×
Login Register an account
Top Submissions Explore Upgoat Search Random Subverse Random Post Colorize! Site Rules Donate
2

Plasma TVs are still the best (for 1080p content)

submitted by ghostofvoatspast to movies 3.7 yearsSep 19, 2021 22:29:00 ago (+5/-3)     (movies)

A high quality late model 1080p plasma TV will still produce a better picture quality at 1080p than the best OLEDs. Arguably a better picture quality in general. Plasma like OLED uses self illuminating pixel technology. Each pixel is essentially a miniature lightbulb. The difference is that plasma uses gas filled pixels, picture a old-school incandescent light bulb. OLED pixels are like mini LED bulbs. They produce a very different quality and feel of light. OLED are bright, vibrant and very saturated. Plasma are warm, rich and natural. OLED has true blacks because the pixels can turn all the way off, however, plasma comes very close to OLED black levels. One huge advantage plasma has is motion handling. Motion looks far better on plasma. Some people are more sensitive to this than others. Plasma definitely is the top dog for 1080p content because 1080p upscaled to 4k will never look as good as it does displayed at its native resolution. Also most TVs don't do a particularly good job at upscaling. In the AV (audio video) world plasma still has a huge following. It produces such a warm, true to life pleasing picture quality that cannot be reproduced with other technology. I liken the picture quality to an oil painting. OLED is great as well, just different. It is has cooler color reproduction with brighter more saturated colors. Almost like an HD version of real life. Now, LCD/LED are backlit screens meaning there is a giant flashlight shining through all of the pixels at one time. Because of this the picture quality, black levels, contrast ration and motion is substantially below OLED and plasma. These sets are decent now but the tech just isn't the greatest.


15 comments block


[ - ] enormousatom 0 points 3.6 yearsOct 27, 2021 18:25:02 ago (+0/-0)

These are the BEST OF THE BEST plasma tvs you're talking about. Most of them were honestly trash. Pioneer was the market leader for the mass produced plasma stuff. They were also like four times more than any other tv on the market.

[ - ] AlexanderMorose13 1 point 3.7 yearsSep 19, 2021 22:55:21 ago (+1/-0)

Yeah, plasma is kind of like vinyl. It will have advantages and disadvantages, but it did its job well enough when being used. Is it practical for everyone and every situation? Of course not.

[ - ] ghostofvoatspast [op] 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 19, 2021 23:04:06 ago (+0/-0)

Plasma was the OLED of TVs in its day, it was for enthusiasts. Its still holds up great.

[ - ] Teefinyomouf 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 19, 2021 23:27:05 ago (+0/-0)

Some LCD/LED do dim the backlight according to a coarse grid. This helps the contrast since there is often a gradient anyway. Of course there will be a bleeding effect in some sharp cases but I usually can't tell with normal scenes.

[ - ] ghostofvoatspast [op] 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 19, 2021 23:59:59 ago (+0/-0)

yes they do what is called local dimming and on the very high end models it works pretty darn good when done right. like you said, even at its best it does cause some issues such as ghosting and blooming. some of the high end lcd sets are very nice and produce very good pq. not as good as plasma or oled but very good nonetheless. the cheap 4k sub $500 sets that most people buy are really bad. most people probably don't know better and have never seen a good picture quality to compare. you have to spend 1k on a new set to start seeing decent picture quality. or, if you are okay with 1080p, you can spend $200 on a used late model high end plasma and get oled like picture quality. many people don't realize this. plasma are very heavy and put off heat so one must consider all aspects.

[ - ] Love240 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 19, 2021 23:23:46 ago (+0/-0)*

The TV I bought was an LG 65" 1080p LCD/LED 240Hz 3D 2013 model. Not the battery powered 3D glasses, the passive ones. Bought this over plasma at the time because of sports and games (speed and burn in). This TV has aged so well.

The faster/better electronics had to be used for the 3D functionality so clarity in motion is better than plasma TVs at 60Hz or 120Hz.
Blu-ray movies almost look surreal because of the 240Hz.
Black levels are comparable enough to plasma w/ the LCD/LEDs HDR.
Less heat than a plasma TV because of Less electricity use which means less cost than plasma TV.
No burn in.
Still not even looking for a new one 8 years later, it still looks better than most 4K TVs because of their motion stutter.

Bonus functionality, It works with 3D movies and if you need extra glasses, save the movie theater ones, they work.

[ - ] ghostofvoatspast [op] 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 20, 2021 00:03:07 ago (+0/-0)

any plasma tv would have far far far better motion handling for watching sports. i'm not trying to be mean but you are dead wrong. you can verify what i am saying easily with some research. not even todays best lcd tv will have as good as motion handling as a low end early plasma.

[ - ] Love240 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 20, 2021 00:24:14 ago (+0/-0)

I worked around these displays for years (sales of them), No, the plasma was not as good looking for motion as the 240Hz display. The image is actually interpolated in-between the frames to complete the 240Hz Motion+ or whatever LG calls it. It does look considerably better for motion, like watching sports and games.

There are many reasons that Plasma TV sales have tanked. That's just one.

[ - ] ghostofvoatspast [op] 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 20, 2021 00:27:08 ago (+0/-0)

bro, your 240Hz TV is not actually 240Hz. you are wrong about all of this although like most you will probably just keep arguing. anyone who knows anything about video know NO lcd will ever have motion handling on par with plasma.

[ - ] Love240 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 20, 2021 00:33:34 ago (+0/-0)

Most plasma's never had the tech built in to frame-interpolate. They don't look as smooth on fast motion, that's why I bought the one I did. Calm down, guy, there are more than 1 model TV out there. I'm not just 'wrong' because you say so.

[ - ] ghostofvoatspast [op] 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 20, 2021 00:44:25 ago (+0/-0)

im calm.

[ - ] ghostofvoatspast [op] 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 20, 2021 00:24:44 ago (+0/-0)

Motion handling is far inferior on LCD, due to the sample-and-hold technology of OLED and LCD panels versus the pulse technology of plasma panels. This is really noticeable on sports, action movies with panning, etc. Also pixel response time on plasma is much faster. Also the 240Hz is not the true refresh rate. Here is some info if you are interested. No LCD TV has a true 240Hz refresh rate. info https://www.cnet.com/tech/home-entertainment/fake-refresh-rates-is-your-tv-really-120hz/

just posting this in case you are interested. if not ignore.

[ - ] Love240 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 20, 2021 00:31:08 ago (+0/-0)

That's exactly why I got the 3D model specifically, It is true 240Hz. Dude, you're sending me Cnet articles from the age of my TV, are you a Plasma TV salesman or something? lol

[ - ] CPU 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 19, 2021 23:06:33 ago (+0/-0)

How's your PS3 collection?

[ - ] ghostofvoatspast [op] 0 points 3.7 yearsSep 20, 2021 00:03:48 ago (+0/-0)

i gave it away because i wasn't using it. i only game on pc now.