screen level.

m h o
*v ƒe

ps - and it has been said that in most cases the factory settings for
the main controls are set - too high, and should be readjusted for
personal use.

m h o
*v ƒe

I've had a Sony 42-inch DLP for the living room for almost a year.

Sony does NOT make any DLP's, they missed that boat. They have LCD rear
projection, yes, which is what you probably have.

Why would I want to "stink" the a/v button?

wrote in message
...
you might check out the options on the menu source list by stinking the
a/v button
on the remote control, and select the one peculiar to your immediate
needs.

and the tv screen is best viewed when the eyes are at mid-screen level.

m h o
v fe

wrote in message
...
ps - and it has been said that in most cases the factory settings for
the main controls are set - too high, and should be readjusted for
personal use.


I've gone through all the settings. The issue is SD and the visual
blockiness that it is exhibiting with SD that it doesn't do with HD content.

m h o
v fe

FDR wrote:
wrote in message
...
ps - and it has been said that in most cases the factory settings for
the main controls are set - too high, and should be readjusted for
personal use.


I've gone through all the settings. The issue is SD and the visual
blockiness that it is exhibiting with SD that it doesn't do with HD content.

m h o
v fe



The easiest way to get a good picture with any HDTV whether it is
plasma, DLP or LCD is to watch SD programming using s-video or composite
cables (RCA with Yellow Red and White)... The HDMI, Componet and DVI
inputs usually are very grainy with SD content even when the tv has
noise reduction filters and so on. I have seen very few tv's that
display both SD and HD content well on the HD inputs.

Most color and sharpness settings are independent for each input so it
also helps to turn sharpness down a bit on the non-hd input. I
demonstrate this every day and people are surprised at the difference.

Summary:
HD content only on HDMI, DVI or Componet (RGB) inputs.
SD content only on S-video, Composite (RCA) or even consider the coax input.

In article , george1234 says...

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:02:14 GMT, "FDR"
wrote:

Last night we picked up a Samsung 40" LCD tv. The picture looks fine with
HD content, though it doesn't have the impact as out 42" ED plasma. More
importantly though, on SD content channels the LCD picture looks poorly.
Faces seem be "smeared" and the picture looks unnatural, and in general it's
not as good as our plasma.

My LCD had the same problem . The worst was the analog cable directly
to the NTSC tuner on the TV .I just stopped watching analog sources.
SD via digital OTA does not look bad. HD looks great



I'm not familiar with LCD or DLP but I wonder if it's possible to use either an
internal or external line-doubler with these technologies. I know on the higher
end CRT rear projection sets these were very effective in improving SD picture
quality.

In article ,
BillJ wrote:

In article , george1234 says...

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 13:02:14 GMT, "FDR"
wrote:

Last night we picked up a Samsung 40" LCD tv. The picture looks fine with
HD content, though it doesn't have the impact as out 42" ED plasma. More
importantly though, on SD content channels the LCD picture looks poorly.
Faces seem be "smeared" and the picture looks unnatural, and in general
it's
not as good as our plasma.

My LCD had the same problem . The worst was the analog cable directly
to the NTSC tuner on the TV .I just stopped watching analog sources.
SD via digital OTA does not look bad. HD looks great



I'm not familiar with LCD or DLP but I wonder if it's possible to use either
an
internal or external line-doubler with these technologies. I know on the
higher
end CRT rear projection sets these were very effective in improving SD
picture
quality.

I have found that instead of taking the SD signal direct from the sat
receiver, I get it from my DVD recorder with progressive scan. Better
picture for SD than I get any other way.

Connections are Sat to DVD recorder via SVHS then component video to TV,
and SAT to TV via DVI with DVI to HDMI cable which is used on HD content.