LED Or LCD

http://barelybad.com/xwdthemes_110596.htm
"cjt" wrote

My 30 year old Sony TV is still going strong; most current TV content
doesn't merit anything better, anyway.

Profeel?

"chicagofan" wrote in message
...
| John McWilliams wrote:
| cjt wrote:
|
|
| My 30 year old Sony TV is still going strong; most current TV content
| doesn't merit anything better, anyway.

Quit bragging...
My Sony XBR is only 23 years old!
:)
--
Regards,
Richard Harison

|
| P'raps. But just one good show in true HD makes it worthwhile for me.
|
| MMV.
|
|
| I know what you mean. I used to feel the way the OP does, until I got
| an HDTV and saw a Sunrise Earth show titled "Bison before Breakfast".
| Nature programs in HD can restore your soul.
| bj

On Dec 24 2009, 8:14*am, JimH wrote:
Vet wrote:
I am going to buy a new TV set.I need to know if the LED are better than
LCD? What is the pros and cons?.Also is 220 hertz better then 120 hertz?.
Thanks for any input as I am not up to the new technology.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * Vietnam Vet
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *82 Abn.Div. 1969

I recently bought a 55 inch Vizio from Costco. It is an LCD TV, with LED
back lighting. What that does, is illuminate the LCD image using LEDs
for brightness. They are used in place of a fluorescent light in older
sets. This TV has what is called "local dimming". That dims the LEDs
behind a dark areas of the screen. It makes the black levels much better
than older LCD TV's, and that makes the picture appear more like a movie
theater. I wouldn't buy another LCD TV if it didn't have that
technology, or something new that replaces it. It makes a big difference.

The TV also has a 240 Hz picture. That makes the TV generate
intermediate images between the ones in the source material, so that
there are 240 images each second. That minimizes the blur that is common
with LCD TV sets during fast action. I never noticed the blur, but I did
find that the "smooth motion" associated with 240 Hz resulted in
everything looking like a soap opera. I turned that off, and I don't
miss it.

As with everything else in life, your mileage may vary.

--
Jim

Actually the 240 Hz only helps 24fps material, because it can sync on
each frame. 240 is evenly divisible by 24. It has no effect on 30fps
or 60fps input since the frames don't change faster than 30 or 60Hhz,
the extra refreshes don't accomplish anything.

"ToMh" wrote in message
...
On Dec 24 2009, 8:14 am, JimH wrote:
Vet wrote:
I am going to buy a new TV set.I need to know if the LED are better than
LCD? What is the pros and cons?.Also is 220 hertz better then 120
hertz?.
Thanks for any input as I am not up to the new technology.
Vietnam Vet
82 Abn.Div. 1969

I recently bought a 55 inch Vizio from Costco. It is an LCD TV, with LED
back lighting. What that does, is illuminate the LCD image using LEDs
for brightness. They are used in place of a fluorescent light in older
sets. This TV has what is called "local dimming". That dims the LEDs
behind a dark areas of the screen. It makes the black levels much better
than older LCD TV's, and that makes the picture appear more like a movie
theater. I wouldn't buy another LCD TV if it didn't have that
technology, or something new that replaces it. It makes a big difference.

The TV also has a 240 Hz picture. That makes the TV generate
intermediate images between the ones in the source material, so that
there are 240 images each second. That minimizes the blur that is common
with LCD TV sets during fast action. I never noticed the blur, but I did
find that the "smooth motion" associated with 240 Hz resulted in
everything looking like a soap opera. I turned that off, and I don't
miss it.

As with everything else in life, your mileage may vary.

--
Jim

Actually the 240 Hz only helps 24fps material, because it can sync on
each frame. 240 is evenly divisible by 24. It has no effect on 30fps
or 60fps input since the frames don't change faster than 30 or 60Hhz,
the extra refreshes don't accomplish anything.


