Originally Posted by dusty
Um, there's really no contest as to which type of TV has better picture quality. It's not a matter of preference, it's quantifiable; color saturation, contrast ratio, and especially motion are all better on plasmas. LCD certainly has its advantages, but none of them are related to picture quality. And if anything's being overstated here, it's the performance of LCD vs plasma in bright rooms.
But it's not all quantifiable. Contrast ratios are more or less academic these days, like megapixel counts in digital cameras. Plasmas have blacker blacks in part because they are dimmer
displays. There is no dispute that LCDs are brighter--that, of course, affects picture quality, particularly when you want to be able to watch TV without dimming the lights. And in a dim or dark room, why not just use a DLP?
Originally Posted by Verno Inferno
God bless ya' for mentioning DLP. I loved my old Samsung DLP. 56 inches of movie watching joy. Yeah, my current Panasonic V10 Plasma has a better picture, live sports are much better and Blu Rays look unbelievable on it. But there's something theater-like about viewing on a DLP. You can get an enormous screen on the cheap. And the non-reflective matte screen of the DLP (with no bezzel) is something that added a totally underrated aspect to movie viewing. With the DLP, it felt like a mini-theater, whereas the awesome new plasma feels like a big, perfect television.
The failure of rear projection DLPs to catch-on is just further evidence that the mass market cares more about the sex appeal of a television's exterior than pure image quality. Most people don't take advantage of the form factor offered by LCDs and plasmas, merely standing them up where they used to put their tube sets, so it boggles me that they put so much value in slimness.
Originally Posted by Verno Inferno
However, they are fixing this in their 2010 models so that the change in black level performance is more gradual, rather than over-night.
Wait, so even the best plasmas will still degrade over time, just more gradually?
Originally Posted by Brian SD
Low lighting has always benefited TV viewing. For decades, people have been lowering the blinds, turning off the lights, etc. to reduce glare. Or am I just living in crazy world here?
No, you are right that low lighting benefits TV viewing across the board. However, my point is that the best plasma needs to be in a dimmer room in order to decidedly outperform the best LCD. I don't know about your personal experience, but I've never been accustomed to turning off the lights to watch regular television programming (movies are a different story).
Originally Posted by Fuuma
The amount of effort people will expand to have maybe a marginally better image quality on the TV they use to watch their culturally inferior products always amazes me. Go to store, try a few tvs, read a few reviews, buy. Get a LCD not a Plasma cause your fat westerner ass already consumes so much energy it's a shame.
Aww, come on--the most culturally inferior products are often those that benefit the most from superior technology! For example: Revenge of the Fallen on Blu-ray.
Originally Posted by origenesprit
Runco DLP Projector. That is all. Edit: Serious answer, I agree with Foo, rear projectors have incredible picture quality. I personally like Sony the best, but it has been years since I looked around at all the options.
I think Samsung was making the best DLP sets. They had the most advanced chips from Texas Instruments and used the most gorgeous matte screens. I love our Sharp LCD, but movie viewing was more special on our old DLP.