First time Plasma owner

[poofyhairguy]

Ok, so technically the TV could be on brightness 0 and the phosphors would still be working according to the signal they're receiving from the slides? Doesn't seem to make sense to me.

This is great! Any way that this would vary for my plasma or are the practices basically the same?

On a Samsung plasma don't mess with the brightness, just keep the cell light on less than half the max the first 100 hours.

 

[tinpanalley]

With regards to hertz, fps, etc... which I may be confusing as I come to a better understanding of all this. Tell me if I've got this right:

I'm running a BluRay movie, on my PS3, via HDMI, but to my current CRT-HD before setting up the Plasma (which arrived this morning ). Info on the CRTHD says I'm at 720p - 60Hz. I'm not getting 24hz on this TV because 24 doesn't divide evenly into 60, so the TV is naturally doing a 3:2 pulldown. Have I got that right?

So, when I set up my Plasma this afternoon, which can reach 600Hz, what can I expect to happen with the same output signal?

 

[poofyhairguy]

With regards to hertz, fps, etc... which I may be confusing as I come to a better understanding of all this. Tell me if I've got this right:

I'm running a BluRay movie, on my PS3, via HDMI, but to my current CRT-HD before setting up the Plasma (which arrived this morning ). Info on the CRTHD says I'm at 720p - 60Hz. I'm not getting 24hz on this TV because 24 doesn't divide evenly into 60, so the TV is naturally doing a 3:2 pulldown. Have I got that right?

Yup, you got it. Some people don't notice 3:2 pulldown as much but it drives me nuts unless you have a TV that handles it very intelligently (and 99% of 60hz TVs don't).

So, when I set up my Plasma this afternoon, which can reach 600Hz, what can I expect to happen with the same output signal?

The 600hz is a marketing number. Its a way of saying "plasma handles motion better than even 480hz LEDs." In reality plasma tvs either run at 48hz (Panasonics can and its a worthless feature), 60hz (this is the majority of plasmas), or 96hz for 2D. The 96hz mode is enabled on Samsungs when you enable Cinema Smooth (an option that only appears in the menu when the 24p source is playing) or on my Panasonic when I turn on the 96hz mode.

So best case, it outputs from the PS3 in 24p and its accepted to the TV with Cinema Smooth enabled. This will unlock the 24hz mode which will look much more like a real theater (down to the fact you see the film grain on older movies easier in 24hz mode) and will be much smoother on panning shots.

 

[tinpanalley]

So best case, it outputs from the PS3 in 24p and its accepted to the TV with Cinema Smooth enabled. This will unlock the 24hz mode which will look much more like a real theater (down to the fact you see the film grain on older movies easier in 24hz mode) and will be much smoother on panning shots.

Ok, so now I'm probably gonna drive you nuts but I have to ask because I'm clearly not grasping a few things... these questions may or may not be related, might be the fault of my not understanding...

1. This 60Hz US and 50Hz Europe thing is a remnant of the NTSC-PAL days? This is the only reason manufacturers continue to do this with refresh rates and not just make one standard television? As far as I can tell, this isn't related at all to the Hz of power frequency from power outlets, right?
2. Cinema Smooth turns the native refresh into 24p on plasma by adding black frames and on LCD by interpolating. Am I getting this? So there's NO television that natively displays 24p as encoded on a disc? What about PC LED monitors?
3. When I've walked into tech shops and seen a wall of torched out LEDs all playing X-Men or Spiderman or whatever comic book movie people are watching these days (sorry, not an action fan) and I've stared at it because it looks like it was shot on miniDV at 29.97fps, what's actually happening is that those LED panels are interpolating and creating that disgustingly overcrisp smoothness? I don't understand the desire for that look. I'm an independant filmmaker and when I began, other than 16mm, miniDV was your only shooting format. And we HATED it's awful video look and disguised it as best we could with gels and soft lighting and slow pans, etc etc etc. Anything we could do to hide the lack of motion blur. And now you're telling me people actually DESIRE this look? Are we regressing? I don't get it. I also don't get the shooting at higher frame rates thing. The Hobbit looked ridiculous to me at 48fps. ...ok, question/rant finished, apologies. So, is that what I'm seeing in stores? Interpolation?
- If 24p is only a HD thing, am I wrong to have thought all this time that classic films looked just fine on DVD? In fact other than very light detail, I've looked at a bluray and DVD of a classic side by side and not noticed enough of a difference to make bluray that much better than the DVD. Except for the very rare scenario where a classic was actually ENTIRELY remastered for bluray. Because I'm guessing that DVDs can't do 24p, right? So shouldn't those classic films I own on DVD look bad? What am I missing?

