High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource > High Definition Viewing Mediums, HDTVs > Flat-Panel TVs
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

Flat-Panel TVs Plasma, LCD RSS - Flat-Panel TVs

Oversaturated vs Natural color: Which do you prefer?

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-29-2006, 10:43 PM   #1
I prefer Analog
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34
Default Oversaturated vs Natural color: Which do you prefer?

So, I've been glancing across a majority of HDTV threads, HDTV reviews, and the consumate flame wars across the interweb, and have found one overriding theory regarding HDTV quality.

It seems that those who prefer oversaturated, unnatural colors war with those who prefer darker, natural colors. Each has picked their brand--either consciously or uncounsiously b/c such brands (based on reviews) tend to reflect their preferences based on what they consider a better display.

I do quite a bit of photography, video editing/production, etc...and I certainly have my own opinions as to how I prefer to view an image.

My question: What type of image do you prefer? You don't have to use my descriptions; esp if you're unfamiliar with them--most of the reviews I find (professional or otherwise) ignore the standard terminology and go with over-long descriptions that can be simply interpreted as either "saturated" or "natural."

Also, what panel do you prefer and/or own?

I have a strong feeling that a lot of the preferences for panel technology are soley based on personal, ingrained image preference, and not on one manufacturer's technology being superior to the other's (esp. considering that the guts of all major panels are manufactured by the same company from a year-to-year basis...just like any tech industry), despite how most people will shape their argument...

(As an example: It's quite obvious that those who rate Panasonic panels very high are the same type that made Kodak a household name...many, many years ago)
zinfamous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 11:34 AM   #2
HD-DVD ftw!
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 70
Default

Personally, I much prefer natural color in any viewing situation. It was one of the driving reasons I picked up a dSLR as quickly as I did. Most point and shoot digital cameras overstaurate the image a lot, even in "natural" color mode. Blech!
xepherys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 11:59 AM   #3
Something will come to me
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Talladega County, Alabama
Posts: 1,178
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zinfamous
I have a strong feeling that a lot of the preferences for panel technology are soley based on personal, ingrained image preference, and not on one manufacturer's technology being superior to the other's (esp. considering that the guts of all major panels are manufactured by the same company from a year-to-year basis...just like any tech industry), despite how most people will shape their argument...
I agree.
You mention you do some photowork - me too. I have an Olympus E300, along with a Sony V1 P&S. The Sony to me is more like what a LCD is - probably might be considered more natural. The Oly definitely is noted for having saturated colors.
Guess I lean more toward the satuated - or PDP side of the discussion. That said, my next TV will be an LCD due to my wife's TIVO habit.

Note - There are advances being made in panel technology pretty fast. Recently I have noted that Pioneer have what they refer to as 'Deep Encased Cell Structure' & 'First-Surface Pure Color Filter'. The brand I rep, LG - has been using both of these technologies in their PDP panels for about 7 months now. It really made a difference from the prior generation of panels they used.
These new advances could actually change the saturated vs natual / PDP vs. LCD equation in the future.
It would be interesting to actually know how many actual makers there are of panels. I know LG and Samsung do - for themselves and others brands (like Sony uses Sammy panels). There is another mfg. out there - Chi-Mei. I know they make a lot of panels, but I am not sure who for or how good they are. Somebody has to make the cheap panels, thats for sure..
BamaPanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 12:13 PM   #4
HT Frontiersman
 
borromini's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,309
Default

An ISF calibrated display is what I advocate for the most realistic, accurate image possible. A $250 calibration session is well worth the time and money when considering the purchase of a $1.5k+ HDTV.
__________________
"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy"
borromini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 01:05 PM   #5
Something will come to me
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Talladega County, Alabama
Posts: 1,178
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by borromini
An ISF calibrated display is what I advocate for the most realistic, accurate image possible. A $250 calibration session is well worth the time and money when considering the purchase of a $1.5k+ HDTV.
PDP's generally seem more saturated tha LCD (to me, anyway). What does ISF do to either, in your opinion? Does it make the PDP less saturated, and bring the LCD up some (if needed)?
BamaPanda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 05:06 PM   #6
HT Frontiersman
 
borromini's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,309
Default

ISF calibration simply sets the display to the appropriate color temperature, contrast ratio, brightness, etc. With the latest models, anybody can make an LCD's colors just as "saturated" as any other technology.