120hz is also evenly divisible by 30,60 & 24

--
Regards,
Richard Harison

ToMh wrote:
On Dec 24 2009, 8:14 am, JimH wrote:
Vet wrote:
I am going to buy a new TV set.I need to know if the LED are better than
LCD? What is the pros and cons?.Also is 220 hertz better then 120 hertz?.
Thanks for any input as I am not up to the new technology.
Vietnam Vet
82 Abn.Div. 1969
I recently bought a 55 inch Vizio from Costco. It is an LCD TV, with LED
back lighting. What that does, is illuminate the LCD image using LEDs
for brightness. They are used in place of a fluorescent light in older
sets. This TV has what is called "local dimming". That dims the LEDs
behind a dark areas of the screen. It makes the black levels much better
than older LCD TV's, and that makes the picture appear more like a movie
theater. I wouldn't buy another LCD TV if it didn't have that
technology, or something new that replaces it. It makes a big difference.

The TV also has a 240 Hz picture. That makes the TV generate
intermediate images between the ones in the source material, so that
there are 240 images each second. That minimizes the blur that is common
with LCD TV sets during fast action. I never noticed the blur, but I did
find that the "smooth motion" associated with 240 Hz resulted in
everything looking like a soap opera. I turned that off, and I don't
miss it.

As with everything else in life, your mileage may vary.

--
Jim

Actually the 240 Hz only helps 24fps material, because it can sync on
each frame. 240 is evenly divisible by 24. It has no effect on 30fps
or 60fps input since the frames don't change faster than 30 or 60Hhz,
the extra refreshes don't accomplish anything.

240 is also evenly divisible by 30, 60, and 120

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 17:13:33 -0500, "LightByrd"
wrote:

"ToMh" wrote in message
...
On Dec 24 2009, 8:14 am, JimH wrote:
Vet wrote:
I am going to buy a new TV set.I need to know if the LED are better than
LCD? What is the pros and cons?.Also is 220 hertz better then 120
hertz?.
Thanks for any input as I am not up to the new technology.
Vietnam Vet
82 Abn.Div. 1969

I recently bought a 55 inch Vizio from Costco. It is an LCD TV, with LED
back lighting. What that does, is illuminate the LCD image using LEDs
for brightness. They are used in place of a fluorescent light in older
sets. This TV has what is called "local dimming". That dims the LEDs
behind a dark areas of the screen. It makes the black levels much better
than older LCD TV's, and that makes the picture appear more like a movie
theater. I wouldn't buy another LCD TV if it didn't have that
technology, or something new that replaces it. It makes a big difference.

The TV also has a 240 Hz picture. That makes the TV generate
intermediate images between the ones in the source material, so that
there are 240 images each second. That minimizes the blur that is common
with LCD TV sets during fast action. I never noticed the blur, but I did
find that the "smooth motion" associated with 240 Hz resulted in
everything looking like a soap opera. I turned that off, and I don't
miss it.

As with everything else in life, your mileage may vary.

--
Jim

Actually the 240 Hz only helps 24fps material, because it can sync on
each frame. 240 is evenly divisible by 24. It has no effect on 30fps
or 60fps input since the frames don't change faster than 30 or 60Hhz,
the extra refreshes don't accomplish anything.


120hz is also evenly divisible by 30,60 & 24

The 240Hz or 120Hz frame update (or 200/100Hz in Europe) on these
models does not only repeat the original frames. It estimates the
motion vectors and calculates intermediate positions of the objects.

The effect is most visible on 24Hz (and in Europe also 25Hz) material,
but it also has a sharpening effect on 60Hz (50Hz) intterlaced
material. This can be seen for example on "news tickers" with
horizontal scroll.

Without this feature the objects are held still on the screen for a
rather long period (17ms or longer) between each 'jump' to a new
position. When our eyes try to follow the motion (with a constant
speed) the still picture creates "motion blur" in our eyes.

