Is there then a time frame at the beginning of the plasma tv’s life that IR or burn in may be an issue?

HDguru: Were the tests that you did on a brand new tv within its first 100 hours of use? Isnt the first 100-200 hours of use on a plasma the most important and that is when one can cause burn-in and IR problems?

I’m confused. I just purchased a plasma PN50B650 and after playing an hour or so of Ninja Gaiden I see the health bar in the corner for around 20 minutes. You didnt really say much (well anything really) about HUD on games and why after viewing that image for a while why it persists for up to 15 minutes and if there is any chance at all it can be permanent

@ Jason

On my 07 Hitachi plasma my old roomates would play Gears of War 2 on my Xbox constantly (At least 4 hours per day for about 6 months) and after that much time I had a faint HUD element stay on screen. I thought it was permanent but after a month of two of more moderate use away from them it was only visible on a completely black screen, and by the time I got rid of the TV it was damn near invisible to my incredibly retentive eyes. I’ve played a lot of games on my 09 Panasonic Viera for long periods of time and I might get some image retention, but it’s always gone within a few minutes of watching regular TV.

My two cents: Don’t worry about it, don’t play the same game several hours a day for several months, and if you’re addicted to a game look in the game options to see if you can turn off or dim the HUD. If it worries you run snow on screen overnight once a week. Otherwise I recommend you stop worrying and just enjoy your awesome TV.

I have my Fujitsu 42″ plasma TV for 10 years now. All four corners has 2 inch size yellow spots, but none appear in the center of the screen. Not easily seen unless you really stare at the screen and look for it. I also have a burn-in on the lower left hand corner with “NY1″ logo and is apparent when I shut the plasma off. Otherwise, the plasma still works great and I am able to view HD TV via external HD tuner(Panasonic).

Thanks Guru! I love my ’08 Panasonic plasma but I’m pretty consiensious about varying my content to prevent much of any IR or burn-in.

I have worried about getting a nice plasma for my in-laws (who tend to leave TVs on and walk away), but at the 50″+ range plasmas are just such a killer value. I feel a bit better about recommending one to them now

Burn-in may be “difficult” to accomplish, but I don’t know how else to explain the faint “ESPN” that appears in the lower-right hand corner of my 60-inch Vizio plasma bought in 2007.

Even when I haven’t watched ESPN for hours or days, on solid-colored backgrounds the outline is always visible. (ESPN displays its a small logo in white on the right side of their “Bottom Line” ticker. And I know it isn’t simply image retention (IR) as described above, since the ghost appears in the location where ESPN’s *previous* Bottom Line displays their logo. Thankfully, under normal viewing conditions it’s wholly invisible, but it’s there for sure.

So, while I believe I have suffered burn-in, it’s not visible under most conditions, which I’m thankful for.

Thanks HD Guru for setting the record straight. Image retention and burn-in has, for far too long, been the subject of myth and speculation!

I notice that those who have experienced any image retention always have older plasmas made by second tier manufacturers. In the comments posted at your site we see only a ten year old Fujitsu, a 2007 Vizio, and a 2007 Hitachi where owners claim to have experienced any problems.

I own a 2008 Panasonic Plasma and ran tests with the color bars and then used a white screen – the same test you performed. I could not detect any image retention even in a darkened room.

The only other tests of image retention were done by the “Plasma Display Coalition” which is an industry group.
LG, Pioneer Samsung, Hitachi and Panasonic are members. The test results are a few years old and showed no permanent damage or burn-in. However some tested sets were more prone to image retention than others. Unfortunately (remember this is an industry group) the brands were not identified. Also these tests were performed in 2006 or 2007.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the Pioneers and Panasonics are least likely to have any image retention and the Samsungs are slightly more prone to this temporary problem.

Thanks again for reporting on this issue!

Now – if you would only take the time to redesign your web site!

Bob Stone

I have around a 3-4 year old Panasonic that has burn-in on the sides from viewing regular 4:3 TV. The TV will not remember the expansion settings so you have to manually set the zoom to fill the screen each time you turn on. The kids never bother to expand the screen, so the center pixels have many hours more wear than the sides. You can clearly see the shadows on the sides when viewing full screen HDTV content. Hopefully the newer ones are better, but based upon this experience I will never buy another plasma.

While I agree that most people will not get any significant amount of burn-in on a modern plasma to say it doesn’t exist is simply wrong. I’ve seen burn in on several plasmas made in the past year or two. For example, I saw several at an airport with massive burn in due to the way the arrival/departure information was formatted. Also, I play MMOs. I have friends with over 10k hours of game time. From some of them who play on a plasma they have certain parts of the HUD burned in on their plasmas. For casual gaming sure, plasma is nice. But if you’re playing a game for hundreds or thousands of hours do not do it on a plasma set.

I had a Pioneer 50 inch Plasma wall mounted and professionally calibrated by ISF. While burn in was not a problem, after only 2 years of use, an ugly blob of yellow mass color appeared in the upper center screen about 7 inches in circumference. It was there, permanent. I guess I was an unlucky one. I sold the house, left the tv and bought a Sharp Aqous 65 inc LCD.

So this has become plasma (Panasonic) fansite? Every article is deliberately aimed to slack LCD’s off and ridiculously praised. We no that Panasonic is sponsoring this site, but come on, don’t be so obvious about it.

Panasonic FANBOY??? Are you nuts! Plasma IS the best picture by far. LCD is for the masses and those who don’t know. (Maybe you don’t know!) BTW, Samsung has ads and Mitsubishi too and Mitsi doesn’t even MAKE a plasma. So get your facts straight before you sling BS!!!!!

Lol, look at the recent articles:

-Panasonic best tv
-Panasonic best tv
-Panasonic thin, beautiful, fabulous
-120/240Hz problems exposed
-Plasma burnin, fact or myth

, and plasma doesn’t have best picture by far, example Samsung B8500 (LCD) has better absolute picture quality (better thann Kuro, which kills Panasonic) if you don’t count viewing angles. It’s sad world when people take everything as truth what corrupt bloggers write.

I can only image the HD Guru’s frustration after reading some of these comments. Do people even read an article before typing away in the comments section? Apparently not!

Frankly the HD Guru should answer these comments himself but I’ll restate a few points mentioned in this article.

1.) The article clearly states the findings are for 2008 and 2009 plasmas. It does not cover 10 year old fujitsu plasmas nor plasmas made in 2007 or earlier.

2.) The HD GURU clearly states it may be possible to create burn-in by leaving the same image on the screen for weeks or months at a time. So yes – if you own an airport and display fight imformation in the exact same grid pattern for years at a time you will create some burn-in.

3.) If you happen to find that a yellow “blob” appears on your screen after a few years you probably should not assume it is burn-in. A burned in image replicates exactly a prior image and would never be described as a “blob”

4.) If you constantly watch 4:3 material for years at a time with black bars on either side, never varying the content to full screen, then, as the article states, you may create burn-in. The phosphers will have aged unevenly

5.) If you bought an HDTV that is not been highly rated on a praticular web site – you probably should ask the host for a review. To make reckless statements that a reviewer is owned by an advertiser is reckless and unwarranted without very sound and convincing evidence. It should surprise no one that advertisers select web sites were their products receive some praise but that does not mean the reviewer is in their debt.

Bob Stone:

Now it is you that needs to read carefully…
I stated in my comment, ” While burn in was not a problem, ”

I clearly understand the difference. I am just pointing out that Plasma is not the Holy Grail of television display tech. My plasma failed prematurely.

The plasma’s are getting better and better indeed.
I could see image retention on my Panasonic 50PV70, but it was not a problem.

My latest buy, a Pioneer KRP600M 60 inch (lucky me!), has no image retention what soever!

I play hours of Battlefield43, but absolutely no image retention is there to be seen!
Our Panasonic 42PX80 in the livingroom has the same thing, no image retention.

etype2:

Your point is well taken. You did say burn in was not a problem. My mistake and my apologies.

Still I wonder why you posted your comment here????????

FYI: Whether an HDTV uses plasma or LCD technology- there will always be some sets which fail prematurely.

According to Consumer Reports the failure rate for plasmas is very low

To each his own, I guess. Why are TV owners so defensive about LCD v Plasma??? Some folks seem to take is so friggin personally! If you prefer your LCD to the clearly superior qualities of plasma (just kidding!) then that’s all that matters! TV viewing is personal choice. Period. I went out to buy a flat screen TV convinced I was going to get an LCD because of plasmas burn in problems and screen reflectivity…but after researching on quality websites like this one and viewing friends TVs and occasionally in the ugly big box stores, I personally concluded that Plasma was for me. Others come to a different conclusion because THAT’S THEIR PREFERENCE. My brother was doing similar research to me at the same time and bought an LCD that he’s happy with (and does have a fantastic picture, to be sure). I don’t sit watching his TV thinking “damn LCD piece of junk, why didn’t my foolish sibling buy a plasma…he’s an embarassment to the family name!” TV’s are TV’s and will always be subject to personal taste and specific use decisions. Get over it.

No problem Bob Stone.

Why I posted… as my above comment, ” I am just pointing out that Plasma is not the Holy Grail of television display tech. ”

Yes, Burn in is largely over come and hangs on in people’s minds just as the old problems of motion blur and viewing angles hangs on to LCD.

I appreciate Mr. Merson’s site. He offers very useful information. I have commented frequently for 3 plus years. I feel there is a bias to plasma in this site. Mr Merson in articles complained about high price of LCD such as the Sony XBR 8 and others, then in another article praises the latest Panasonic plasma as the best available or the Kuro both priced in $5000 to $6000 range. He sees no problem with glossy screens,when in fact they can be a big problem for folks who cannot control room lighting (such as high clearstory windows) Display Mate had a long exhaustive scientific test over months with many LCD, Plasma and a Sony Studio monitor CRT. They invited industry experts, techs, journalists. The test was non biased. The conclusion?… No one could detect motion blur on mid to high levels LCD sets with live motion. When they thought they saw motion blur it turned out to be from the source. I can provide the link if you like.

I can not see motion blur on my 65 inch Sharp Aquos without 120 scanning. I think I have an educated eye because I have owned and viewed in my home all the various display tech since the mid 60′s, but I’m not an expert. ( I have always had my sets professionally calibrated by ISF.)

On viewing angles, over and over again on this site, “LCD’s have poor viewing angles.” In the past, yes. With lower class sets and small sets, yes. I want to stress the next point…

I would venture to say, most folks watch their sets in average homes in a family room sized room. Most folks do not have a dedicated home theater room that is large with controlled lighting.

In my situation, my viewing room is 14.9 feet by 17.8 feet. My 65 inch LCD is 2 feet from the opposite wall. My 12 foot, 6 person sofa is against the back wall. The viewing distance is 13.5 feet, eye to center of screen. At the extreme ends of the sofa, the viewing angle is 45 degrees and the distance is greater. I can not in this room, get far enough or create a viewing angle to see a reduction in image quality. Granted if the set was smaller, less then 50 inches, I think you would see some image reduction.

My point, in real world viewing conditions, my personal situation, most if not all the points about LCD’s are non issues. It could be the same or different for others.

I wish there was a more balanced commentary when comparing plasma and LCD.

Often times I read in this site, …at B. Buy, I can see a big difference in plasma and LCD. A person needs to audition a prospective purchase at a quality store, dare I say high end, where all the sets are properly, uniformly adjusted and calibrated and set up in a living room enviourment.

Having said all the above, I will concede that Plasma has a small edge in black levels, motion resolution (and yet Display Mates tests show with live video, motion blur can not be detected) and off access viewing.

LCD is better in higher brightness rooms (don’t tell me to close my blinds, I have high windows and for esthetic reasons, I’m not going to cover them up.) LCD generally consumes less power (and both plasma and LCD are getting better at this.) Most plasma until recently have glossy screens, a real problem for some. LCD weigh less so are easier to wall mount if that is desired.

If the comparisons between LCD and Plasma could be a bit more fair and balanced and how they relate to real world viewing situations it would be appreciated.

etype2:

Thank you for your comments.

LCD vs Plasma

I would agree with you that motion blur, which can be easily seen on test images, is difficult to detect with real world sources. As you pointed out, the Displaymate tests (which I was fully aware of) showed that viewers had a great deal of difficulty detecting any blur once one moves beyond test signals. In support of your arguement, CNET basically says the same thing – motion blur is hard to detect. Yet I’ve seen this blur as has the HD Guru. But it is a minor point that has probably been given too much significance.

Where I strongly disagree with you is that viewing angles are a “non-issue” with LCDs. This is Simply Not True. In the SAME article you cite (about motion blur) published by Displaymate they say: “What we found in both the measurements and viewing tests is that for LCDs the viewing angle where THERE IS NOTICEABLE PICTURE DEGRADATION is a mere 10 degrees”. Displaymate tested high end 2008 LCDs including a Sharp, Samsung, and Sony XBR. I’m afraid your reading of the Displaymate article shows some rather selective editng on your part. You cite their conclusions about motion blur but ignore their remarks about viewing angles. Strange. In a similar vein, while CNET agrees with you about motion blur their reviews of LCDs often mention that if a person moves “only a seat cushion away” from the sweet spot for an LCD – the picture degrades considerably.

While you dismiss the limited viewing angles of LCDs – it is a very common if not universal problem with this technology and to my mind, the key reason one should avoid LCDs. You evidently are not bothered by the problem. Note that Displaymate lists the Sharp’s TRUE contrast ratio at a 45 degree angle as 174. On axis the Sharp measures 1,330. The Panasonic Plasma measures about 3,500 on or off axis

Brightness. Here I would tend to agree with you if this was 2008. LCDs had an edge and if you watch TV during the day, in a room with no shades, the LCD might be better. However in 2009 the Panasonic Plasmas appear to be able to put out a great deal more light than they did in the past. See the HD Gurus review of the Panasonic G10 where a blinding 80 ft/l was reported. For most viewers that would hurt their eyes.

Screen reflections: Here I agree with you. If you have reflections or bright light sources opposite the TV then a matt surface is desirable.

In the end a plasma is the far better choice for most viewers. A holy grail -no – what is. The matt screen is the only plus for some LCDs and the tradeoffs are considerable. In 2008 I would have also agreed that for well lit rooms – LCDs held the edge because they were brighter but for 2009 that is no longer true.

