Screens vary, and need to be calibrated. However, more importantly, I'm convinced that most manufacturers intentionally miscalibrate their TVs because consumers prefer them miscalibrated.To this day I struggle to understand why DIGITAL systems need calibrated at all. They should come out of the factory pre-spec'd. For that matter, since apparently there's a universal setting that every person should know and apparently like or their an idiot, there should be no reason at all for screen settings. If someone don't like the picture, you can just say "shut up stupid, that's how it's supposed to look, noob."
You missed the entire point of my post. If you are going to argue for a professionally calibrated daytime mode, you really should have multiple daytime modes. "Daytime" is not a fixed environment.
If that was the point you were trying to make, it was horrible. You mean to tell me you want separate settings for each hour the sun is rising and each hour the sun is setting. THEN have a different setting for when a light to the left is turned on and then a different setting when the light on the right is turned on and then when both are turned on? Is THAT the point you are trying to make? Seriously? That's completely ridiculous.
You have ONE setting that is satisfying during the day (ISF Day), then you have ONE setting that is satisfying during the night (ISF Night). And unless the TV can auto select modes depending on light conditions, those two modes are more than adequate. Also take into consideration most TV's don't even have an ISF mode and the ones that DO only have ISF Night, ISF Day and one other ISF mode. Any other mode is not as accurate so what you are proposing can't even be done with today's TV's.
internet connectivity.
internal clocks and calendars.
To this day I struggle to understand why DIGITAL systems need calibrated at all. They should come out of the factory pre-spec'd. For that matter, since apparently there's a universal setting that every person should know and apparently like or their an idiot, there should be no reason at all for screen settings. If someone don't like the picture, you can just say "shut up stupid, that's how it's supposed to look, noob."
Yep. If you have your set done by a reputable calibrator, this should be a given. I have both modes on both of my plasmas, however like Zivic, I normally just leave it on ISF Night. And unlike LCD owners, I don't have to switch it to "game mode" when I play games.
Where are all these strawman LCDs coming from? I don't have to switch my LCD to game mode either. And the football flying through the air is not a blurry mess.
Obviously.
Personally I can't stand the dithered "dancing pixel glitter" that you get with plasma. LCD just has a sharper image and more vibrant color to me, color that is CONSISTENT and SOLID when it comes to solid runs of the same color, not a dithered blob where the pixels are "dancing" even with a static image.
Every plasma I've seen also has a distinct smudgy greenish-brown puke tint to the image. And I'm talking taking my own 480p and higher game consoles connected via component or HDMI with material of my choice, not just in store demo feeds. At the time I was looking at plasma, Metroid Prime in 480p component looked like washed out blurry green-brown motion blurred shit on all of the plasmas for some reason.
I have friends and relatives available that happen to have one of each, and even their more modern sets today with the 360 and PS3, their LCD is superior. A bright colorful game like Ni No Kuni looked noticeably more bland on the plasma and there was no difference in the blacks to the naked eye.
Exactly. TV watching is about compromise... You can't have your claimed optimal professional calibration in a constantly changing environment, so you compromise on one setting that looks decent enough to your eyes most of the time.If that was the point you were trying to make, it was horrible. You mean to tell me you want separate settings for each hour the sun is rising and each hour the sun is setting. THEN have a different setting for when a light to the left is turned on and then a different setting when the light on the right is turned on and then when both are turned on? Is THAT the point you are trying to make? Seriously? That's completely ridiculous.
You have ONE setting that is satisfying during the day (ISF Day), then you have ONE setting that is satisfying during the night (ISF Night). And unless the TV can auto select modes depending on light conditions, those two modes are more than adequate. Also take into consideration most TV's don't even have an ISF mode and the ones that DO only have ISF Night, ISF Day and one other ISF mode. Any other mode is not as accurate so what you are proposing can't even be done with today's TV's.
Any of you plasma guys had problems with image retention with ESPN/ESPN's BottomLine? I'm in the market for a new 55-60" and really intrigued by the Panasonic ST60 coming out soon. I'm just a little apprehensive because I watch a crapload of ESPN and sports broadcasts. Is this even a legitimate concern with a modern quality plasma?
Oh really, trying playing a game on one of the top HDTV LCD's (I'm not talking some goofy little PC monitor LCD) and brace yourself for the input lag. Seriously, this is just common knowledge. Even die hard LCD TV owners know this. No need to get a sudden case of denial.
I think you're missing the point. Some of you would like to think that PQ is all that matters in a TV, but in reality, it's a baseless metric. What matters in the real world is "good enough". Is the LCD TV good enough? Yes. Is the plasma better with PQ, yes. But the LCD is still good enough. You're talking about small differences that, for 95% of users, will not be noticed. Most people buy a TV to watch a show or a movie before bedtime or during lunch, and that's about it. Not everyone sits there and stares at a TV and wants to calibrate it to make it pitch perfect.
And sorry, weight does matter, and it does sell. Even if you move your TV rarely, the lighter one will always be attractive because one day, you will have to move a TV, and you don't want it to be difficult. Not to mention, there's a lot of people buying TVs (think younger, 20s crowd) who have the money to spend on a TV, but don't have the stability of a permanent home. Apartments, college dorms, etc.
And not to mention, the black levels... won't be noticed in the majority of situations. You won't watch TV in dark rooms most of the time, it's usually on in the background while work is being done or near bright windows. In this case, vibrance does matter more.
Also, the burn-in issue and the limited lifetime issue of early plasmas.. that definitely helped to kill. Even if it has "gotten better", the first one in the door is the one that wins. And LCDs got the reliability image first.
PQ isn't everything. Practicality also matters.
here is the problem with your logic...
1.) Every LCD I have ever seen suffers from off axis viewing issues. this is something that is noticable to the masses... true they may not care, but it is something that is an issue that even the novice will pick out. to me, it's a flat out deal breaker. on some displays, just rocking side to side in my seat I can see color shifts it is so bad
2.) the difference is weight is not an issue. in the real world, anything 50"+ is going to need two people to move it due to size, not weight.
3.) and this one is most important... when we are referring to "good enough" PQ, the plasma will provide the good enough PQ at a lower price point (in general)
Personally I think the severe glare of plasma screens outweighs your points for a good chunk of the population.