LCDs vs Plasmas (vs CRTS)
The last line in HD/SD what's it all about was really a throw-away joke, but it seems that it might be useful for another basic differentiation guide*.
First off some background info. Televisions display their pictures using pixels, if you've read my previous entry linked above you'll recall me talking about lines 720 or 1080; each of these lines are made up of pixels. So for a 1920x1080 television they'll be 2, 073,600 pixels that's the same number for a 32" screen or a 40" or a 72" or... well you get the point. Hopefully you'll see that a pixel has no size by itself; if televisions of different sizes have the same number of pixels then each pixel will be a different size. It's important to note this as they might even have a different aspect ratio to the telly.
Each pixel is made up of three sub-pixels Red, Green, and Blue controlling how these sub-pixels are lit determines the colour you see. What makes the types different is how those sub-pixels are controlled.
Refresh rate gets banded about so here we go cinema movies are normally filmed at 24 frames per second (fps), UK TV programmes at 25fps, and US TV programmes at 30fps. Most modern televisions can run at 50 or 60Hz so each frame is drawn twice for a progressive scan or half the frame followed by the other half for interlaced; in HD terms 1080p/50 1080p/60 or 1080i/25 1080i/30. Sometimes you'll see 100Hz televisions advertised these can seem smoother to some people, but remember the input source is still 24/25/30 fps so you're not really getting any additional frames.
CRTs or Cathode Ray Tubes are the old big bulky televisions, they have a tube (hence the name) shaped a little like a cone. At one end is an electron gun and at the other the pixel/sub-pixels made up of phosphor. The gun scans along each line of pixels firing off an electron at some of their sub-pixels; when the electron hits the phosphor it glows.
Plasmas work in a similar way, but instead of an electron gun there's a small fluorescent light behind each sub-pixel, the light flicks on and stimulates the phosphor to glow.
LCDs have one large light shining behind all the pixels all the time and have the equivalent of semaphore gates behind each sub-pixel opening or closing that allows the light to shine through the coloured filter.
Enough tech talk onto what you need to know.
They're getting better but LCDs still have a smaller contrast ratio then plasmas, blacks can appear grey in a darkened room. They tend to have a smaller colour range then plasmas, but again are getting better, and they used to have problems with fast moving images when the pixels couldn't refresh at the speed of the picture. The angle of viewing can be a problem, if you've ever tried looking at a phone or camera display from the side you'll know what I mean. They're also limited size-wise plasmas are much easier to make with larger dimensions so the price per inch can be more expensive.
Plasmas on the other can still suffer from burn-in when displaying a constant image that will leave a ghost image on the screen when you change channels, though they're getting better. They're also heavier then LCDs, not as bright, and use more power. Plasma screens also have a fixed resolution meaning whatever input source you're using will be altered to fit the screen so any 4:3 will be stretched out to 16:9.
So saying all that which is best? Um depends what you want to do with it.
if you want to hook it up to your computer, not after something in the 50" range, are going to be watching it in a reasonably well-lit room, aren't trying to watch it from wide-angles, might be moving it about a bit, or putting it somewhere with poor ventilation -then go for an LCD.
If you're in the dark, putting it in a fixed position with the necessary clearance, want the largest display possible with the largest angle to watch it at, and don't mind that presenters on 4:3 broadcasts appear to have gained weight - then go for a plasma.
Why haven't I discussed CRTs - because despite having the best qualities of both LCDs and plasmas (and some of the faults too) you simply can't buy them any more.
However you may want to wait for the next exciting installment - "Digital tuners in an HD world"
*Basic being the word, don't shoot me if I miss out some technical bits or simplify things.
3 comments:
Just thought I ought to emphasize that not all LCD screens suffer the problems you mention. On my computer I use a LaCie display meant for graphics designers. The colour reproduction is unbelievable, far better than any CRT I've ever used, and it's stable from any angle. The darks aren't quite as black as on the newer Sony displays, but it's only noticeable when I'm watching films where the director has decided to use the whole dynamic range of film. (See below.) The response time is unnoticeable, and I'd say that goes for all modern LCD screens as well.
Certainly, if you go for one of the cheap things that Dell will give you with one of their overpriced systems, you'll notice that the blacks are not very, and that the colours look different from every angle, but if you spend the money on a proper screen you won't have those problems.
Now a brief note on dynamic range. This just means the range of brightnesses that can be shown: how bright is the brightest white, and how dark the darkest black, and what sort of colours are in between. But there's an interesting mismatch. Televisions and computer monitors have an almost linear dynamic range: the colours they can display are evenly spread between black and white, though the brightness of black and white depends on the exact model. There's a little non-linearity, because with CRTs, when you double the voltage across the tube, the screen gets slightly more than twice as bright. Because television was designed around CRTs, plasma screens and LCDs have circuitry in them to mimic this effect. This non-linearity is called the gamma factor.
Film is very non-linear: it has much finer gradations of very dark colours than light colours. Many directors make use of this when shooting their films: they have very dark scenes, and rely on the extra shades of black to let the audience see what is going on. But then when the film is broadcast on TV, or when you watch it on DVD, the colours on the film have to be mapped onto the linear dynamic range of TV, so all the dark colours get turned into the same colour, and you can't see the mad axeman sneaking around behind the heroine in the dark.
You're quite right Dan I should have made it clear that if you're not looking at the 'Dell' end of the market then a some of these problems have been resolved or at the least are not as noticeable.
It can however mean a higher initial investment, which may not be wise as I hope will become evident in my next entry in this 'series' "Digital tuners in an HD world".
Also thanks for the brief on dynamic range; very interesting.
I choose Plasma ^^
Post a Comment