Does anyone have information on energy consumption of plasmas? I have a 42inch LG but may get rid of it as I have been told it is an energy “pig”?

I’ve seen retention on a couple Plasmas. Cheaper LG and a older Viera. The LG’s rention was due to gaming hardcore out of the box… the Panasonic’s was viewing 4:3 content for a year or so.

Both are still fine, and you have to be picky to notice it. I’m glad these aren’t my TV, as it does bother me.

What did I buy? 50″ Viera S1. Why? The neoPDP Viera’s are the only TV that can do 1080 lines under full motions without crazy artifacts. IR an issue? Haven’t seen it yet, but I am careful.

What about LED LCDs? I was hoping they would close the gap btwn Plasma and LCD… but they only introduce more artifacts!!! Hope you like Halos while playing Halo!

Don’t fall for the LED/120/240 scams. If you want LCD just get a 60hz CFL model! The anti-blur from 120/240 is more annoying than the blur itself! Sadly, the newest most $$$ LED LCD has the most Artifacts of any TV!

Bob Stone:

Thank you for your comment as well.

I did not ignore Display Mate’s article on motion blur, because I did not read that article. I believe it was apart from the one made reference to.

Above, I commented on my personal viewing room and my experience. I can say, for me, my wife and guests, we can not detect ANY picture degradation ANYWHERE in our room. I simply have to disagree with the comment that *one seat cushion away the picture degrades. That was the day of rear projection sets, I know I had several, but not now, not with LCD or Plasma.

Comments like this one * about viewing angles are totally alien to me in my experiences with LCD and which has caused me to respond passionately in defense. I don’t know what else to say, it just doses not exist in this room with this particular LCD. For the record, I stated above about viewing angles, ” In the past, yes. With lower class sets and small sets, yes. ”

An observation, I believe this loss of contrast off axis in LCD directly relates to screen size and room size. I have a 65 inch in the main room and I have a 46 inch Sony XBR6 in the master bedroom. My bedroom is 20 feet by 13 feet, wider then my main room. I do see loss of contrast in this room. It is not an issue however, because the set is centered to the bed. We watch in bed. ( this is another example of a non issue. I admit the picture degrades in this room with this set, but we never see it because we only watch in bed.)

Obviously, I can’t disagree with the finding you cite above. I can tell you unequivocally, in my viewing room, I can not detect any loss of contrast, color shift and the like when viewed anywhere in my 15×17 room. I would like to invite you to my home to see for your self, if that were possible. What I could do is take high quality pictures from center and off axis of my viewing room, with the image on the screen, put them up on my website and link them here but I’m sure you and others would doubt the results. The argument would be made that a photograph can’t detect the shift. (Most importantly my eyes can’t detect it in this room.)

What I have been trying to say all along in this and other article on this site, it is not cut and dry. Plasma is NOT the best in certain situations and to much attention to OLD REAL problems of LCD which been for all intents and purposes been eliminated just as Plasma burn in has been eliminated.

You conclude in your above comment, “In the end a plasma is the far better choice for most viewers. ” A Plasma would not be the best choice for me, with high windows with a lot of natural indirect light, nor would it be the best choice for my neighbors who have views of the ocean and want to see the scenery in their viewing rooms as well as great quality movies on their flat screens. They chose LCD.

I agree with you that Plasma is getting brighter.

I’m glad you agree with me on some points and as stated before, I DO give the nod to Plasma for ultimate picture quality. I will say it again, Plasma is not the Holy Grail display for everyone.
It is an individual choice and I believe it is wrong to give the impression That Plasma is the best choice. Some folks like LCD because they are lighter, thinner, use less power, easier to wall mount.
This debate will go on… I can’t wait for OLED to mature into 50, 60 inch and beyond panels and it will be here in the not to distant future.

About me: This writer began tinkering with crystal radios in the mid 50′s. Helped wire his boyhood neighborhood with a home built house to house intercom and other devises. Bought his first stereo in 1965. Moved on to high end audio. Bought his first color TV in 1966. Purchased the first Sony Trinitrons imported to the U.S. a 7 inch and a 12 inch in 1969. Then went on to purchase 17 inch and 32 inch Sony Trinitrons. Later purchased a Kloss Nova Beam 6 foot and 10 foot rear projectors in the 70′s. Went on to purchase various rear projectors and front projectors, a 40 inch Mitsu CRT, a RCA 38 inch CRT HD, a Pioneer 50 inch Plasma. Currently owns a Sharp Aquos 65 inch LCD, a Sony 46 inch XBR6 LCD, a Sony 11 inch OLED and a high end audio system. All sets starting with the Mitsu were professionally calibrated by ISF. Does this make me an expert? NO. It gives me insight.

I bought a 42″ 1080P Panasonic TC-P42S1 @ Sears for $650, the picture on it is great. I don’t think that I could have gotten an LCD TV like this, with regards to price/quality. My Desk sits Parallel to the TV stand & I like to watch TV while I am working. I know that this is an EXTREME viewing angle & I don’t do this when I am watching movies or a TV show that I really must enjoy fully but it is nice to know that I can still see the picture clearly from this angle. There is a slight double image from this angle because of the two planes of glass with SOME images but that’s a NON-ISSUE.

My only major gripe with this TV is “Image Retention” or “Burn-in” or whatever. I am not an audio/video guy & I am probably being overly concerned with this issue but I am paranoid of what I watch. In the past 10 days that I have had this TV, I have set the contrast & brightness to less that 40, which sucks in dark scenes & I really have not been able to watch any news channels (CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Bloomberg) because of IR. I read on a website that “Burn-in” occurs in the first 100-200 hours of TV watching & it recommended that you set the contrast to a lower setting. I also watch in “Zoom” format, which gets rid of the black bars, but you sacrifice some of the picture. I tried watching CNN for about 20/30 mins but when you turn off the cable box and just left the TV on you could see the residue of the static images, granted I had to put my face very close to the TV to see it, about 7″/8″ away. I tried the scrolling bars twice (all the way through each time) but it was still mostly there. It wasn’t until I resumed regular TV watching for about an hour or so then rechecked it to find that the IR was pretty much gone. During this time I was really scared that I had damaged the scene. It seems to me the scrolling bars are pretty much useless.

When it comes to gaming I play only for about 1/2 hour to an hour at a time and I switch between “Full” & “Zoom” format to prevent IR.

When I decided to buy a plasma I really hadn’t FULLY counted on having to make all these adjustment to my viewing habits & 20% of me has some buyers remorse but I am very happy with the picture/price for this TV.

My question to everyone is: I am being too paranoid? Does it get better after the 100-200 hours? Can I resume normal news watching after the time period is over?

What bothers me about this article is that it says that if you cause “IR” it can be cleared up in 5 minutes which has not been true in my case & I have to agree that there does seem to be some bias towards plasma’s on this site.

Matt

Matt:

Relax. I own a Panasonic 58″ made late in 2008. I’ve seen no image retention including hours where a static image was frozen on the screen by mistake. My set is in the custom mode and fairly bright. However, out of an excess of caution, during the first 200 hours I watched mostly full screen sources.

There was some information published by Panasonic, in a white paper circa 2003, which said that the phosphers were more sensitve to image retention in the first 200 hours. I’m not aware of any other studies that discussed this issue.

If you look at what the HD Guru reports and what the Plasma Coalition reports — they both say that true burn-in (permanent damage) is essentially impossible to create unless you leave static images frozen on the screen for weeks or months at a time.

Temporary image retention is possible but, as you note, difficult to detect. This image retention does disappear although perhaps not as rapidly as the HD Guru suggested.

I suspect that after a bit more viewing time even this temporary image retention will be reduced to a large degree

It is important to make a clear distinction between temporary image retention and permanent burn-in. The latter, ie, the possibility of permantently damaging your TV you should not be concerned about.

Enjoy your plasma and watch it the way you would any other TV.

etype2:

LCD Viewing Angles:

You persist in suggesting that LCDs, in general, do not have a problem with viewing angles. You say that viewing angles were a problem “(in) the day of rear projection sets … but not now”. You repeat that sentiment several times suggesting that LCDs have evolved and this is a non-issue for the better LCDs of today or this problem is limited to smaller LCDs. In short – I think it is fair to say you dismiss this problem.

Lets put aside your personal Sharp LCD which may be quite unique, by your own account.

Looking at the Displaymate article “Plasma-LCD shootout” which you selectively quoted regarding motion blur. Here we see the very same scientist, that you were so fond of when he spoke about motion blur, saying that the viewing angles on LCDs were terrible. Now remember – these tests were done in 2008 and as the article notes – they selected the top of the line, the very best for this shootout. Here is what the test says: All 8 of the top of the line LCDs “showed noticeable color shifts at +- 15 degrees” while the Panasonic Plasma was essentially perfect even at 45 degrees. To quote the article again “the significance of this is ernormous because the “sweet spot” for seeing an accurate picture on an LCD is only one person wide, even for these top of the line models” That is a direct quote from the same study you quoted regarding motion blur. This was a 2008 study using TOP of the LINE LCDs!

If we look at Consumer Reports, CNET, or Sound and Vision in 2008 or 2009 you will see almost the same comments about restricted viewing angles on LCDs.

Yet you persist in saying this problem doesn’t exist – or it is from a bygone era, or is restricted to cheap or small LCDs. NOT TRUE!!!!

I know you love your Sharp LCD but there is amble evidence that everyone else does see the limited viewing angles of LCDs. This problem has been reported time after time in every credible source you might want to look at. Is Displaymate wrong, is CNET wrong, is Consumers Reports wrong, is the HD Guru wrong. In every case I’m referring to their 2009 reviews and LCD viewing angles are a problem except at your house!

Please – I understand you like your Sharp but really – viewing angles are a problem but we all understand you really like your Sharp LCD

Bob Stone:

This issue comparing LCD to Plasma reminds me very much of introduction of the first solid state high end audio amplifiers compared to tube amplifiers in the early 70′s and the introduction of Compact Disk to vinyl records in 1980.

What critics said about the first solid state amplifiers: To sterile, cold. Indeed, to this day, the debate goes on, yet virtually all high end audio amplifiers are solid state with a few exceptions.

What critics said and continue to say about CD’s: Cold, loss of depth, constrained and insisting that vinyl presents the best sound, ignoring all the benefits of CD’s.

So what do we have here? Both are very good, just different.

LCD-Plasma

In my above comments, I said the OLD, REAL problems of LCD existed and now largely eliminated.
I said in lower quality and small LCD sets the viewing angle problem exists. I said I saw loss of contrast on my smaller Sony in a larger room, but it was a non issue for ME for the reasons given. I said I gave the nod to Plasma for edge in picture quality. With today’s high quality LCD’s 46 inch and larger in an average living room, I reject the comment that “only a seat cushion away” from the sweet spot for an LCD – the picture degrades considerably.” I remember all to well this effect with 80′s all in one rear projection sets, but not today, not with good quality LCD and Plasma.

I said before and now you cite more commentary from other reputable sources all of which I read and respect, I can’t dispute their findings.

I gave this article, one persons personal experience and opinion about LCD. That is all I can do.

I think you are focused on test bench results and specifications.

I am talking about real world viewing environments and my personal experience. In your last comment, you suggested my personal situation is unique. Perhaps it is not and applies to others.

In my above comments, I gave reasons why LCD is preferred by folks, I’m not going to repeat them again.

LCD and Plasma are both wonderful display devices.
Each has it’s merits and disadvantages. It is up to each person to decide for them, which is better. My voice is here to try to remove the bias for Plasma and ask for a more fair and balanced commentary.

Matt:

With LCD you would not have this anxiety about burn in. I hope your IR clears up. I had a 50 inch Pioneer plasma and never noticed IR.

On the viewing angles: I don’t know about you but in critical viewing, I always sit in the front of the TV set, as in movies I wan’t to be in the sweet spot for surround sounds. On daily viewing, news and whatnots sitting off angle and of sweet spot isn’t a problem as I’m not critically watching TV.

In my opinion LCD offangle degradation isn’t such a issue that most of these sites suggests.

If you live alone, the limited viewing angles that all current LCDs exhibit, would not present a problem.

Yet, many households have more than one member who watch televison together.

etype2:
“I can not see motion blur on my 65 inch Sharp Aquos” I know you love your TV, but seriously? I read and read that “motion blur is undetectable on modern LCDs” that’s total BS.

I must have magic eyes or something as I can see motion blur on ALL LCDs, especially the newer ones. 120/240 modes seem to be worse IMO, as “motion estimation/compensation” is total crap.
And don’t get me started on the LEDs… worst TVs ever made.

I also have a room with high light, but my S1 isn’t a problem @ all. The new AR coating is really good, and performs much better than my 30″ CRT.

Viewing Angle for LCDs, Slight-Reflections on Plasma. Too each his own, but I’d rather my picture not change based on my seating position… or heck, if i dare to stand. The only time I close a blind is when the sun is beaming directly on my TV.

Remember, your 65″ Aquos is putting out a whole 320 lines of motion resolution. You pay for 1080 from your Cable/Sat and Bluray, but @ full motion your TV can’t even deliver half of that!
Most of the time the image is 90% static, so your TV does look beautiful!(All modern HDTVs do)

But if motion blur isn’t a prob, why are there 120/240 mode to compensate?
The simple fact is, no LCD is HD under motion!
Sadly, not even DVD quality under full motion.

I don’t care if my TV is Plasma/LCD or made of Carbon Fiber. All I want is 1:1 input:output ratio under full motion, without signal modification.(Image Artifacts)

Plasma isn’t the holy grail, I agree. But for now, it’s as close as you can get!

Bob Stone:

I am relaxed. I carefully watched my news yesterday & have no “IR” to speak of today. I also watched “Once Upon a Time in the West” in HD, which is almost a 3 hour movie in letter box format. It was beautiful. I am loving this TV more, my only regret now seems to be I wish it was a 50″ TV but who doesn’t wish there TV was bigger.

Currently I am waiting for my THX glasses to fully calibrate my TV, not that I will probably be able to tell the difference because audio/video is really not my thing.

Long live the Panasonic plasma.

Matt

Bob:

I hope you read ALL my comments above.

Motion Blur does exist. It can be captured in freeze frames. I can’t see it on my personal TV’s. I chose to reference Display Mate’s article because it supports what I have said for the last 3 1/2 years. Experts, techs; columnists, could not detect motion blur with live video. I can provide you with the link, if you did not read the article.

The article talks about the fact that the human brain can’t decode complex information as perhaps a reason why we can’t see motion blur, yet we can capture it in a static image. Yes television manufactures have introduced these devises to reduce motion blur because in truth it can be measured, tested and captured in static frames, but it can not be detected in live motion. We have learned that these so called correction devises only introduce more artifacts. No dispute there.

The only motion distortion I see, is rapid flood lights in music concerts. I saw that also, with my former plasma.

My set is pre 120/240. In addition, I have all so called correction circuits turned off.

Please remember, I’m talking about my personal experience with LCD.

For Bob Stone, HD Guru and anyone interested, with regard to viewing angles. On Thursday, December 10, 2009, that is today, I took a series of photographs of my Sharp 65 inch Aquos LCD. They were taken between 4 and 5 PM local time. I set my camera on a tripod and focused on the identical portion of the screen for each shot. I used Joe Kane’s Video Essential blu ray test disc as the video source. I chose 3 different images from the disc and then paused them. The first of each image was on center and the second was approximatly 45 degrees off axis or in my viewing room, 3 seat cushions off center or in other words at the extreme viewing angle in my room. The tripod was positioned about 1 1/2 feet forward of the normal viewing position in each location.

Bob Stone, this is for you. You said: “only a seat cushion away” from the sweet spot for an LCD – the picture degrades considerably.”

If interested, please view these links. They show the images as described. THE FIRST ON CENTER, THE SECOND, OFF AXIS AS DESCRIBED.

SCENE ONE on center:
http://etype2.deviantart.com/art/LCD-test-1-on-axis-146386713
SCENE ONE 45 degrees off axis:
http://etype2.deviantart.com/art/LCD-Test-1a-off-axis-146387072
SCENE TWO on center:
http://etype2.deviantart.com/art/LCD-Test-2-on-axis-146387251
SCENE TWO 45 degrees off axis:
http://etype2.deviantart.com/art/LCD-test-2a-of-axis-146387432
SCENE THREE on center:
http://etype2.deviantart.com/art/LCD-Test-3-on-axis-146387704
SCENE THREE 45 degrees off axis:
http://etype2.deviantart.com/art/LCD-Test-3a-off-axis-146387896

If you see a small image, just left click on it to see full size. As you can see, no reduction in contrast, color shift and THREE SEAT CUSHIONS AWAY FROM CENTER OF SCREEN, at the end of a 6 person sofa. All images unedited. the background looks dark because the camera sensor focused on the light from the screen.

etype2: Nice setup! You’ve done well in eliminating any viewing angle issues. I could live with some viewing angle issues, as I would probably sit dead center 99% of the time.

Motion resolution is my main concern.
I’ve read your links/articles, and I wish I could agreed that motion isn’t detectable. But I can’t.

95% of the time, it’s a non-issue. But, I watch Hockey! Black puck/sticks on white ice moving at 100mph.

I first saw the blur effect with a friend@ Best Buy on an Aquos and Samsung Series 7 LCD. We both wanted new TVs, I wanted Plasma, he wanted LCD.

All TV were receiving the same HD feed with a hockey clips(Decent feed, Not too much compression.) We watched for a few minutes on the LCDs and I couldn’t really detect any blur.
Then we watched on a G10… Instantly we noticed that the motion was much easier on the eyes.

Back to the Aquos and Sammy and wow, you can really tell that the puck/sticks/referees jerseys really do drop resolution under motion.

Jaggies and blur where the most noticable effects and were far from undetectable. I wish this wasn’t the case, but I was blown away! Then we go to look at the 4000$ 240-LED, and IT’S WORSE!

Only after seeing true 1080 motion could I really detect the blur on the LCDs.

I know I know I know, you can’t compare TVs in the Store. But, it’s a good starting point, as we did see blur/jaggies on 3 different LCDs.

I bought a Panasonic S1 and my buddy bought a Samsung Series 7 w/ 120 mode. First we watched a hockey game at my buddies place. Motion blur with sticks and the puck was very noticable. He played around with the setting for most of the 1st period, the only thing that helped was turning off 120mode. (500$ feature down the tubes, not a happy camper)

At the end of the game, not only did the blur of the puck/sticks annoy my eyes, but I noticed blur in a much more serious place, faces. When still, you can see the hairs/pores and zits on the players faces… pan a bit and the detail is lost. Oh, static again, it’s back!!!!

It’s this switching of resolution that really annoys my eyes. The more I watch this TV, the more I can find places of blur.

After watching the next game on my S1. There’s still some blur from the source signal, but the overall detail of the puck/sticks/faces was much improved.

As for IR, haven’t seen it yet but I am careful. This IS an issue still for plasmas. My S1 TV has IR prevention build in, so the engineers obviously took steps to prevent this. Just like LCD engineers are trying to solve motion resolution problems. 320 lines under full motion is just unacceptable.

From what I read, most people probably won’t notice the motion blur/resolution drop, but I do… my buddy who bought the LCD admits it… co-worker has seen it too.

So what matters most to you?
LCD: Thinner, lighter TV that burns less energy
But, what about the Image Quality??!?!

Plasma: Blacks, Contrast Ratio, Motion Resolution.
All pluses are related to image quality.

My S1 is only 4″ thick, and burns the same energy as a CFL LCD. LED are the worst TVs ever, so we won’t even go there.

Plasma keep improving by getting thinner/lighter and more efficent while still providing maximum image quality.(1080 under motion is as good as it gets)

LCD makers have been adding new features to compensate for slow LCD panels, but all their new features introduce image artifacts!

What a sh|t show… I feel bad for Joe Blow who spends 4000$ on a 240hz LED.

Bob;

Thank you for your insights. I believe you.

The premature failure of my Plasma soured me to another Plasma purchase. I guess I was an unlucky one. It was a top line Pioneer. I see how Plasma’s have been improving in all areas and particularly now with non glare screens. I to am interested in top image quality. I will hold out for OLED if they can come up with LARGE panels. Once you have 65 inches, it’s hard to go down in size. It looks like we will see larger OLED panels in 2010 and beyond. Once they get the manufacturing costs down,they will take off.

I really like the Panny Plasma that is one inch thick with wireless receiver. Unfortunately to small for me, and those vertical black stripes contrast to much with the silver frame. If they were to make it in black,would look better.

I saw the halos on the 1st generation Sammy backlit LCD. Not good.

Enjoy your Panasonic Plasma.

Don’t hold your breath on OLED. There are still enormous problems with scaling up the technology at anything approaching affordable costs and the uneven color aging problem (especially with blue) has not been solved.

OLED is one of those technologies that may never be practical beyond certain usages such as in small displays in telephones and some computer monitors.

With regard to OLED, the last I read, the short life of blue has been extended. You may see 21 and 27 inch production ready OLED’s from Sony at CES in January. Samsung and LG have larger panels in the works starting in 2010. Apple will introduce a 9.7 inch OLED tablet computer in summer of 2010. LG has a 15 inch OLED in production now, good size for a lap top.

When LCD first started out in the 80′s they were 2, 3, 12 and 14 inch and very expensive, then they solved tech problems, the manufacturing costs came down. I expect the same evolution with OLED. I can wait a few years.

With regard to my second last post and above discussions, I just wanted to post 3 more images to try and dispel once in for all the myth that ALL LCD televisions have degraded images when viewed off angle and in particular ” the one seat cushion ” comment above.

All images were taken today, Jan. 4, 2010 between 10:00 and 10:30 AM in my viewing room and one from another room. once again, I used Joe Kane’s Video Essential blu-ray test disk. I paused one image from the disk, set my camera on a tripod. My camera is only a point and shoot digital. I focused on the identical portion of screen for each shot. This time I used extreme viewing angles.

The first image is on axis.
http://etype2.deviantart.com/art/test-4-on-axis-149201167

The second image is in same room but in corner behind sofa, the equivalent of 5 seat cushions from center of screen about 155 degrees off axis.
http://etype2.deviantart.com/art/test-5-155-degrees-off-axis-149201482

The third image is from an adjoining room, about 170 degrees off axis.
http://etype2.deviantart.com/art/Test-6-170-degrees-off-axis-149201719

If you see small images, just left click on them for full view. As you can see, no loss in contrast, color shift, etc. I hope this helps people who read about LCD bad viewing angles. This is only my personal viewing room. Happy New Year and good viewing to all.

I have a 2009 50″ panasonic Plasma and I have burn in:( I have the BNN logo burnt into the display. You can’t see it unless there is a white screen but it’s definitely there. I watch BNN every day for about 8 hours a day, and then different channels are on for the rest of the day. So, I would say that burn-in occurs more easily than having the same image displayed 24/7 for weeks on end (like the article says). piss-off because i’m a huge panny plasma fan but now i feel like i can’t watch that station as much anymore, who wants a t.v that dictates what you can watch?

I am currently experiencing some weird stuff with my Panasonic plasma 50 inch TV. I turned on the TV and the picture is yellow. I don’t know if it’s a problem with the TV or my cable company, can you help!!!???

I have had a 42″ samsung 1080 p for over 5 years and it still looks as good as the day I bought it.it was also a floor model before I got it.SAMSUNG is my favorite!!

@etyp2, all your pictures show is that your camera does not see LCD picture degradation off-angle. However, the response of the human eyes do not match the camera. For example, if you aim the TV remote at the camera, you will see the remote signal as you press the buttons. I have a Sony LCD and I definitely see picture degradation as I move off-axis. So do the testers at the well respected publication, Consumer Reports.