• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Prices of Very Large Flat TVs are Falling Fast

I tried the setup for my new TV as recommended by Consumer Reports, and hated it. I went back to the default. I watch mostly DVDs and old TV shows, and the default setting is correct for them.

I watch for things like subtlety in pastels, and see no troubles. Perhaps the Roku is doing something.
 
JustJones said:
I donated my previous TV to a local charity. Are you a 501(c)(3) ?
Click to expand...
Not sure being a charity means anything by needing a tv but if your looking for a tax break then no I am not. Just a guy looking to take your tv if as you say you don't use it.
 
Krusty09 said:
Not sure being a charity means anything by needing a tv but if your looking for a tax break then no I am not. Just a guy looking to take your tv if as you say you don't use it.
Click to expand...
Friend of mine who works for a charity needed a monitor for meetings as theirs died. I mentioned I had a 50 inch Samsung and let them have it. The last time I watched anything to the best of my recollection was last January. My wife occasionally will watch a show. I'll probably watch a few movies this winter.
 
Got it.

Enjoy your tv and you should watch more as there is some really good things out there to watch.
 
Chris A said:
I always hated the black levels of the old 65" LED: splotchy areas across the screen. I first noticed OLED black levels. As evening arrives, black means black. This is a big deal.

The differences don't stop there. The smoothness and presence of the out-of-focus backgrounds...the bokeh...are just stunning. The brand of digital camera used to capture film images (e.g., ARRI Alexa cameras) can easily be seen. There is an almost pastel color quality, image naturalness and an understated sharpness that invites the viewer. It's like staring at art gallery color photographs or paintings.
Click to expand...

Sorry for resurrecting this now-old thread, but I recently happened upon a bit of information that I wanted to share that's apropos to the subject at hand.

I had made a much earlier comment (reproduced above for ease of reference only) about the dynamic range of OLEDs over competing technologies...that the "look" was stunning. So since then I found the following handy little table at Wikipedia that sheds light on on the subject of the differences in "dynamic range vs. brightness":

Dynamic ranges of common devices​
DeviceStopsContrast ratio
Glossy photograph paper7 (7–7+2⁄3)[58]128:1
LCD9.5 (9-11)[59]700:1 (500:1 – 2000:1)
Typical cellphone camera~10[60]varies
Negative film (Kodak VISION3)13[61]8000:1
Human eye10–14[54]1000:1 – 16000:1
OLED or quantum dot13.2-20.9[62]9500:1 – 2000000:1
High-end DSLR camera (Nikon D850)14.8[63]28500:1
Digital cinema camera (Red Weapon 8k)> 16.5[64]92000:1

This really tells a story. If you go back to the Side by Side documentary I referenced earlier, the primary objection by those that objected in the movie to digital over photochemical processes was that digital had limited dynamic range in the past.

In the table above, it shows that current state-of-the-art (SOTA) video cameras exceed the dynamic range capabilities of the human vision system, whereas the best photochemical processes (and most suppliers of photographic film of 15-20 years ago now no longer produce motion picture film) are several stops behind current digital technology.

LCD (in apparently any sub-format) performs at a much lower level...even lower than I had anticipated. See the above table entries for dynamic range levels.

When I view films like 1917 in 4K format on the 77" LG OLED, I see a moving image that's actually better than anything I've seen elsewhere, even first hand (in real life). "Stunning" is all I can think of to say.

Chris
 
Last edited:
Here’s a question about smaller sizes:

If one wants a true 4k device, what size is the smallest model available matching that requirement? I can’t seem to find any model smaller than 43 inches.
 
Chris A said:
Sorry for resurrecting this now-old thread, but I recently happened upon a bit of information that I wanted to share that's apropos to the subject at hand.

I had made a much earlier comment (reproduced above for ease of reference only) about the dynamic range of OLEDs over competing technologies...that the "look" was stunning. So since then I found the following handy little table at Wikipedia that sheds light on on the subject of the differences in "dynamic range vs. brightness":

Dynamic ranges of common devices​
DeviceStopsContrast ratio
Glossy photograph paper7 (7–7+2⁄3)[58]128:1
LCD9.5 (9-11)[59]700:1 (500:1 – 2000:1)
Typical cellphone camera~10[60]varies
Negative film (Kodak VISION3)13[61]8000:1
Human eye10–14[54]1000:1 – 16000:1
OLED or quantum dot13.2-20.9[62]9500:1 – 2000000:1
High-end DSLR camera (Nikon D850)14.8[63]28500:1
Digital cinema camera (Red Weapon 8k)> 16.5[64]92000:1

This really tells a story. If you go back to the Side by Side documentary I referenced earlier, the primary objection by those that objected in the movie to digital over photochemical processes was that digital had limited dynamic range in the past.

In the table above, it shows that current state-of-the-art (SOTA) video cameras exceed the dynamic range capabilities of the human vision system, whereas the best photochemical processes (and most suppliers of photographic film of 15-20 years ago now no longer produce motion picture film) are several stops behind current digital technology.

LCD (in apparently any sub-format) performs at a much lower level...even lower than I had anticipated. See the above table entries for dynamic range levels.

When I view films like 1917 in 4K format on the 77" LG OLED, I see a moving image that's actually better than anything I've seen elsewhere, even first hand (in real life). "Stunning" is all I can think of to say.

Chris
Click to expand...
The human adapts over a wider range. It even does localized adaptation. And localized white balance correction.
The human eye sees well over 10 f-stops of exposure. By that I mean it adapts well to scenes that differ by 10 f-stops for camera settings. Assuming the camera setting is for a neutral gray card, the eye could see detail plus and minus four stops.

Eighteen in all. There is a bit of cheating there, adaptation. But the eye is useful in even dimmer light. So adding half a dozen stops for a fully adapted eye.

Digital cameras can cheat by bracketing exposures. Machines will eventually beat humans at anything that can be specified.
 
I used to do photojournalism without a light meter. I just knew the exposure based on the light source.
 
Timmy said:
Here’s a question about smaller sizes:

If one wants a true 4k device, what size is the smallest model available matching that requirement? I can’t seem to find any model smaller than 43 inches.
Click to expand...
I know Samsung makes one of their 4k QLED TVs in 32 inch. You can also get a computer monitor. Those are widely available as small as 27 inch with 4k resolution. Most of those will have chroma sub-sampling better than TVs because without it text looks awful. If you get smaller than this you'll need to be 2ft or closer to see the extra resolution.
 
Timmy said:
Interesting! What exact model would that be you know about? Since I can’t find none within the Samsung product range.
Click to expand...
Your location may have something to do with what products are being sold (or not sold) in your area.
 
Timmy said:
Here’s a question about smaller sizes:

If one wants a true 4k device, what size is the smallest model available matching that requirement? I can’t seem to find any model smaller than 43 inches.
Click to expand...
I have a 42" LG C3 OLED (4K resolution) as desktop monitor. Last years model was a bit cheaper in the end.
It replaces a 27" Dell. I like it. Has 4 HDMI inputs and a remote. I can watch primevideo on it because Linux isn't supported properly by amazon.
It is larger than my previous tv (37") in the living room but has smaller bezels.
Resolution works as 105 dpi close to the 27" so a remote 1920x1080 screen is still readable and fills a quarter screen.
 
I use a 32" LG for my 4K NVR. It has speakers, but no tuner - so still technically a "PC Monitor" and sold as such...

LG 32UN550-W
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom