High Def Forum
Thank you for visiting. This is our website archive. Please visit our main website by clicking the logo above.

Motion blur vs "jitter"

WSU Tony
08-16-2010, 11:09 PM
Hi guys.

Went to my local best buy/ ultimate electronics tonight and learned alot. Here are a few things about my plans. I am going to spend around $1,000 for my new TV. It will be used in a normal 12X14 living room with 1 sliding glass window. I need to see the TV from both sides of the room (couch is on one side and the kitchen is on the other)

I was nearly convinced a plasma is the way to go.... until I went into the store. A movie was playing on a plasma and some lagging caught my eye. The salesman said it was called "Jitter." It annoyed the crap out of me. I turned 180 degrees and saw a LED tv and the picture as it moved slowly across the screen was moving so fluid and smooth it looked amazing.

I guess what I'm asking is this: What's worse, the "jitter" of Plasmas with slow moving objects or the motion blur of quick moving objects on LED's?

Sports/Movies/Gaming will be the primary uses of the TV.

Maybe I'm way off on this, if so, please let me know.

Thanks for the help!

PFC5
08-17-2010, 07:08 AM
Well it is actually called JUDDER not Jitter, so the salesman was wrong about what it is called.

Second, with Judder (because of 3:2 pulldown to convert 24Fps film to our 60Fps/60Hz broadcast/electric frequency rate) has been how we have been watching movies for many decades. There could have been an issue with the signal to the plasma or it could have been set wrong so the cadence was set to the opposite of what was being fed, but it IS there unless you watch film at a refresh rate that is an equal multiple of 24Fps (i.e. 72Hz, 96Hz, 120Hz, 240Hz). It is usually only seen when doing a slow pan of the camera from side to side. If you see it at other times that would make me believe that something was not set up properly for the type of signal being sent. This could happen if the plasma was set to film mode (24Fps using 3:2 pulldown when the material being sent was video at 60Fps. Here is some info on 3:2 Pulldown, etc:

http://www.moviola.com/edu/rc/pulldown

What you saw in the store was the LCD either 120 or 240Hz interpolating the frames and it seems more people do not like it than like this as it is called the Soap Opera Effect. It makes film look like home video, but in a store it likely will look smoother at first. Many/most people end up not liking this effect after watching it for a while because it takes away the look of film.

Now many LCDs also have an option to just repeat frames (3x for 72Hz, 4x for 96Hz, 5x for 120Hz, & 10x for 240Hz) instead of interpolating (guessing how the material changes between frames) but even that will not look as smooth as using the interpolation that you likely saw.

LCDs use a higher refresh rate to help hide the slow pixel response (how fast a pixel can change states - i.e. from blue to green etc) rate they have when compared to plasmas. Plasmas have pixel response rates at least 2,000x faster than the fastest LCD panels, so fast motion from material such as sports/gaming will look better without the motion smearing that LCDs have. Some do not notice the motion issues with LCDs, and some do not notice it because of the torch mode used in stores and then see it in home lighting. It depends on your eyes and how closely you watch the picture.

Film has a unique look compared to video shot, and most seem to like it preserved, but some do love that Soap Opera Effect. It is a matter of taste to some, but purists like the look of film. Quite a few people who have posted here hated the SOE after bringing the LCD home, even though they didn't notice it much in the store, and a few brought them back for a plasma.

One strength of LCDs has been how bright they can get since they were originally designed as computer monitors in bright offices. But plasmas can get pretty bright now also. LCDs use to always have a matte screen panel which helped to reduce glare/reflections, but now many/most of the higher end LCD/LED backlit LCDs now have a glossy screen like plasma. Both can use anti-glare coating that vary between mfg/models in their effectiveness.

I assume you know about Image Retention (IR) and Burn-In (BI), but IR is temporary and usually not an issue as if proper picture settings are used it should be minimal. This can happen with both techs, but much more likely with plasmas than LCDs. Burn-in is permanent and you almost have to abuse the display to get it with plasma now, but it is still possible if you have the screen set too bright and/or have static images on the screen for too long. This is WHY I usually recommend LCD if someone will be using their TV as a computer monitor for more than about 5% (excluding streaming movies etc at full screen). Here is some info on IR & BI:

http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/plasmatv/plasmatv-burnin.html

If you are looking for wide angle viewing as it seems from your post you would need a plasma to preserve the PQ from those angles. LCD mfg claim around 178 degrees, but this is just to be able to see that there is something on the screen. With material you want to watch the viewing angles with LCDs, PQ can drop off rather fast any more than 2-3 seat off from the center position. It really depends on the display though with some LCDs doing better than others. Here is a link to a shootout showing viewing angles of both techs done last year:

http://www.displaymate.com/LCD_Plasma_ShootOut.htm

I watch Movies, TV shows, Sports & gaming on my PS3 on my plasma and I do better with my plasma than I do on my LCDs. Another thing that effects LCDs much more than plasmas is something called Video Lag. This is when the display takes more time to process the moving images instead of doing it instantaneously in real time. What you see on the screen has already happened in the game console so it is something that can effect game play. Especially with sports games like football, baseball, golf, etc where you need split second timing for many actions/reactions. It also can hurt in shooting games like Call of Duty etc. since others can see/shoot you a split second sooner than what you see. This also varies from LCD brand/model to brand/model, so it is another consideration if you game a lot.

Hope this helps & welcome to the forum! :hithere:

HiDefRev
08-17-2010, 11:18 AM
There are a number of factors, mainly customers playing with the settings, that can affect pictures in a retail store. My advice would be for you to check out what kind of TV most of the experts on this site own, and you will see that it is a Panasonic plasma. There absolutely is no better HDTV being manufactured today. :2cents

krooked22
08-26-2010, 06:17 PM
right now I can afford the 720p 42 inch. Im 80 bucks short of getting the 1080p model ARRRRRGHHHH the sale ends on Saturday. I must come up with 80 bucks somehow..

If I cant come up with the 80 bucks should I even bother with the 1080p

HiDefRev
08-26-2010, 06:24 PM
Get what you can afford at this point. And you might try checking some of the online retailers. Their prices are generally much less than the B&M stores. Check out the prices at www.ClevelandPlasma.com , www.us-appliance.com , www.amazon.com , and www.vanns.com . You will be pleasantly surprised at what you find. Most of us on here order from these retailers regularly. :thumbsup:

acblue94
08-30-2010, 05:26 PM
By far the LED/LCD has such a nicer and crisp picture. Its funny that on some of the plasmas the black was so dark that the detail was gone. IMO of course.

TwoPlusTwo
08-30-2010, 05:37 PM
By far the LED/LCD has such a nicer and crisp picture. Its funny that on some of the plasmas the black was so dark that the detail was gone. IMO of course.

FUD and :spam: