You didn't answer his question either!
I liked all of our answers. Maybe he didn't.
You didn't answer his question either!
It's your business what you like and if it's high-contrast, "eye-pop" you like, then go for it. If after a while you want to change it, then come back here and we'll give you thirty-eleven opinions about that too.
It's your business what you like and if it's high-contrast, "eye-pop" you like, then go for it. If after a while you want to change it, then come back here and we'll give you thirty-eleven opinions about that too.
And there are ignorant people all over the Internet posting on Forums, who think that they understand digital video technology, because they had 3rd grade arithmetic and know that 1920 is bigger than 1440. But since they are not video engineers, they can't understand that in some cases, 1440 looks better than 1920.1. there are constantly posts on forums all over the internet that Dish and Directv are producing HD Lite by starving bandwidth etc.. and people are complaining about picture quality etc...
I wouldn't trust consumer reports too much when it comes to electronics.
Their reviews make me laugh.
Unfortunately I have done research and you get conflicting reports on just about everything. As someone stated the question(s) still haven't been answered. If I follow the logic to the other answers I am getting, it's the lighting and they tweaked the tv's etc... than all or most of the tv's in best buy should look pretty much the same, i.e. same lighting etc... it seems as though it is a dirty word to say/admit that there is a difference in HD and no one wants to speak it. I remember a few years back they did one west wing episode where the picture was the sharpest clearest picture that anyone had ever seen on network tv, how it was done someone explained in the filming of it etc, . The boards were lit up about it and many purists dismissed it as being "too clear." I.E. no artistic value, no movie type little fuzzy dot things (brain fart as to what their called). Maybe it is just me but I can't understand why anytime clarity of a nice HD picture is brought up people seem to dismiss it. I thought that is what we were all looking for, the best, clearest, sharpest, life like, pristine picture we could find. I thought this was the so called "holy grail!?."
Thanks for the replys, however, I am well aware of tweaking, lighting etc...
This was more than just tweaking and lighting, this was set up on 3 different LCD tv's, 2 blue ray players, 1 HD DVD player. The Blu Ray players had the same demo Blu Ray dvd playing which was movie clips etc.. the same was with the HD DVD player, it was movie demo's etc...The clairity, color and pop was definately more than what I have seen. I understand currently this quality is only available with HD DVD and Blu Ray due to the band width and 1080p output to a capable tv. I am not hearing anyone say that the factors I mentioned will result in the pristine picture that was viewed
Factors
Contrast Ratio
1080p Output
1080p Capable TV
The Source Material (HD DVD, Blu Ray)
BTW my local best buy has a lot of incompetent workers who don't know the difference between 720p and 1080p. Even if was tweaked, so what, I want to know that when I upgrade my television that I can get such a great picture without having to bring my HD DVD setup in and hook it up.
Two factors that helped your eye popping experience are contrast ratio (you want a higher contrast ratio for best picture) and Sony. Sony never fails to look great in the home, also.
Reading this thread is the most fun I've had sober in months!
But as long as there is already a good sized pile of pennies in the pot here are my two:
Wild claim 1: Once you back away from a Plasma or LCD screen a sufficient distance *Visual Acuity* is THE limiting factor in "sharpness" of image so unless comparisons are done at a predetermined distance they aren't any more objective than a claim of which blond actress is the finest looking this year.
Wild claim B: Room illumination and background wall color can have a *huge* effect on apparent brightness and contrast so unless these variables are uniform comparisons are only somewhat informatory.
Wild claim III: "Perfect" video from the "best" TV camera will look "best" with TV settings that are not the same as those where cine conversions look "best". The TV adjusted for the perfect Superbowl game would yield a "better" picture if differently adjusted than if the TV was for peaked for the "best" movie picture.
But, hey, don't let me stop the fun! My TV *really is* better than yours!!!
And by the way, five guys told this guy he posted in the wrong forum but wouldn't let him know what the right forum is. Where should he have posted? I'd like to know so I don't make the same mistake.
A VIP722: $300.00.
A Saturday afternoon in a Satelliteguys forum:; Priceless!
Well as long as you are having fun, that's all that matters. However, you should do a little more homework because those claims are not as wild as you think.
Oops! When sarcasm fails it fails big. My "wild claims" are the ones I think are the best set of facts to guide anybodys choice of TVs. I used "wild claims" as a snipe at a lot of poster's claims and to downplay mine.
I apologize for being a lot snarkyer than was called for. But sometimes you just read something that starts a flood of things burning to get said. Next time I'll have two fingers of bourbon before I start typing. I'm always in a better mood then.
You're too far to personally do me any good but what price range do services like yours go for in southern California?Have your tv calibrated, if you're in D/FW metroplex, look me up, I'll help you out.
Ben Bassinger ISF