LED TV it's a hoax.

Technically-oriented discussion of classic films on everything from 35mm to Blu-Ray
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

LED TV it's a hoax.

PostSun Feb 05, 2012 4:45 pm

Just for curiosity... I want to call attention the the big hoax of the home video technology.

How many of you know that LED TV are not really LED TV?
It's just a damn LCD iluminatesd by white LEDs. In other words, LED TV are LCD TVs, with the same anoying limited angle of view of the problematic LCD technology.

Edge Lit LED TV are also darkers in the center than in the sides, for the most slim models, because it's iluminated by white leds around the edges, and a difusor difuses the light, that get less intense in the center

Image

. And the models with white LEDS in the background (Local-dimming), despite of large contrast can create distortions cause it's not one white led for each LCD pixels. The different light level (trick to get more contrast ratio) have only a fraction of the resolution of the LCD pixels.

Image


The called "modern technology", just created large slim displays, that only the people who are far, or in case of be near stay in the center of the display, will enjoy some quality.

Industry always want to make fool of consumer .
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline

Paul Penna

  • Posts: 507
  • Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 11:02 am

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostSun Feb 05, 2012 6:20 pm

If you Google the term "LED backlit LCD" you get over 18 million hits. Not a very efficient "hoax," it seems.
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostSun Feb 05, 2012 6:35 pm

In my contry they just call TV LED (Led TV), and most people do not know it's just iluminated by LED.
At least here, it's a very big hoax.

Paul Penna wrote:If you Google the term "LED backlit LCD" you get over 18 million hits. Not a very efficient "hoax," it seems.
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline

Nick_M

  • Posts: 353
  • Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:02 pm
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostSun Feb 05, 2012 6:57 pm

At the very least, it's false advertising. I have never seen anything but "LED TV" on boxes for LED-backlit LCDs, and I can't say that I've seen any mention of LCD on those sets, either.
Offline
User avatar

Mike Gebert

Site Admin

  • Posts: 5680
  • Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:23 pm
  • Location: Chicago

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostSun Feb 05, 2012 8:13 pm

So they no longer have little people inside the box acting the stories out?
“Sentimentality is when it doesn't come off—when it does, you get a true expression of life's sorrows.” —Alain-Fournier
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostMon Feb 06, 2012 10:06 am

No, thanks to the politically correct fashion fever, it's a forbidden practice today.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Mike Gebert wrote:So they no longer have little people inside the box acting the stories out?



The near perfect Monitors and TVs will be OLED. There are some few models on market, but they cost a fortune. :cry:
Last edited by All Darc on Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline
User avatar

Mike Gebert

Site Admin

  • Posts: 5680
  • Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 3:23 pm
  • Location: Chicago

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostMon Feb 06, 2012 10:16 am

I saw one at a Sony store. It looked fantastic, but you know, any technology looks great when it's HD at only 11" wide or something. When size goes up and prices drop, maybe.
“Sentimentality is when it doesn't come off—when it does, you get a true expression of life's sorrows.” —Alain-Fournier
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostMon Feb 06, 2012 10:42 am

About resoltuion advance... I saw a video about Sharp introduce a 4K reolution 16:9 TV, but I don't think it was OLED.

If with actual HD TV female hosters and actress get crazy about their wrinkles appear, what wil they say with super HD.

The HD broadcast in my city leave digital artefacts if we look in huge screen.
How is HD, in artefacts aspects, for USA and Europe ?


Today we found the atom is too big and the light speed too slow. The atom barrier already became a problem to evolution of processors, and light speed it's not fast enought for some real time things for one side of Earth globe to another. You can't play a "virtual orchestra" with member from different continents, due latence became a problem.

Mike Gebert wrote:I saw one at a Sony store. It looked fantastic, but you know, any technology looks great when it's HD at only 11" wide or something. When size goes up and prices drop, maybe.
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline
User avatar

Christopher Jacobs

Moderator

  • Posts: 2287
  • Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:53 pm
  • Location: Grand Forks, North Dakota

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostMon Feb 06, 2012 4:07 pm

All Darc wrote:About resoltuion advance... I saw a video about Sharp introduce a 4K reolution 16:9 TV, but I don't think it was OLED.

If with actual HD TV female hosters and actress get crazy about their wrinkles appear, what wil they say with super HD.