 

[poofyhairguy]

1. This 60Hz US and 50Hz Europe thing is a remnant of the NTSC-PAL days? This is the only reason manufacturers continue to do this with refresh rates and not just make one standard television? As far as I can tell, this isn't related at all to the Hz of power frequency from power outlets, right?

Yeah, pretty much.

2. Cinema Smooth turns the native refresh into 24p on plasma by adding black frames and on LCD by interpolating. Am I getting this?

No no. That is what an LED does when you turn on interpolation.

Cinema Smooth puts the plasma display into a 96hz mode and then quadruples the frames that the source feeds the TV to give you smooth and cinema-like motion.

So there's NO television that natively displays 24p as encoded on a disc?

Any 120hz+ LED or plasma can. Problem is you don't always want pure 24p, that is a low framerate by itself and it leads to flicker. The best case is what modern plasmas do where they quadruple the frames (so no interpolation just multiplication) and the display those frames at exactly 96hz.

3. When I've walked into tech shops and seen a wall of torched out LEDs all playing X-Men or Spiderman or whatever comic book movie people are watching these days (sorry, not an action fan) and I've stared at it because it looks like it was shot on miniDV at 29.97fps, what's actually happening is that those LED panels are interpolating and creating that disgustingly overcrisp smoothness?

Yup. Those TVs are basically making up the extra frames between 24 and 30 which makes everything look like a "soap opera." If they didn't do that, the pure 24hz looks like crap sometimes. They can't just frame quadruple unless its a 480hz model (as that can be divided by 96).

Interpolation is much like scaling, but the techniques are less advanced IMHO. I have never seen interpolation that doesn't produce artifacts even if some produce a picture that is less unnaturally smooth.

And now you're telling me people actually DESIRE this look?

Kinda. People were told to desire that look. Without interpolation 24p content on 120hz TVs falls apart. Some consumers like the soap opera look. Heck I like the HFR Hobbits myself (more because I think it flickers less and flickering 3D gives me a headache).

- If 24p is only a HD thing, am I wrong to have thought all this time that classic films looked just fine on DVD?

No honestly a lot of sources are 24p even at the DVD level. Its not HD specific, its just with HD you can see the pulldown effects more easily and many dvd players don't support a 24p output. Also many DVDs contained not the original 24p source but instead the ruined telecine version which means 24p was impossible. Many times on the Blu Ray release they fix this and go back to the original source (like TNG for example).

In fact other than very light detail, I've looked at a bluray and DVD of a classic side by side and not noticed enough of a difference to make bluray that much better than the DVD. Except for the very rare scenario where a classic was actually ENTIRELY remastered for bluray. Because I'm guessing that DVDs can't do 24p, right? So shouldn't those classic films I own on DVD look bad? What am I missing?

What you are missing until now, no offense, is a modern display. On my 65 inch plasma I can EASILY tell the difference between 480p, 720p and 1080p source across the room. The detail level and clarity of picture jumps at every step up that ladder.

Heck I basically don't watch anything that ISN'T HD anymore unless I have to. I have gotten spoiled by the clear picture and smooth panning.

 

[tinpanalley]

Problem is you don't always want pure 24p, that is a low framerate by itself and it leads to flicker...

So, forgive my ignorance.. what is it that CRT-HD does/did (or doesn't do) to make all video look just fine in this regard, barring lower resolution of course? No judder, no flicker, no oversmoothing, etc. And why can't that be replicated in flat panels? Because that's just the difference between a cathode ray and glowing diodes?

Kinda. People were told to desire that look. Without interpolation 24p content on 120hz TVs falls apart.

I guess I'm just having a hard time understanding why an entire industry threw itself head first into a technology for encoding and playing back video that had no adequate display to play back content without these refresh rate issues. Money, investors, market share, is the obvious and inevitable answer but this just seems misguided to the point of being ridiculous. Let's just get the HD content out there and deal with how to minimize 3:2 pulldown as we go?! Really?

Also many DVDs contained not the original 24p source but instead the ruined telecine version which means 24p was impossible.

I'm gonna have to read up on this because I find it fascinating. I knew about this a little but I'm interested in the tech behind this and how it worked on DVDs.

What you are missing until now, no offense, is a modern display. On my 65 inch plasma I can EASILY tell the difference between 480p, 720p and 1080p source across the room. The detail level and clarity of picture jumps at every step up that ladder.
Heck I basically don't watch anything that ISN'T HD anymore unless I have to. I have gotten spoiled by the clear picture and smooth panning.

Well, a few things...
a)Yes, no offense taken, you're right that I haven't ever had a "modern display". And I'm quoting that not to be flippant but because my CRTHD IS HD, it's just not flat panel. Of course, there are differences but it's not like I was on some 4:3 concave-screen Trinitron from 1995.
b) We've always lived in what most people would consider small apartments. There is simply no justification for anything over about 45 inches because it gets to the point where you have a movie theatre with furniture in it. So the comments I frequently hear about the detail you can get at 60+ inches are a bit lost on me. I also have philosophical views on screen size for TV content that are neither here nor there in this conversation so I'll skip them.
c) I've had to restart this three times because I invariably end up talking about content and this is meant to be about tech... Essentially, the point is that my HD viewing consists of online streaming sports sent via HDMI to the TV from my laptop, maybe 1 hour of TV every two weeks, downloaded video content and gaming. I own literally 3 blurays. I'm switching to plasma because it's becoming impossible to have anything else. I'm not a luddite, I'm a total technology geek. I just think it's easy to become spec-obsessed and forget the essence of what watching is about. For me, there is a point where good enough is fine. Within the capabilities of my tech devices and what I can afford, I will absolutely geek out and get the best I can.

More on the topic of calibration... I may have to just throw slides up for the first 200 hours. Outside of 16X9 movies, I can't find anything among what I watch that doesn't cause problems. The only TV/downloaded video I watch is UK dramas and documentaries which all have either a BBC or ITV transparent station ID in the corner or sports which have fixed chyrons and scoreboards. Even half of my movie watching (for a clean 16X9) would consist of 4:3 classic films and even among the 16X9, few are EXACTLY 1.77:1. And even with contemporary films, with so many studios going beyond the Academy ratio, lots of movies are 2.35:1 letterboxed on 16X9 screens.

Also, out of the box, I immediately set my new TV to Movie and Warm2 and I was a bit alarmed at its brightness. Turning the cell light down to 25-30% helped. I know this is all relative to the room and the conditions. It was late but we did have our living room lights on. Anyway, just something I thought I'd mention. Can't wait to do a proper calibration to see where the colour levels are.

 

[poofyhairguy]

So, forgive my ignorance.. what is it that CRT-HD does/did (or doesn't do) to make all video look just fine in this regard, barring lower resolution of course? No judder, no flicker, no oversmoothing, etc. And why can't that be replicated in flat panels? Because that's just the difference between a cathode ray and glowing diodes?

The way CRTs work honestly hide a lot of the problems. Just like old video games would USE the scanlines to improve the graphics. A modern flat panel just gives you the source as it is, problems and all. CRTs in particular are good at covering motion blur.

I guess I'm just having a hard time understanding why an entire industry threw itself head first into a technology for encoding and playing back video that had no adequate display to play back content without these refresh rate issues. Money, investors, market share, is the obvious and inevitable answer but this just seems misguided to the point of being ridiculous. Let's just get the HD content out there and deal with how to minimize 3:2 pulldown as we go?! Really?

The HD transition has been a painful one (Blu Ray vs HD DVD, 720p vs 1080p, etc.). Stuff like 24p got lost in the details until companies really pushing picture quality performance (like Pioneer back in the day) pushed it to the forefront. Most every decent TV review now at least tests 24p support.

I'm gonna have to read up on this because I find it fascinating. I knew about this a little but I'm interested in the tech behind this and how it worked on DVDs.

I waste so much CPU time de-telecining old DVDs....

b) We've always lived in what most people would consider small apartments. There is simply no justification for anything over about 45 inches because it gets to the point where you have a movie theatre with furniture in it. So the comments I frequently hear about the detail you can get at 60+ inches are a bit lost on me. I also have philosophical views on screen size for TV content that are neither here nor there in this conversation so I'll skip them.

Honestly screen size is the biggest difference. Less than 50 inches? 720p is fine. 65 inches or less? You need 1080p. 70 inches+? Welcome to why we need 4K.

For me, there is a point where good enough is fine. Within the capabilities of my tech devices and what I can afford, I will absolutely geek out and get the best I can.

Amen.

More on the topic of calibration... I may have to just throw slides up for the first 200 hours./QUOTE]

I would. Search Google for dnice slides.

 

[tinpanalley]

I would. Search Google for dnice slides.

I was using the evangelo slides today for 5 hours. But I'll look for those you mentioned. Movie mode and Warm2 had the contrast up to 95 which seemed ridiculous to me even if it's all relative. I put it down to 45.
Really hard not connecting the TV to watch the US Open but I know I'll get that solid white Eurosport logo stuck in the corner. Are 4:3 films ok with grey sidebars? Cause I get two options of light and dark ones on this.

EDIT: Those d nice slides look like they're only for Panasonic. Is that possible? Aren't all plasmas the same?

 

[poofyhairguy]

I was using the evangelo slides today for 5 hours. But I'll look for those you mentioned. Movie mode and Warm2 had the contrast up to 95 which seemed ridiculous to me even if it's all relative. I put it down to 45.
Really hard not connecting the TV to watch the US Open but I know I'll get that solid white Eurosport logo stuck in the corner. Are 4:3 films ok with grey sidebars? Cause I get two options of light and dark ones on this.

EDIT: Those d nice slides look like they're only for Panasonic. Is that possible? Aren't all plasmas the same?

Yeah they work fine on a Samsung, its just when both were on the market Panasonic had more support in the enthusiast community.

 

[Raincity]

I was using the evangelo slides today for 5 hours. But I'll look for those you mentioned. Movie mode and Warm2 had the contrast up to 95 which seemed ridiculous to me even if it's all relative. I put it down to 45.
Really hard not connecting the TV to watch the US Open but I know I'll get that solid white Eurosport logo stuck in the corner. Are 4:3 films ok with grey sidebars? Cause I get two options of light and dark ones on this.

EDIT: Those d nice slides look like they're only for Panasonic. Is that possible? Aren't all plasmas the same?

Did you check the brightness and contrast against test patterns. While 95 for contrast seems high it was right on the money for me in my viewing environment. You can see detail all the way up to the 253 range without any blooming, distortion or clipping of the primary and secondary colors. Also check the overscan. On my 8500 the setting is labeled just scan. On both of my 5300 the setting is labeled screen fit. If you leave it on 16.9 setting. You will loose about 2% of the screen.

 

[Thebobo]

Sorry to run over this scientific processes thats allegedly needed to allow you to enjoy your tv, imo its bunk. I just turned mine on and watched it. Try and avoid long burn in as your manual says.

 

[tinpanalley]

Sorry to run over this scientific processes thats allegedly needed to allow you to enjoy your tv, imo its bunk. I just turned mine on and watched it. Try and avoid long burn in as your manual says.

No need to apologise, everyone's opinion and experience is valid and adds to the dialogue, as long (I would think) as everyone else's opinions are allowed to be valid as well.
For me, in the research I've done, I've read the same things from various certified technicians and companies like THX who've pioneered the imaging tech that we're all talking about that have led me personally to the conclusion that these methods while not part of printed manuals, are seen as processes that will help prolong the life of TVs that are already going to be just fine. Also, people's definitions of "just fine" vary. I know people for whom "just fine" means stretching 4:3 to fit 16:9. Something which to me, as dramatic as it may sound, is cinematically criminal.

CDs don't come with instructions telling you to wipe from the center to the outside with soft cloths and chef's knives don't come with instructions telling you that they have to be sharpened at 20 degrees with a wet stone to prolong the lives of both but these are methods that have been tested by professionals for decades and for over 100 years respectively. Doesn't mean you can't, if you want to, just forget about the fingerprints and oils from your hands on the CD and that you can't just run a 200 dollar Wusthoff chef's knife through a 10 dollar sharpener and wash it in the dishwasher. You can do all those things if you want to. These are just ways of doing a bit more.

...I think. I only just started studying flat panel technology and maintenance.

 

[tinpanalley]

Did you check the brightness and contrast against test patterns...

I'm only running slides right now and light watching. I'm not calibrating yet.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I know people for whom "just fine" means stretching 4:3 to fit 16:9. Something which to me, as dramatic as it may sound, is cinematically criminal.

Amen.

 

[tinpanalley]

Yeah they work fine on a Samsung, its just when both were on the market Panasonic had more support in the enthusiast community.

Any particular reason for these over the evangelo slides?

 

[Raincity]

Any particular reason for these over the evangelo slides?

Both sets will accomplish the same thing. It does not matter what set you use.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Both sets will accomplish the same thing. It does not matter what set you use.

Exactly. Its all about avoiding black bars, channel logos, or game huds during the TVs crucial first 100 hours.

 

[Raincity]

Yep treat it well and it will be good to you. Who knows how long before OLED becomes affordable buts its welcomed rumor that Panasonic is getting into the OLED game.

 

[tinpanalley]

Just noticed that I don't have a Blue only mode at all. I thought I did but no luck. What else can I do when it comes time to adjust colour and tint?

 

[poofyhairguy]

Isn't there a custom color space selection option in the menu?

 

[Raincity]

Its listed as RGB mode under advanced settings. You can turn off any of the primary colors.

 

[tinpanalley]

Its listed as RGB mode under advanced settings. You can turn off any of the primary colors.

Sorry.. total bonehead question. Didn't even occur to me. So, I'd completely kill the red and green to 0, and do I have to crank the blue to 100 to get 100% blue?

Separate question...
16X9 is clearly the choice for filling every pixel of the screen. If 1.85:1 video is encoded into 16X9 with the slim bit of black on the top and bottom then you'll see those slim bars.
So when "screen fit" leaves a ring of black about an inch wide all around the screen, what is it doing? Is it a digital video meant for a digital screen but displaying for overscan? Is that black rim all around added by the TV or is it in the video file? And why doesn't the 'screen' 'fit'?

 

[Raincity]

I am not sure if you have different menu options. RGB gives you the option to just turn on or off the primary colors on my sets. There is no option to turn it up or down on my sets. As for your issue with overscan. I can only assume that your source devices are set up incorrect. Do you have any test pattern disc's yet. You can download the AVCHHD test disc and burn it to a DVDR http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/948496-avs-hd-709-blu-ray-mp4-calibration.html With this disc you can test and set your grayscale, primary colors and tint. There is a overscan test pattern on it also. On the overscan test pattern. You should see the difference in the overscan between the 16.9 and screen fit setting. 16.9 is set for 2% overscan while screen fit is a 1.1 pixel map with no overscan present. Before you test for this, make sure your blu-ray player is set to output a 16.9 1080P 24 signal.

Also there is no such thing as bonehead questions. Just keep firing away for advice / help until you get this set tweaked to your satisfaction.

 

[tinpanalley]

I am not sure if you have different menu options. RGB gives you the option to just turn on or off the primary colors on my sets. There is no option to turn it up or down on my sets.

Yeah, I have a bar I can set on each colour from 0-100. So, I guess this is like setting colours in Photoshop. So, 100% blue would be R and G down to 0 and B at 100. ...I'm guessing.

As for your issue with overscan. I can only assume that your source devices are set up incorrect.

It was on a Boxee box that I saw this, and with a downloaded video. The Boxee has its own overscan settings that I have set up, according to the guide, correctly. I do have the AVCHD disc so I can go check out the overscan pattern.

Before you test for this, make sure your blu-ray player is set to output a 16.9 1080P 24 signal.

Ok, so this overscan pattern is only ever valid when watching via 24p signal?

Also there is no such thing as bonehead questions. Just keep firing away for advice / help until you get this set tweaked to your satisfaction.

Thank you.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Ok, so this overscan pattern is only ever valid when watching via 24p signal?

No, with a 720p TV you are always going to have to deal a little bit with overscan. No big deal.