And this is progress??
Discussion
Many moons ago, everybody had a big CRT TV, and most of them had good, clear pictures, with great colour and contrast. Fair enough they kinda maxed out at about 36" for domestic use, but the picture quality was pretty bloody good.
Then LCD/Plasma came along and allowed us to "go large" - at a price. Blacks are no longer black, you can clearly see graduations on single blocks of colour and on SCART its just not quite as "sharp as a CRT.
Now we have HD - we get ours through Sky - and this sharpens up the picture beautifully and the colours are intense, but again there is a price: every single panning shot I see on our Sky HD (movies, documentaries, doesn't matter, any channel does it) has a significant judder or jerk, making it irritating to watch.
So apart from having a much bigger picture, I'm struggling to see how this is better than CRT. Progress? I'm not so sure.
Then LCD/Plasma came along and allowed us to "go large" - at a price. Blacks are no longer black, you can clearly see graduations on single blocks of colour and on SCART its just not quite as "sharp as a CRT.
Now we have HD - we get ours through Sky - and this sharpens up the picture beautifully and the colours are intense, but again there is a price: every single panning shot I see on our Sky HD (movies, documentaries, doesn't matter, any channel does it) has a significant judder or jerk, making it irritating to watch.
So apart from having a much bigger picture, I'm struggling to see how this is better than CRT. Progress? I'm not so sure.
mondeoman said:
you can clearly see graduations on single blocks of colour
That's not your TV's failure though, its the quality of the broadcast picture - its just that you're seeing it clearly for the first time. On an HD channel or DVD you won't see this effect, but on regular TV channels with limited bandwith they have to compress the image.otherman said:
mondeoman said:
you can clearly see graduations on single blocks of colour
That's not your TV's failure though, its the quality of the broadcast picture - its just that you're seeing it clearly for the first time. On an HD channel or DVD you won't see this effect, but on regular TV channels with limited bandwith they have to compress the image.RobDickinson said:
Judder could be ntsc pulldown or some processing on the TV or even sky's broadcast/compression. Way too many options to blame the tv directly.
It wasn't specifically a complaint about the TV per se, just that I seem to be paying for increased size with a loss in overall enjoyment.mondeoman said:
It wasn't specifically a complaint about the TV per se, just that I seem to be paying for increased size with a loss in overall enjoyment.
My 28" Panasonic CRT was £700, bought in 2001. My 40" Samsung LCD was £700 bought in 2008.Not sure where the increased cost you refer to is, unless you mean you were forced to buy a new TV before the old one was beyond its useful life.
I upgraded to a HD system (blu-ray+freesat, not SkyHD) while back and am totally happy with the improved video and (particularly) audio quality.
My 2x 24" LCD HD monitors are doing a lot better than the old 15" I used to work on... Cant remember being able to hook up 2 monitors before unless shelling out hundreds for the tech.
Resolution is increased greatly and I can actually do work that I need to do rather than always being held back by using only one screen and having to keep scrolling around when debugging.
Plus its great for movies when Im done working.
Oh and I forgot to mention it cost me £260 for both monitors rather than the £300 it cost for a 15" back then and if you wanted the 17" model it was £600-700.
Resolution is increased greatly and I can actually do work that I need to do rather than always being held back by using only one screen and having to keep scrolling around when debugging.
Plus its great for movies when Im done working.
Oh and I forgot to mention it cost me £260 for both monitors rather than the £300 it cost for a 15" back then and if you wanted the 17" model it was £600-700.
Can I ask those that are moving to TV from CRT if the TV is built for this?
The resolution on monitors is way above that on the TVs?
I notice this when plugging my MBP into my TV and thinking how crap it was, but the TV is not designed to really be used as a cheap monitor hence the monitors still can and will cost unto 4 to 5 times the amount of the relevant TV to get the resolution you want.
Correct?
The resolution on monitors is way above that on the TVs?
I notice this when plugging my MBP into my TV and thinking how crap it was, but the TV is not designed to really be used as a cheap monitor hence the monitors still can and will cost unto 4 to 5 times the amount of the relevant TV to get the resolution you want.
Correct?
aizvara said:
mondeoman said:
It wasn't specifically a complaint about the TV per se, just that I seem to be paying for increased size with a loss in overall enjoyment.
My 28" Panasonic CRT was £700, bought in 2001. My 40" Samsung LCD was £700 bought in 2008.Not sure where the increased cost you refer to is, unless you mean you were forced to buy a new TV before the old one was beyond its useful life.
I upgraded to a HD system (blu-ray+freesat, not SkyHD) while back and am totally happy with the improved video and (particularly) audio quality.
Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff