1
   

LCD or plasma

 
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jul, 2007 12:39 pm
A fix-it is to turn down the color so everyone on the screen, including Eddie Murphy, looks Swedish.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jul, 2007 12:58 pm
And why not? There are some good looking Swedes out there:

http://www.svd.se/images/ettan2005/050914/nyamko_339.jpg
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jul, 2007 01:09 pm
Laughing That's not a picture of Eddie Murphy in a multiple role, is it? Of course, the turning down the color may be discerned as not a case of black-and-white.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jul, 2007 01:16 pm
nope, that's Swedish Minister of Integration and Gender Equality. Nyamko Sabuni..... sorry for butting in...
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jul, 2007 01:18 pm
I thought it was Cameron Diaz on my Vizio. Laughing
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jul, 2007 01:54 pm
If you turned the color down on Cameron, she'd disappear.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Sep, 2007 06:29 am
My reception was great for a while, then a few weeks ago it started to diminish. The TV still works great. On my satellite system it's fine, but some of the digital signals on free to air just seemed to get weaker and weaker, until I lost a couple of stations altogether. I finally weakened and tomorrow I'm getting a new digital antenna installed, and getting rid of the old UHF antenna. Pretty good price too.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Sep, 2007 10:02 am
Digital does take a larger, better quality antenna for off-the-air broadcast channels.

I have some late news about plasma and LCD. Some of the newest 1080p SONY's have come so close to the depth of black as to be hard to see the difference in a side-by-side AB test with plasma. The major factor in which one you want is heat and energy consumption now. Some new Plasma are coming in with glare reducing front glass and some LCD's will be dropping the non-glare fuzzy surface in favor of a glare reducing glossy surface. The viewing angle will still be a refracting Fresnel lense on the inside surface of the LCD. On 1080p, you wouldn't see any difference in detail on a true 1080p source (a 1080p camera shot digitally live), and it would be difficult to spot it on a film. I'm not sure of 70" and some have exceeded 90" but the low contrast ratios on those huge screens require darker ambient light.

If one isn't concerned about a wall mount, I'd go SONY rear projection 3 LCD for the price and they've slimed down to fit nicely on a horizontal counsel which would hold all the other equipment. Always curious with people who insist on "mount on the wall" as it really isn't flat (it can hang off the wall 4" to 6" with an articulating mount). Where do they put the equipment, unless below on an open rack or closed equipment cabinet (where they could place a rear projection set). The SONY's are their new SXRD technology on the larger screens.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2007 06:03 am
When we pulled the old one down, we found that the connections had been corroding away. That was why it had deteriorated. It's great now.

My father's got a 127cm Plasma. I think the picture on my 106cm LCD is better.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Sep, 2007 09:24 am
You wouldn't be able to compare unless both sets were calibrated to ICC standards. Again, the factory settings are straight up the middle off the factory assembly line. It's like taking a surround sound out-of-the-box and not calibrating the distance of the speakers for volume, equalizing to the acoustics of the room, adjusting the sub-woofer to perform at the right level with the correct cross-over Hertz setting, the delay to the rear channels, etc.
0 Replies
 
lapantz4less
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Nov, 2007 10:43 pm
You want 1080P or I. When deciding between LCD or Plasma, it comes down to what looks good to you. LCD is cirsp an brighter where Plasma has a warmer look to it.

Good Luck All,
Chuck
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2007 12:30 pm
Not true -- if you don't have the display calibrated, there could be a slightly noticeable difference in the color temperature, etc., although one can adjust that with the remote control. The basic differences are disappearing except for the energy use, even with plasma offering an energy saving setting which is fine for, say, movies viewed in a darker room. I've seen the latest technology in LCD, Plasma, and DLP powered by the LED light source and although they are all good, the DLP wins out on a smoother, more cinema-like picture if you have the small depth of space available (which is usually in a cabinet underneath the set or in a cabinet which houses all of the other components -- why people still believe having their sets mounted on a wall hanging about 6 inches out is the only way is beyond me.) The SONY SXRD three LCD displays are also incredible although higher priced than an LED DLP. One thing you absolutely want in a new set is the anti-reflective surface for daytime viewing.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Recording Detector - Question by gollum
Bad picture on my Sharp LCD TV - Question by hydroplant
LCD TV. Help! - Question by kolinos4
p3 or 360 and why - Question by XxGWOPBOYZxX
Post your latest gizmos - Discussion by Chumly
IPOD OR ZUNE HD? - Discussion by detroittou
Giving up my iPod for a Walkman - Discussion by djjd62
Digital audio in your home sound system - Question by hingehead
 
  1. Forums
  2. » LCD or plasma
  3. » Page 5
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/07/2024 at 03:26:59