What ToMh and Richard describe above is (only) the other reason of
selecting a frame rate of 120Hz (or 240), which is, that it is
possible to perform 5:5 (10:10) repeating sequences for 24Hz material
to get rid of the uneven judder that 3:2 sequencing in 60Hz creates.
/Jan

"Jan B" wrote in message
...
| On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 17:13:33 -0500, "LightByrd"
| wrote:
|
| "ToMh" wrote in message
| ...
| On Dec 24 2009, 8:14 am, JimH wrote:
| Vet wrote:
| I am going to buy a new TV set.I need to know if the LED are better
than
| LCD? What is the pros and cons?.Also is 220 hertz better then 120
| hertz?.
| Thanks for any input as I am not up to the new technology.
| Vietnam Vet
| 82 Abn.Div. 1969
|
| I recently bought a 55 inch Vizio from Costco. It is an LCD TV, with
LED
| back lighting. What that does, is illuminate the LCD image using LEDs
| for brightness. They are used in place of a fluorescent light in older
| sets. This TV has what is called "local dimming". That dims the LEDs
| behind a dark areas of the screen. It makes the black levels much
better
| than older LCD TV's, and that makes the picture appear more like a
movie
| theater. I wouldn't buy another LCD TV if it didn't have that
| technology, or something new that replaces it. It makes a big
difference.
|
| The TV also has a 240 Hz picture. That makes the TV generate
| intermediate images between the ones in the source material, so that
| there are 240 images each second. That minimizes the blur that is
common
| with LCD TV sets during fast action. I never noticed the blur, but I
did
| find that the "smooth motion" associated with 240 Hz resulted in
| everything looking like a soap opera. I turned that off, and I don't
| miss it.
|
| As with everything else in life, your mileage may vary.
|
| --
| Jim
|
| Actually the 240 Hz only helps 24fps material, because it can sync on
| each frame. 240 is evenly divisible by 24. It has no effect on 30fps
| or 60fps input since the frames don't change faster than 30 or 60Hhz,
| the extra refreshes don't accomplish anything.
|
|
| 120hz is also evenly divisible by 30,60 & 24
|
| The 240Hz or 120Hz frame update (or 200/100Hz in Europe) on these
| models does not only repeat the original frames. It estimates the
| motion vectors and calculates intermediate positions of the objects.
|
| The effect is most visible on 24Hz (and in Europe also 25Hz) material,
| but it also has a sharpening effect on 60Hz (50Hz) intterlaced
| material. This can be seen for example on "news tickers" with
| horizontal scroll.
|
| Without this feature the objects are held still on the screen for a
| rather long period (17ms or longer) between each 'jump' to a new
| position. When our eyes try to follow the motion (with a constant
| speed) the still picture creates "motion blur" in our eyes.
|
| What ToMh and Richard describe above is (only) the other reason of
| selecting a frame rate of 120Hz (or 240), which is, that it is
| possible to perform 5:5 (10:10) repeating sequences for 24Hz material
| to get rid of the uneven judder that 3:2 sequencing in 60Hz creates.
| /Jan


Jan...
So what about sets that claim a refresh rate of say 8ms?
Or is that just what they are *capable* of?

--
Regards,
Richard Harison

On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:00:17 -0500, "LightByrd"
wrote:
....
Jan...
So what about sets that claim a refresh rate of say 8ms?
Or is that just what they are *capable* of?

I guess you are thinking of "Response Time".
These numbers are often in the region of 8ms.
It does not specify how often the display is "refreshed".

The Response Time is a parameter that specify how long time it takes
one LCD pixel to change luminance level. (usually back and forth
between 2 levels).
If it takes too long, it creates smearing or "comet trails" from
moving objects.

One of the reasons for introducing frame rate upsampling using motion
interpolation is that if the objects are shown static on screen for
17ms (while we move our focus point) there was more to gain in motion
sharpness by reducing that time to half (using 120Hz) than to reduce
the reponse time further.

It is also the reason why the actual "Response Time" is often not
given for panels with motion interpolation. They call it "BEW" (=Blur
effective Width) or similar. These numbers are often down to 3 or even
1 ms.
/Jan

On Jan 6, 2:02*am, Jan B wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 17:13:33 -0500, "LightByrd"
wrote:



"ToMh" wrote in message
....
On Dec 24 2009, 8:14 am, JimH wrote:
Vet wrote:
I am going to buy a new TV set.I need to know if the LED are better than
LCD? What is the pros and cons?.Also is 220 hertz better then 120
hertz?.
Thanks for any input as I am not up to the new technology.
Vietnam Vet
82 Abn.Div. 1969

I recently bought a 55 inch Vizio from Costco. It is an LCD TV, with LED
back lighting. What that does, is illuminate the LCD image using LEDs
for brightness. They are used in place of a fluorescent light in older
sets. This TV has what is called "local dimming". That dims the LEDs
behind a dark areas of the screen. It makes the black levels much better
than older LCD TV's, and that makes the picture appear more like a movie
theater. I wouldn't buy another LCD TV if it didn't have that
technology, or something new that replaces it. It makes a big difference.

The TV also has a 240 Hz picture. That makes the TV generate
intermediate images between the ones in the source material, so that
there are 240 images each second. That minimizes the blur that is common
with LCD TV sets during fast action. I never noticed the blur, but I did
find that the "smooth motion" associated with 240 Hz resulted in
everything looking like a soap opera. I turned that off, and I don't
miss it.

As with everything else in life, your mileage may vary.

--
Jim

Actually the 240 Hz only helps 24fps material, because it can sync on
each frame. 240 is evenly divisible by 24. It has no effect on 30fps
or 60fps input since the frames don't change faster than 30 or 60Hhz,
the extra refreshes don't accomplish anything.

120hz is also evenly divisible by 30,60 & 24

The 240Hz or 120Hz frame update (or 200/100Hz in Europe) on these
models does not only repeat the original frames. It estimates the
motion vectors and calculates intermediate positions of the objects.

The effect is most visible on 24Hz (and in Europe also 25Hz) material,
but it also has a sharpening effect on 60Hz (50Hz) intterlaced
material. This can be seen for example on "news tickers" with
horizontal scroll.

Without this feature the objects are held still on the screen for a
rather long period (17ms or longer) between each 'jump' to a new
position. When our eyes try to follow the motion (with a constant
speed) the still picture creates "motion blur" in our eyes.

What ToMh and Richard describe above is (only) the other reason of
selecting a frame rate of 120Hz (or 240), which is, that it is
possible to perform *5:5 (10:10) repeating sequences for 24Hz material
to get rid of the uneven judder that 3:2 sequencing in 60Hz creates.
/Jan

Also note that not all TVs that are 120Hz have the motion
interpolation feature, and for those that do, many people claim it
actually makes things worse. Films are shot at 24fps, do you really
want your TV mucking with that? Plus I have yet to see any review were
anybody could see much of a difference for live TV. If you see and are
pleased with the difference, then it's probably worth it, the price
isn't much different anymore, plus I believe most TVs can let you
disable this feature. The 120hz for 24fps Movies does make sense
though.

"Jan B" wrote in message
...
| On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 10:00:17 -0500, "LightByrd"
| wrote:
| ...
| Jan...
| So what about sets that claim a refresh rate of say 8ms?
| Or is that just what they are *capable* of?
|
| I guess you are thinking of "Response Time".
| These numbers are often in the region of 8ms.
| It does not specify how often the display is "refreshed".
|
| The Response Time is a parameter that specify how long time it takes
| one LCD pixel to change luminance level. (usually back and forth
| between 2 levels).
| If it takes too long, it creates smearing or "comet trails" from
| moving objects.
|
| One of the reasons for introducing frame rate upsampling using motion
| interpolation is that if the objects are shown static on screen for
| 17ms (while we move our focus point) there was more to gain in motion
| sharpness by reducing that time to half (using 120Hz) than to reduce
| the reponse time further.
|
| It is also the reason why the actual "Response Time" is often not
| given for panels with motion interpolation. They call it "BEW" (=Blur
| effective Width) or similar. These numbers are often down to 3 or even
| 1 ms.
| /Jan


Thanks...
Had my terms a little skewed.

--
Regards,
Richard Harison