The HD broadcast in my city leave digital artefacts if we look in huge screen.
How is HD, in artefacts aspects, for USA and Europe ?


Today we found the atom is too big and the light speed too slow. The atom barrier already became a problem to evolution of processors, and light speed it's not fast enought for some real time things for one side of Earth globe to another. You can't play a "virtual orchestra" with member from different continents, due latence became a problem.



(Darn those natural laws of physics! They just don't let you do anything you really want! Gravity is another one I always hated!)

The HDTV picture that I've seen on cable and over the air is usually substantially sharper than the old standard NTSC broadcasts were (and digital standard-definition is usually worse than analog NTSC), but with any digital broadcasts whenever there's a lot of motion on screen the picture degrades rapidly, typically with what looks like a swarm of insects around whatever's moving. Then HD doesn't look any better and sometimes looks worse than SD. I've found sports broadcasts all but unwatchable on broadcast HD. Movies and TV shows look pretty good (especially talk shows where all they do is sit around talking), but Blu-rays and theatrical HD from a hard drive is so much better that I won't pay a premium cable surcharge just to get more HD channels than the ones in the basic cable. I'll just buy the Blu-ray, usually after reading reviews to be sure that the digital noise reduction and edge enhancement are at a minimum. I still favor theatrical screenings that use 35mm film when they're available (recently saw WAR HORSE and THE DESCENDENTS on 35mm), as 2k digital theatres, though the actual images usually look good, appear virtually identical to a good Blu-ray, and like Blu-rays, often exhibit jagged diagonals on any printed titles.

As far as how regular LCD monitors and LCD monitors backlit by LEDs perform, from various store demonstrations I prefer the standard LCDs, and LCD projectors are far preferable to consumer DLP projectors that use one chip and a spinning color wheel. If three-chip DLP projectors get cheaper, they might become a home option.

"Truth in Advertising" in the US at least, usually requires fine print, and it wasn't long before I discovered that the so-called LED TV screens merely used LEDs as the lighting source behind an LCD screen. Using red, green, and blue LEDs for the pixels seems more practical for those giant sporting stadium video displays, and far beyond the pricing of consumers.
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostMon Feb 06, 2012 5:04 pm

Here a SD digital cable TV (mini sat parabolic) looks worse than VHS. No kiding. I recorded a VHS in SP speed from a good DVD mastered from a rock Show recorded for TV in 1988, and I compared the VHS to several channels of the digital sat TV company. The VSH winned!!!
This digital sat TV company started with few channels, and was very acceptable in quality. But they began to put more and more channels, without expand the bandrange of signal, so the bitrate for channel got progressivelly worse.


I think other problem is that digital broadcast needs to encode in real time, for example in a TV NEWs, and real time encoding don't compare in quality to long planned encoding of Blu ray.
Even in cases when the TV channel is broadcasting a film, recorded from a very good and well encoded a digital file, the bit rate and format it's not the same of the TV channel band.

Since most films loose grain during the real time endoding of TV system of transmission, I think would be wise to studios to supply digital TV Stations with film files already grain reduced with high quality tools. The smoother texture in static areas would turn easier to the real time encoder of broadcaster to preserve the fine details&lines of the image, since the encoder will not spent much bit rate trying to reproduce grain.

John Lowry use to say that grain reduction made encoding easier. This was very true in the first 5 year of DVD, and became less relevant after high quality encoder softwares made DVD look better. Perhaps it's a valid argument today if we think in HD broadcast.
Keep thinking...

Image
Online
User avatar

greta de groat

  • Posts: 2013
  • Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:06 am
  • Location: California

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostTue Feb 07, 2012 12:17 am

Christopher Jacobs wrote:
The HDTV picture that I've seen on cable and over the air is usually substantially sharper than the old standard NTSC broadcasts were (and digital standard-definition is usually worse than analog NTSC), but with any digital broadcasts whenever there's a lot of motion on screen the picture degrades rapidly, typically with what looks like a swarm of insects around whatever's moving. Then HD doesn't look any better and sometimes looks worse than SD. I've found sports broadcasts all but unwatchable on broadcast HD....


I wondered if anyone else noticed this. I've got a regular old TV and a digital cable box, and i've noticed the picture degrading when there is fast motion, just like it does on heavily compressed DVDs (like a 12 chapter serial all on one DVD, all the chase sequences are unwatchable). I'm also seeing a lot of a picture gradually degrading and suddenly sharpening up, and then degrading again, over and over--as i see frequently on YouTube. But, hey, i'm paying for cable TV, why is the picture getting worse all the time?

greta
Greta de Groat
Unsung Divas of the Silent Screen
http://www.stanford.edu/~gdegroat
Offline
User avatar

Danny Burk

Moderator

  • Posts: 1567
  • Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 7:11 pm
  • Location: South Bend, IN

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostTue Feb 07, 2012 12:32 am

I see it all the time...it seems worse on broadcast HD than it does on DVD, and still worse to me (rendering the scene basically unwatchable) on broadcast SD. I often say that I'm VERY unimpressed with digital cable. It shows up on, say, nature programs with a flock of flying birds, moving over a scene with a lot of fine detail (leaves, flowers, etc). If I later get a blu-ray of the same program, the problem is usually gone, thanks to lessened compression.
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostTue Feb 07, 2012 7:54 am

At least I'm not the only one who noticew all the crap of real time digital video compression.
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline
User avatar

Jim Reid

  • Posts: 1516
  • Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:16 am
  • Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostTue Feb 07, 2012 10:23 am

I think one of the problems, especially with broadcast televsion, is that we're still in a transitional period. Yes, everybody went HD, but they didn't go out and buy all new equipement. Right now, there's a bunch of equipment that was made for analog broadcasting that has been modified/hacked to work with HD. Once that equipment is phased out, I think things will clean up. I'm speaking from personal experience here. We're having all sorts of problems with conversions that are really trashing out our video. We have new editing systems coming in this summer that should really clean things up. Just my opinion.
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostTue Feb 07, 2012 2:49 pm

Uhhnnnn.... I would say that your point view it's 50% true or less.
Conversions can carry video noise, problems of video field like ghost frames, and this makes the encoding work a hard task for a real time algorithm.
But nothing forbides a film or FX to have things like ghost images, or things similar to noise, or any very texture or intense detail variation frame to frame.

About TVs, if a analogic TV, for example, show artefacts while you watch a DVD or digital cable TV, the artefacts will appear in a digital TV two, as well on computer monitor. Some people who work for digital cabele TV try to use digital TV as a excuse, saying that the artefacts it's due you use a analogic TV. For me this is just trying to meake fool of people.

Jim Reid wrote:I think one of the problems, especially with broadcast televsion, is that we're still in a transitional period. Yes, everybody went HD, but they didn't go out and buy all new equipement. Right now, there's a bunch of equipment that was made for analog broadcasting that has been modified/hacked to work with HD. Once that equipment is phased out, I think things will clean up. I'm speaking from personal experience here. We're having all sorts of problems with conversions that are really trashing out our video. We have new editing systems coming in this summer that should really clean things up. Just my opinion.
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline

WaverBoy

  • Posts: 1600
  • Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:50 am
  • Location: Seattle, WA

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostFri Feb 17, 2012 2:55 pm

All I know is that Blu-rays look phenomenal on my lovely 55" UN55C8000 LED LCD Samsung. My dusty old CRT is now hooked up in the game room, host to all my pre-'90s video game consoles.
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostThu Jun 29, 2017 7:27 am

I never saw a good LCD (with or witohut LED backlight) that looks very good. All model have a garbage dynamic range, creating crushed shadows and clipped whites. If you adjust contrast to avoid extremes of this you end up with a very faded garbage image.

Also they tried to homologate the TV and computer monitor. In CRT times the computer monitor was a low contrast display, and TV signal on it or the first PC DVD kits, looked fadded, and adjusts setting didn't work well, resulting images with inferior light/vivit compared to CRT TVs to render video signal.

Now TVs and monitors are very close or even the same in terms of contrast, making TVs a sh... to reproduce image without blow up dynamics, creating clipped whites and crushed shadows.

-I can't accept the genocide of dynamic range.
-I can't accept the sh... image when you move just 30 degrees to side, creating images without density. And it's individualist to say that it need to be straigh to center, since it let space for only 1 person.
-I can't accept the center images more bright than the corner, when you are not 5 or 6 meter from TV.
-I can't accept the blur effect this crap creates during moviment, due problems with atualization tax of the LCD technology
-I can't accept the houx that is HD broadcast, the lies, since the HD image it's not true HD due video compression of broadcast TV kill most details, and HD codec are even worse than MPEG2 used in DVD, since it kills more details in motion (plus the blue from TV screen itself).
-I can't accept technician saying foolishs like telling me to watch TV from 6 meter from screen, that it was made for watch so far, to avoid notice artefacts. I must remamber that 6 meters make no difference SD or HD, so it's a stupid advice, a offense to inteligence

Take the compression used in cameras, used in edition, used in storage, and used in broadcast. It's compression over compression over compression... But they say digital it's clear and perfect... Their ass are cleaner than it...

Are people blind ??? Incapable of see compression artefacts???
Are stupid, only noticing the analogic artefacts from analogic TV that media and marketing tell them to notice???
A TV local channel here, that mostly broadcast in SD, with HD in few TV atractions, claims they have perfect image quality, but it have a lot of artefacts and a lot of detail loss during very little camera motion (or people motion). The SD it's worse now that it's digital than when it was analogic, cause here (home) analogic had good reception and texture and fine details was good. Now the details are waxy and get lost during medium or hard motion.

Honestly, I know you are very tired of hear me complain about digital technology... But I feel like in the tale of the naked emperor, with everyone praising the naked king (suposed invisible clothes) and only me realising that he is just naked and silly.

Maybe some blu rays are free from artefact, from banding, blocking, pixelation, ringing around edges. But the majoroty have some of these at least here and there. Anyway HD broadcast it's very... very inferior to blu ray. HD broadcast it's a disgrace, ate least here it's worse than DVD quality. It's just a lie. For this reason I don't watch TV anymore.

About 4K... I saw some demos, made by the TV brands, of 4K videos... Many were a garbage, full of artefacts where should be gradients, and this even in scenes with camera stopped and even in videos with up to 1GB for just 1min and 30 seconds, and also some videos with soft or blured images, lacking sharpness, like a clip of a soccer game and a clip on Africa's jungle.

I challenge any digital video system engineer in this world to create a video HD, 2K or 4K, encoded, where they can fit it with many SD images or super VHS resolution images, creating a mosaic of moving images, with quality enough to use/cut one of these moving images from the mosaic and fit on a CRT TV, having the same amount of details than a good super-VHS TV station tape.
They can't do it. The result would be a disaster.
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline

MoviecollectorOH

  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:29 am
  • Location: Ohio

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostWed Jul 05, 2017 8:05 pm

As per your last post, the contrast level at the point of digital encoding (regardless of level of digital compression) will dictate the useful contrast which you will be able to get out of the encoded picture/video. You can't get any more information than you put into it.
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostThu Jul 06, 2017 6:52 am

Well, we can't get more information that is in the encoded (trash compressed) image, you are right.

But the point I'm trying to do is that we get less information when we try set contrast to a decent level. Unless we used a fadded and lifeless "gray look" for contrast and brightness, the trash LCD/LED panel will clip tonalities in highlights and crush shadown tonalities in dark areas.
In good CRT display, like trinitron,. I had not this problem of get a image with garbage highlights and trash shadows.

And LCD have another anoying thing. Their pure white are not strong, are not like real glow, but somewhat murk, not as should, and it makes the clipping even more irritating.

I will never accept LCD/LED technology. I don't want it even for free.

I'm forced to use a LED computer monitor, that I dislike a lot (despite be a LED backlight Samsung), due 16:9 format and due failure of my CRT. I only watch clips in small screen, cause I can't tolerate watch full screen videos in such miserable technology whitch have a not uniform light (center brighter than corners unles you sit very far away), and all the defects I mentioned.
And what about the falacy of IPS technology ??? In the end is thew same sh...

The digital channels for broadcast TV that are stil SD resolution (or during atractions produced in SD), now have worse quality than when they were analogic, cause the analogic reception in my neighborhood was good.
And people talk about "digital miracle", "digital perfection" ??? That's insane...

And about resolution. It's a fallacy to talk about resolution in encoded video. Take a photo with the same resolution, shot of the same object and compare to a digital video. The video always look more fuzzy, less sharp. So when somepone says a video have a given number of resolution lines... it's just a lie, in fact it's not really up to the resolution in terms of final details generated.
Keep thinking...

Image
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostThu Jul 06, 2017 8:00 am

Yeah, it the transmited signal it's digital compressed, this happens even with a analogic CRT TV, cause the loss of details during motion it's due video compression, and real time video compression it's a garbage. And in a LCD/LED TV plus this you have also the blur of the LCD itself, since the refresh rates creates some blur in most LCD displays.

I saw some minutes of the new Mad MAx movie, in a HD channels of a digital sat signature TV. It was worse than a prime VHS (VHS recorded from reat blu ray) in scenes with motion, and have a very fadded image.

That's what Im trying to say, digital TV broadcast (or mini sat antenna) can be a complete disgrace. But they advertise as a perfect image, saying it have many times the resolution of the older system. Just lies of marketing mafia.

Digital can have more degradation than analogic sytem. A professional analogic tape master copy it's very like the original. A digital compressed image in real time lost a lot of details if compared to a uncompressed video. And people keep calling this perfect or miracle. This makes sick.

Even some theater with 2K projectors uses files that generated digital video artefacts. Pay for watch a "big TV" in a room with a lot of people, and in a bad chair ???? No way !!!

greta de groat wrote:
Christopher Jacobs wrote:I wondered if anyone else noticed this. I've got a regular old TV and a digital cable box, and i've noticed the picture degrading when there is fast motion, just like it does on heavily compressed DVDs (like a 12 chapter serial all on one DVD, all the chase sequences are unwatchable). I'm also seeing a lot of a picture gradually degrading and suddenly sharpening up, and then degrading again, over and over--as i see frequently on YouTube. But, hey, i'm paying for cable TV, why is the picture getting worse all the time?

greta
Keep thinking...

Image
Online

fwtep

  • Posts: 506
  • Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 9:55 pm

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostThu Jul 06, 2017 11:53 am

I think you need to complain to your satellite company. What you describe is NOTHING like what I see when I watch.
Online
User avatar

Donald Binks

  • Posts: 2863
  • Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:08 am
  • Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostThu Jul 06, 2017 4:36 pm

Christopher Jacobs wrote:The HDTV picture that I've seen on cable and over the air is usually substantially sharper than the old standard NTSC broadcasts were (and digital standard-definition is usually worse than analog NTSC), but with any digital broadcasts whenever there's a lot of motion on screen the picture degrades rapidly, typically with what looks like a swarm of insects around whatever's moving. Then HD doesn't look any better and sometimes looks worse than SD. I've found sports broadcasts all but unwatchable on broadcast HD....


Are these problems that only exist in America with the NTSC system? In Australia we have PAL and I receive television over the air in both HD and SD and I have never noticed anything like this. The digital signals I get are wonderfully crisp and clear and would out-rank the old analogue 100 to 1.
Regards from
Donald Binks

"So, she said: "Elly, it's no use letting Lou have the sherry glasses..."She won't appreciate them,
she won't polish them..."You know what she's like." So I said:..."
Offline
User avatar

Danny Burk

Moderator

  • Posts: 1567
  • Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 7:11 pm
  • Location: South Bend, IN

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostThu Jul 06, 2017 5:23 pm

Donald Binks wrote:Are these problems that only exist in America with the NTSC system? In Australia we have PAL and I receive television over the air in both HD and SD and I have never noticed anything like this. The digital signals I get are wonderfully crisp and clear and would out-rank the old analogue 100 to 1.


NTSC/PAL only apply to SD, not to HD. But I see this problem frequently on HD broadcasts - never on blu-ray discs - for example, a flock of birds in flight will dissolve into a digital mess on the broadcast version. Perhaps Australian TV isn't compressing the signal as much as is being done here.
Offline

All Darc

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:13 pm
  • Location: Brazil

Re: LED TV it's a hoax.

PostWed Jul 12, 2017 7:51 am

What about animated cell cartoons ?
TV broadcast compression make a disgrace to the black contourns of old cartoons during scenes of motion.

Digital encoding it's killing childhood. :lol:

Digital miracle ??? Digital curse, I must say.
They are selling 100g of beef and advertisaing as 1kg. All digital TV transmitions systems I ever sow are a garbage.

The image details of a photograph in 1920x1080pixels are far way better than the blured and waxy texture of HDTV broadcast. It's insane talk about in resolution if compression kills most things.
Keep thinking...

Image

Return to Tech Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests