Are Panasonic EDTV'S Good And Is EDTV HD?

rickbbb · 02-14-2006, 01:58 PM

Jerk !

sl7vk · 02-14-2006, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickbbb

Jerk !

Well, you've certainly hit the nail on the head with that one.

techjunky · 02-14-2006, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sl7vk

Well, you've certainly hit the nail on the head with that one.

Ouch! The name calling is really getting to me.

(sl7vk) thanks for your two cents worth, but don't you have a rock to crawl under.

How contrast ratio is measured
Shades of gray

By Julie Hill

One of the conundrums of contrast-ratio readings is that there's more than one way to measure them. For best results, these measurements are done in a completely darkened room. The readings are taken with an illuminance meter and measured in lux, a standard unit of light intensity.

METHOD ONE: Full-on/full-off

How it's measured: Two readings are taken using the same projection screen: one, from the center of the screen as it displays a completely white image; the other, from the center of the same screen as it displays a completely black image. The white-screen reading is then divided by the black-screen reading to determine the contrast ratio.

Pros: Tells you the highest, brightest white reading and the lowest, darkest black reading this unit is capable of. If you're a manufacturer, this method generates the highest contrast-ratio number you can get.

Cons: The spec is easy to manipulate. Manufacturers can search around on the screen to find the whitest white reading and the blackest black reading. Also, the brightness setting on the projector itself can be increased for the white-screen reading and decreased for the black-screen reading. This method also tells you nothing about the projector's uniformity of contrast across the screen, or how the projector handles the shades of gray between white and black.

Who uses it: Most projector manufacturers use this measurement method because it yields a higher, more impressive contrast-ratio number.

METHOD TWO: ANSI checkerboard

How it's measured: One test image is used. It has 16 points on it, eight black and eight white. Measurements are taken from all of the 16 points across the screen. The white-point readings are averaged, then the black-point readings are averaged. The average of the white is divided by the average of the black to get the contrast ratio.

Pros: Provides a more realistic measurement of how well the projector handles contrast ratio across the screen.

Cons: This measurement, too, can be slightly manipulated by changing the projector's brightness and contrast settings. This method results in a lower contrast-ratio number, and, if compared with a full-on/full-off reading, may lead consumers to believe a projector's contrast is deficient. Does not address gradients between black and white.

Who uses it: Liesegang and a handful of other projector manufacturers. However, most know the checkerboard reading for their projector models. Many dealers will provide this number if asked.

METHOD THREE: JBMIA
(Japan Business Machine and Information System Industries Association)

This Japanese trade association has developed its own standard to which companies in its membership voluntarily adhere.

How it's measured: Two test patterns are used, one projects an entirely white screen and the other projects an entirely black screen. The white screen is divided into nine fields; each field is measured and all nine readings are averaged. Similarly, the nine fields on the black screen are measured and averaged. The average of the white readings is then divided by the average of the black readings.

Pros: This method attempts to address screen uniformity while also yielding the beneficially high number for marketing purposes as the full-on/full-off method does.

Cons: As with the other measurement methods, a projector's brightness and contrast settings can be adjusted to manipulate the result. And, like the others, the JBMIA method does not measure the gradations between black and white.

Who uses it: The JBMIA member-manufacturers that use this measurement method include Epson, Sanyo and other LCD-projector manufacturers.

Ward Cleaver · 02-14-2006, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Posted By sl7vk - "So I guess in your world 1024 x 768 aren't HD sets either..."

We're not talking about "other" sets and "my" world...we're talking about your particular set which has a resolution of 852 x 480.

Not only is the resolution of your particular set (852 x 480) significantly below the resolution of an HDTV, but it is also well below the resolution of most other EDTV's nowadays (which is 1024 x 768).

As I said before, your 852 x 480 resolution set is a budget model, lower tier EDTV.
Those are the facts.

To hear you tell it, your 852 x 480 EDTV is the greatest thing since night baseball.
I think you need a reality check.

Regards,
-Ward

sl7vk · 02-14-2006, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ward Cleaver

We're not talking about "other" sets and "my" world...we're talking about your particular set which has a resolution of 852 x 480.

Not only is the resolution of your particular set (852 x 480) significantly below the resolution of an HDTV, but it is also well below the resolution of most other EDTV's nowadays (which is 1024 x 768).

As I said before, your 852 x 480 resolution set is a budget model, lower tier EDTV.
Those are the facts.

To hear you tell it, your 852 x 480 EDTV is the greatest thing since night baseball.
I think you need a reality check.

Regards,
-Ward

Night baseball? How old are you grandpa?

No. A Panasonic or Pioneer HD 42 inch is a better unit. The particular Panny we are talking about is IMHO, the best VALUE in Plasma today.

You're the only person that I've ever heard call 1024 x 768 ED. Every Plasma manufacturer disagree's with you.

http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs...00000000005702

Ward Cleaver · 02-14-2006, 03:47 PM

Here sl7vk, let me put it in perspective for you my friend...

1366 x 768 - The resolution of my (and many other) HDTV's.

1280 x 720 - The resolution necessary to view HDTV content.

1024 x 768 - The resolution of most plasma EDTV's under 50" nowadays.

852 x 480 - The resolution of your tv.

Some manufacturers promote TVs with a maximum resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels as "HDTV ready." This is incorrect. Although the total number of vertical pixels is greater than the 720 minimum necessary for HDTV, at an aspect ratio of 16:9 it would need 1280 pixels horizontally to display a 720-line HDTV picture.

Let me know if there are any other matters I can help you sort out.

However, HD resolution is something you need not concern yourself with because you are way down on a lower tier with your 852 x 480 television.

Regards,
-Ward

sl7vk · 02-14-2006, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ward Cleaver

However, HD resolution is something you need not concern yourself with because you are way down on a lower tier with your 852 x 480 television.

Regards,
-Ward

The only thing lower tier are your posts and your condescending outbursts. You haven't helped anyone with anyone since you've begun posting.

Your avatar really does sum you up. A talking head spewing useless information.

Regards,

Thomas

sl7vk · 02-14-2006, 03:57 PM

Oh, and some interesting takes on Philips and their crappy glass at CES. LOL!

http://us.gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-e...ing-147001.php

Oh, and once again, for the 5th time, I challenge you to find a better review of your Philips then my "measly" ED Panny... LOL.

Ward Cleaver · 02-14-2006, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Posted By sl7vk - "A talking head spewing useless information."

Well, I catch you with your foot in your mouth trying to quote (misquote) information regarding the resolution of HDTV versus EDTV, and I correct you and straighten you out with some facts.

You then (frustratingly) realize that my facts are correct so you respond as usual...by hurling out personal insults at me.

I think it's time for you to go take a little break.

Why don't you get a nice, cool beverage out of your refrigerator, go into your living room, sit down on the couch and put your feet up on your coffee table, and watch some 852 x 480 resolution tv.

Regards,
-Ward

sl7vk · 02-14-2006, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ward Cleaver

Well, I catch you with your foot in your mouth trying to quote (misquote) information regarding the resolution of HDTV versus EDTV, and I correct you and straighten you out with some facts.

You then (frustratingly) realize that my facts are correct so you respond as usual...by hurling out personal insults at me.

I think it's time for you to go take a little break.

Why don't you get a nice, cool beverage out of your refrigerator, go into your living room, sit down on the couch and put your feet up on your coffee table, and watch some 852 x 480 resolution tv.

Regards,
-Ward

Again no reviews on your TV. We'll just keep that dirty little secret to ourselves then Ward.

You think that HD plasma's are ED. How am I supposed to argue with someone that thinks the HD symbol on all those 42 inch Plasma's that are sold is fake?

Ward Cleaver · 02-14-2006, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Posted By sl7vk - "Again no reviews on your TV."

You can't debate the facts, so...you put the bean under a different shell and try to stealthily change subjects.
The subject of this thread is not my HDTV, it is Panasonic EDTV's.

But here, just so you don't go away empty handed, let me give you a little review...

1366 x 768 - The resolution of my HDTV (by the way, the Winter Olympics look incredible on it).

852 x 480 - The resolution of your "set."

Enough said.

Regards,
-Ward

weberman · 02-14-2006, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sl7vk

Misconception #2: A high-definition (HD) plasma TV beats
an enhanced-definition (ED) Plasma TV every time.

Usually true, but not always. I suspect this misconception has been perpetrated by manufacturers, who want to move more expensive (i.e., higher-resolution) product, and by retailers, who are repeating whatever the manufacturer tells them. True, HD plasma displays are more expensive than their ED counterparts. The reason is that increasing the resolution on a plasma screen means fitting more pixels in the plasma display element (glass). A simple eyeball test will tell you, though, that this is not necessarily money well spent. Just because a plasma monitor is labeled "HD" does not necessarily mean that it handles things like internal conversion, contrast ratios, and interpolation well -- which are the very of things that ultimately make or break a picture in terms of its displayed quality. In most cases, the quality of the picture you get from a given plasma display (whether it's ED or HD) actually depends on the quality of its make. A good ED plasma TV from a 1st tier quality manufacturer will many times outperform an HD plasma TV from a 2nd or 3rd tier manufacturer.

One example in the past was a 1024 X 1024 resolution 42" plasma panel from 2001/2002 that produced significant motion artifacts on 480P (and less) incoming signals. This was actually the first high definition resolution for a 42" plasma TV. Eventually manufacturers actually reduced the resolution on a 42" high def plasma to 1024 X768 which is today's standard. This high definition plasma resolution is much more efficient at scaling to the native resolution of the plasma due to a more condusive pixel shape than the previous 1024 X 1024 resolution.Source-

http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com/p...nceptions.html

The rest of Misconception 2 from plasmabuyingguide.com that was omitted from your post.

With the tremendous increase in HDTV available programming, an HD plasma is more desirable than in prior years when the price discrepancy between HDTV and EDTV was significant. These days, an HD plasma or LCD makes much more sense value wise since the HD plasma will take full advantage of the HD incoming signal. At the current price difference of around 25 to 30% between a 42" EDTV and HDTV, the HDTV plasma is a better investment.

My prediction is that EDTV plasma will be phased out entirely by 2007. There will only be HDTV resolution plasma, LCDs, DLPs and Hybrids on the market.

End of Misconception #2

The question that started this thread was Are Panasonic EDTV'S Good And Is EDTV HD?

Are Pansonic EDTVs good, probably, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you like them buy one if you are satisfied with the picture.

Is EDTV HD, No and it never will be.

rickbbb · 02-14-2006, 05:49 PM

I think you need the Beaver.

techjunky · 02-14-2006, 07:43 PM

Here is some more info I dug up on EDTV.

OK let's name the most worthy EDTV contenders:

the Panasonic TH-42PWD7UY plasma TV
the NEC 42VR5 plasma TV
the Fujitsu P42VHA40US plasma TV
There's another EDTV screen size but the manufacturers are not really up to the same standards as the Panny and the NEC. The Daewoo 46 inch plasma TV can be useful for viewing distances greater than 12 feet. It's a low budget, no frills plasma. We only mention it if you don't want to step up to the 50 inch HDTV size.

Standard TV has 525 lines of interlaced video. Interlacing means that the video (which is split into 2 fields) gets shown alternately. Of the 525 lines only 480 have a video signal. That’s the 480i you see floating around in all the EDTV vs HDTV specifications.

While standard TV has worked well for years TV sets have gotten bigger and the deficiencies of SD (standard TV) have become magnified.

There's no question that in EDTV vs HDTV the HDTV (for now) is the ultimate in PQ (picture quality). HDTV stands for High Definition TV. EDTV is the 2nd best PQ that we have. EDTV stands for Enhanced Definition TV.

EDTV has the same 480 lines as SD, but they are progressive scan. SD uses 480i (interlaced) and EDTV uses 480p (progressive scan). DVD players uses progressive scan to display PQ and EDTVs do a great job of displaying them.

Progressive scanning means that instead of splitting the signal into two fields and showing half the lines at a time, all 480 lines of video are shown at once. That’s one of the reasons why DVDs look so sharp on your SD TV.

So the big question is --which format should you go with-- EDTV vs HDTV??? Well the truth is it depends upon 3 things......

your budget
your seating distance
your viewing habits
Right now there is very limited TV content available in HDTV format. So you won't get the full viewing impact of HDTV. Another factor weighing in against HDTV is how much DVD viewing do you do?

A controversial point disputed by many HDTV owners is that some TV experts believe that shows watched from a DVD player on EDTV displays better.

Why? Because there's no scaling to be done by the EDTV. An HDTV needs to re-process the signal before it can display it to you. As said before a DVD player's natural resolution matches that of the EDTV format.

Perhaps the most important factor is the viewing distance. How good the PQ is has a lot to do with seating distance. It's a fact that if you sit 8 feet or more from you TV you won't be able to tell the difference in sharpness between a 42-inch EDTV and a 42-inch HDTV side by side.

If you get close to an EDTV say 6 feet or less you start to see the screen door effect (SDE). That's when you start to see the actual pixels on the EDTV.

If you watch sports, the Discovery channel and other channels that will eventually swing into HD programming and you sit close to you TV then HDTV may be for you.

At this point in time EDTV vs HDTV depends mostly upon your viewing distance. If you have the bucks or you sit close to you TV than the EDTV vs HDTV choice is HDTV.

rickbbb · 02-14-2006, 07:51 PM

techjunkie..I think YOU need the Beaver too .

02-14-2006, 01:58 PM	#46
rickbbb Phillips 47 Inch LCD HDTV Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Southern California Age: 51 Posts: 2,108	TO techjunky Jerk ! __________________ \

02-14-2006, 03:47 PM	#51
Ward Cleaver 1024 x 768 Is Not True HD Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 263	Here sl7vk, let me put it in perspective for you my friend... 1366 x 768 - The resolution of my (and many other) HDTV's. 1280 x 720 - The resolution necessary to view HDTV content. 1024 x 768 - The resolution of most plasma EDTV's under 50" nowadays. 852 x 480 - The resolution of your tv. Some manufacturers promote TVs with a maximum resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels as "HDTV ready." This is incorrect. Although the total number of vertical pixels is greater than the 720 minimum necessary for HDTV, at an aspect ratio of 16:9 it would need 1280 pixels horizontally to display a 720-line HDTV picture. Let me know if there are any other matters I can help you sort out. However, HD resolution is something you need not concern yourself with because you are way down on a lower tier with your 852 x 480 television. Regards, -Ward __________________ The ATSC (the body whch sets the standards for HDTV) recognizes only two standards for HDTV...1280 x 720 and 1920 x 1080 www.atsc.org The ATSC standards for HDTV are recognized by the FCC.

02-14-2006, 03:57 PM	#53
sl7vk Panasonic Plasma Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Salt Lake City Posts: 603	Oh, and some interesting takes on Philips and their crappy glass at CES. LOL! http://us.gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-e...ing-147001.php Oh, and once again, for the 5th time, I challenge you to find a better review of your Philips then my "measly" ED Panny... LOL. __________________ "Their LCD tv's are also assembled in the Netherlands...Belgium to be exact." -Ward Cleaver Last edited by sl7vk; 02-14-2006 at 04:01 PM.

02-14-2006, 05:49 PM	#58
rickbbb Phillips 47 Inch LCD HDTV Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Southern California Age: 51 Posts: 2,108	To Ward Cleaver I think you need the Beaver. __________________ \

02-14-2006, 07:43 PM	#59
techjunky All my TV's are HD! Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 319	More helpful tips! Here is some more info I dug up on EDTV. OK let's name the most worthy EDTV contenders: the Panasonic TH-42PWD7UY plasma TV the NEC 42VR5 plasma TV the Fujitsu P42VHA40US plasma TV There's another EDTV screen size but the manufacturers are not really up to the same standards as the Panny and the NEC. The Daewoo 46 inch plasma TV can be useful for viewing distances greater than 12 feet. It's a low budget, no frills plasma. We only mention it if you don't want to step up to the 50 inch HDTV size. Standard TV has 525 lines of interlaced video. Interlacing means that the video (which is split into 2 fields) gets shown alternately. Of the 525 lines only 480 have a video signal. That’s the 480i you see floating around in all the EDTV vs HDTV specifications. While standard TV has worked well for years TV sets have gotten bigger and the deficiencies of SD (standard TV) have become magnified. There's no question that in EDTV vs HDTV the HDTV (for now) is the ultimate in PQ (picture quality). HDTV stands for High Definition TV. EDTV is the 2nd best PQ that we have. EDTV stands for Enhanced Definition TV. EDTV has the same 480 lines as SD, but they are progressive scan. SD uses 480i (interlaced) and EDTV uses 480p (progressive scan). DVD players uses progressive scan to display PQ and EDTVs do a great job of displaying them. Progressive scanning means that instead of splitting the signal into two fields and showing half the lines at a time, all 480 lines of video are shown at once. That’s one of the reasons why DVDs look so sharp on your SD TV. So the big question is --which format should you go with-- EDTV vs HDTV??? Well the truth is it depends upon 3 things...... your budget your seating distance your viewing habits Right now there is very limited TV content available in HDTV format. So you won't get the full viewing impact of HDTV. Another factor weighing in against HDTV is how much DVD viewing do you do? A controversial point disputed by many HDTV owners is that some TV experts believe that shows watched from a DVD player on EDTV displays better. Why? Because there's no scaling to be done by the EDTV. An HDTV needs to re-process the signal before it can display it to you. As said before a DVD player's natural resolution matches that of the EDTV format. Perhaps the most important factor is the viewing distance. How good the PQ is has a lot to do with seating distance. It's a fact that if you sit 8 feet or more from you TV you won't be able to tell the difference in sharpness between a 42-inch EDTV and a 42-inch HDTV side by side. If you get close to an EDTV say 6 feet or less you start to see the screen door effect (SDE). That's when you start to see the actual pixels on the EDTV. If you watch sports, the Discovery channel and other channels that will eventually swing into HD programming and you sit close to you TV then HDTV may be for you. At this point in time EDTV vs HDTV depends mostly upon your viewing distance. If you have the bucks or you sit close to you TV than the EDTV vs HDTV choice is HDTV. __________________ My Home Theater: Television: NEC XR5 Receiver: Denon AVR-4800 (THX ULTRA) DVD Player: Denon DVD-2800 Fronts:Wharfedale Pi-40's(Kevlar drivers) Rears: Wharfedale Pi-30's(Kevlar drivers) Center: Polk Audio CS400i Sub: B&W ASW650 12"(paper/kevlar cone) PowerCenter: Monster Power HTS2600 MKII Speaker wire: Silver Sonic by DH LABS Remote: Sony (Touch Screen) RM-AV2100

02-14-2006, 07:51 PM	#60
rickbbb Phillips 47 Inch LCD HDTV Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Southern California Age: 51 Posts: 2,108	To techjunkie techjunkie..I think YOU need the Beaver too . __________________ \

Similar Threads to Are Panasonic EDTV'S Good And Is EDTV HD?
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
panasonic edtv question	wassim17	Flat-Panel TVs	9	01-10-2005 07:09 PM