Again...for me, the end result or desire would be to create the most realistic, accurate image possible.
__________________
"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy"
borromini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 06:18 PM   #7
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
omeletpants's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaPanda
PDP's generally seem more saturated tha LCD (to me, anyway). What does ISF do to either, in your opinion? Does it make the PDP less saturated, and bring the LCD up some (if needed)?
ISF calibration standards (DF6500) generally yeild a much darker, softer picture than the average customer would like. There is a great thread on AVS called "streaming rat" that talks about the ISF standard versus what the average person might prefer and how to attain a life-like picture that may not be what ISF prescribes
omeletpants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 06:36 PM   #8
I prefer Analog
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34
Default

Nice input. I "upgraded" my canon AE program (c. 1979) to a first gen digital rebel a few years ago. Great value as far as digital slr goes. I can't bring myself to spend more than that; at least not until they increase the physical size of CMOS or CCD to compensate for the senseless cramming of pixels. The new rebel is 10 MP; and mine is 6.3. Same size chip in both....yeah, I think I'll stick with mine.

I'm only recently getting back into Panel tech, and was holding out for another year or so for a well-priced LCD. But...BF and Best Buy saw me carting a new 42" Sammsung HP-S4253 down the street to my apartment for $999.00. The deal offered was for the Panasonic (the one that everyone has), but they sold out when I got there (late--about 8:30am), and offered me the Sammy for the same deal.

I must say, I'm quite happy. Best Buy is now selling the sammy for 1700 and the panasonic for 1200. Yeah, I never had time to do the shopping and scrutinizing that I normally do...but the reviews I've read (despite the poor ratings) tell me that the Sammy is more natural and accurate...and that the industry tends to lean towards saturation. I'm also a Samsung whore (Dig their memory, LCD for my computer) But I'm new to this stuff, so I could just be talking out of my ass here.
zinfamous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 06:51 PM   #9
ISF Technician
 
d6500k's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Oregon
Age: 61
Posts: 1,720
Default

Quote:
PDP's generally seem more saturated tha LCD (to me, anyway). What does ISF do to either, in your opinion? Does it make the PDP less saturated, and bring the LCD up some (if needed)?
Borromini sums it up very well. My only addition is that we (ISF) take a look at the viewing environment and discuss the viewing habits of clients. This may result in setting several "presets" applicable to those environments/habits.

Often, for sporting events in bright rooms we will select a higher color temperature (apx D75) and utilize some edge enhancement protocols to give the display an eyecatching appeal.

When the client wants to view a film in a theater like situation, we calibrate to D65 industry standards with most, if not all, artifically produced display generated enhancements turned off or to low settings. This renders as accurate an image as the display can possibly attain.

Good viewing,

Doug k
__________________
Serving Oregon and Southmost Texas.
Occasional tours to St. Petersburg/Tampa Fla.

www.6500kcalibrations.com
d6500k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2006, 11:41 PM   #10
E86
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 172
Default

It is interesting you mention a photo background. I have the same, and I have been falling back on my "zone system" training in setting up my new Sony LCD. On the Sony, "brightness" brings up the shadow detail and "picture" (contrast) brings up the highlights. There is a variety of content I watch but at times I fell like I am looking at an Ansel Adams print. One reason I got the Sony is its superior ability at upconversion, and the reason I got 32" is because I watch 8 feet away and I have good eyes and I didn't want to see the MPEG compression artifacts or the upconversion artifacts either. Leno blows me away on this set, I am watching PBS Martian rover photos right now and Hogan's Hero's looks great too!!

Mike
E86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 09:23 AM   #11
High Definition is the definition of life.
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 65
Default Hmmmm....

If I wanted "real", I'd walk outside. I prefer a slightly more saturated picture. I'd call it "perfectly saturated", while you might call it "slightly oversaturated".

It's funny, recently, on another flat panel forum, one gentleman who obviously has much more experience with these things than I do, suggested a list of settings for my particular TV, a JVC LT-46FN97, which would give it the most natural picture, with the closest color to 6500K spectrum. So I tried it.... and while I don't doubt that this was probably the most natural, it also looked totally flat, boring, and lifeless to my eyes !

I suspect that their are at least a percentage of people who "secretly prefer" a more punchy, contrasty picture, as I do, but in the public eye, they think its "cooler" to hang with the all natural crowd.
For myself on the other hand, I'm proud of being the outspoken, oddball out in left field :-) This is the story of my whole life, actually.
I like more color and contrast, and I'm more than happy to admit it.

Peace,
Fish

PS, You can check out my photography also, to see "what I like to see" http://www.trophybassonly.com/id182.htm

BTW, this link is "not" to fish photography.... it's just general nature photography taken by a "fish-head" :-) Oh, and I'd love to see some of the other posters photography. If you have it posted on the internet somewhere, please post a link...

Last edited by Fish Chris; 12-01-2006 at 09:35 AM.
Fish Chris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 10:46 AM   #12
Very Grizzled Vet of 1 yr
 
paulc's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,764
Default

Boy oh boy, I read in a lot of places that folks suggest a 50% setting on their chroma controls. If I put mine on 50, in 30 seconds I'd have the first inklings of my skin frying! A lot of folks call this torch mode, for obvious reasons.

And yes, I very much come from a still image background, I go back to the very early days when the Knoll brothers created the very first Photoshop.

When I first got into HD, I was a bit disturbed about black crush. Gradually I came to better understand the issues involved. Turns out my issue had more to do with the fact that even on my top of the line CRT, deep shadows were always kinda grayish, and I could distinguish tone in them. Not so on my HD. This feeling got reinforced big time because in the past month I did 2 movies in theater (the first since last fall). Ha, black crush all over the place... shadows were just that, deep and dark and... no intermediate tone.

Still, there is one "control" I really would like to see on new HD sets. It would be the "Highlight/Shadow" control from CS2 (for the unfamiliar, it allows one to control shadows and highlights separately, as in I can open shadows up a bit without touching highlights).
paulc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 12:51 PM   #13
ISF Technician
 
d6500k's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Oregon
Age: 61
Posts: 1,720
Default

Quote:
It would be the "Highlight/Shadow" control from CS2 (for the unfamiliar, it allows one to control shadows and highlights separately, as in I can open shadows up a bit without touching highlights).
Some displays have contols in user and service that potentially act the same as the CS2.

These "gamma" controls boost or reduce portions of the black and white levels within specific IRE ranges. If used judiciously, some improvement may be attained.

ISF techs have generally had better response with the actual B/W controls in displays in lighting controled environments. We have found that displays in bright rooms, even with good B/W and gamma controls, cannot overcome errors introduced by driving the displays beyond their limits.

Long story short, to help critical viewing needs, control the ambient light then adjust for a good gamma curve.

First graph after calibration, second pre calibration which shows both blacks and whites clipped.

Good viewing,

Doug k
__________________
Serving Oregon and Southmost Texas.
Occasional tours to St. Petersburg/Tampa Fla.

www.6500kcalibrations.com

Last edited by d6500k; 12-01-2006 at 12:54 PM.
d6500k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 01:19 PM   #14
HT Frontiersman
 
borromini's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Chris
If I wanted "real", I'd walk outside. I prefer a slightly more saturated picture. I'd call it "perfectly saturated", while you might call it "slightly oversaturated"...
Good for you. Some of us prefer our displays to be windows to the outside world with all the realism that entails.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Chris
It's funny, recently, on another flat panel forum, one gentleman who obviously has much more experience with these things than I do, suggested a list of settings for my particular TV, a JVC LT-46FN97, which would give it the most natural picture, with the closest color to 6500K spectrum. So I tried it.... and while I don't doubt that this was probably the most natural, it also looked totally flat, boring, and lifeless to my eyes...
Well if he truly was experienced, he would know that suggesting settings without ever seeing the actual display is no different than a crap shoot. It means absolutely nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Chris
I suspect that their are at least a percentage of people who "secretly prefer" a more punchy, contrasty picture, as I do, but in the public eye, they think its "cooler" to hang with the all natural crowd...
Ah...another conspiracy theorist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Chris
...For myself on the other hand, I'm proud of being the outspoken, oddball out in left field :-) This is the story of my whole life, actually...
Isn't it awesome when you know yourself? Peace.
__________________
"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy"
borromini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2006, 08:23 PM   #15
What's all this, then?...
 
BobY's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,197
Default

Count me out of the conspiracy

I almost exclusively watch movies and I don't want them to appear as if I'm looking out a window. That isn't the director's intention in most cases, as they work closely with the cinematographer and set dresser to achieve a desired look.

Paradoxically, to me, the more realistic a drama looks, the more fake it looks--like I'm watching a play or live performance of the drama and not something actually happening. I also find this true of higher frame rates. The more the "presence" of the image begins to approach reality, the harder for me to suspend disbelief.

Last edited by BobY; 12-01-2006 at 08:26 PM.
BobY is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource > High Definition Viewing Mediums, HDTVs > Flat-Panel TVs
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:32 PM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2004 - 2008, High Def Forum