FAO PS Lewis
 

Pete, had a quick go at taking some screenshots to visualise the differences between my old (and excellent) CRT and the new plasma. Same settings on the camera every time, same settings when cropping and resizing in PS and as near as I could the same scene. The same DVD player was used, which will favour the CRT more, as the PDP would seriously benefit from an upscaling HDMI PAL progressive player, or even better an HD source. Obviously there would be no point using any better source for the CRT. Also, the PDP is still on it's running in settings, with colour, contrast and brightness below 40%, Sharpness fully off and all filters (noise reduction, comb etc) turned off.

CRT

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...ony_LOTR_3.jpg

PDP

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...ana_LOTR_3.jpg

CRT

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...R_3_Detail.jpg

PDP

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...R_3_Detail.jpg

CRT

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...ony_LOTR_1.jpg

PDP

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...ana_LOTR_1.jpg

CRT

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...R_1_Detail.jpg

PDP

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...R_1_Detail.jpg

With a better player, and fully run in and set up I expect the PDP to be stunning :cool:

But isn't the criticism levelled at Plasma & LCD more to do with a 'shimmer' during fast moving action (like panning shots of football pitches etc.)?

(Haven't got one myself btw.)

Liking your attempts at proper analysis btw. < thumb up thing >

The crt has slight convergence misalignment. Ignore the colour herring bone effect, the eye doesnt pick this up until it becomes terrible (possibly a consequence of interlace scan/ 4.43mhz colour frequency/ shadowmask-crt).

The black and white sharpness between the crt and pdp are of minimal difference, with the plasma just leading the way.

The problem with flat panel tvs, mainly lcd is the jerky-ness of fast moving objects, not sharpness.

I would expect a plasma to knock the socks off a crt once if full high definition mode, but these signal sources are not the norm, yet. I will be getting a new plasma when they are common place, ie when sky does.

Meanwhile Finlux to the rescue ( 15 or so years old).

Good example of the two formats, but not a great enough difference yet to warrant an expensive purchase.

Andy

Dieseldog,

The LCD will have the slight blurring of a moving objest since the screen refresh time is slower due to the slow response time for the pixels to change colour etc.

The CRT and Plasma do not have this problem and the Plasma has by far the great colour depth and contrast.

When do you have to do the oil change Corradaboy after running it in.:)

Les

Gas change ;) :Suspiciou

Haha that will be the dark screen of death when that happens Corradoboy!

Les :)

Its all academic, Pete will be looking at any telly through his twenty year old bi focals covered in greasy fingerprints and bits of dandruff.

Thanks for the attempt at a comparison ..... but, my major complaint is that the big screens cannot handle movement without looking like a mix-up of pixels - this blurr cannot be seen in a still photo.

Also, I'm not talking about still pictures through a DVD - but, what most of the population uses .... standard signals from a loft aerial - and in that even the very best LCD and Plasma costing £6000+ cannot beat my Sony CRT with an all-up value of £50!!

We are all being taken for a ride (well not me, because I think for myself) - but, certainly, there are many on here who MUST know they are staring at a crap £1500 screen????? Where a £50 CRT would have kicked the LCD/Plasmas sorry ass??

:lol1:

dose ps lewis still work out monthly expenditure on a abacus and chalk board:wonder: :lol1: :lol1: :lol1:

^^^^^^ DOSE?? ^^^^^^

Dear God! :rolleyes: ;)

I take it that YOU are one of those who cannot see a difference between CRT and LCD/Plasma?? :rolleyes:

pslewis is so old and unable to adjust to modern ways, that he has to convert everything back to 'old money' in order to evaluate its true cost.....