Anyone familiar with the X360 Samsung LCD?

[Master-Mold]

A Best Buy near me just got their X360 retail set-up in a couple days ago. The set-up looked really poor, I mean it was the bottom half of a kiosk with the LCD just sort of mounted on to the top of a shelf.

There was a pretty sizeable group of people around it watching CoD2 be played. After the pile of people dispersed I went to work on the LCD which was badly calibrated. I mean it couldnt have been worse if a blind monkey set it up. Just to clarify it was not even in widescreen mode and had 2" black borders on top and bottom and the image was squished.

After about a literal 15 minutes I got it looking good, I mean really good as if it were mine at home and I proceeded to finish the CoD2 demo. The LCD is a Samsung 23" that Best Buy and other retailers sell for $899 on sale. I was so impressed I am thinking about buying one, but other than some net reviews I wonder if any of you own it or have gamed on it for awhile in a home setting. After seeing Kameo and CoD2 looking very crisp in widescreen I want the same display.

I guess I could always run my X360 on my 22" NEC CRT monitor as planned or my 53" HDTV, but neither are widescreen and my Sony HDTV doesnt natively accept 720P so I fear it will look like poo.

Any help would be great:smile:

[Carl B]

Master-Mold... did you just start fiddling with this screen? I mean, did they just let you do that or are you related to the kiosks/stations somehow?

[Master-Mold]

I just went ahead and fixed it. :twisted:

It looked so bad and I wanted to get a real impression of the X360 the first time I used it. Im not kidding, it looked awful when I first got to it. Words cannot describe how bad...

Anyway the LCD wasnt mounted in a case or covered in any way. It was literally the same one they were selling on the other side of the store mounted on a shelf so the buttons on the right side were easy access. Lots of Best Buy employees walked by me but no one said anything. Alot of them were 17-ish kids and were probably scared to say anything.

[Carl B]

Well right yeah, wouldn't expect it *not* to be the same one afterall. ;)

Anyway I saw it set up at EBGames and I agree it looks a lot better than some of the other LCD TV's out there, but that being said, I just don't know - 23" @ $899 doesn't strike me as ideal personally. But then again I can't get Best Buy's website to work right now so I can't compare to the others I found (since I was recently looking).

[pegisys]

I'm thinking of getting one or the 26" version, you can find the 23" for $699 online

[london-boy]

I'm getting the 32" version soon enough so i'll post lots of impressions. Needless to say i'll play with it much more and better than bloody Walmart employees ever will.

Whenever i get the bloody thing!!

[Carl B]

I'm really very inches/$ oriented, and for myself I'm on a 52" HD projection TV. It's not going to be as crisp as newer LCD's, and it won't hang on your wall - but I have to tell you after going on two years now, it'd be hard to imagine something much smaller for my primary set.

For those looking into modern LCD sets, I would certainly urge that you acquire something on the larger end (as long as it's wallet comfortable). LCD's are still kind of expensive relative to where they'll be even a year from now, but if you go too small, then really it's more akin to a glorified monitor. Or, that's how I feel now, post 52"...

L-B's move I would say would be the most enticing one thus far in this thread. ;)

[Dural]

For those in the US looking into getting an LCD soon, wait till black friday as there should be some good deals. Sears will have a 32" LCD for $799 and I'm sure Best Buy, Circuit City, Fry's and probably CompUSA will have some on sale.

[Laa-Yosh]

I'm getting the 32" version soon enough so i'll post lots of impressions. Needless to say i'll play with it much more and better than bloody Walmart employees ever will.


Factory default settings have too much color and 100% sharpness turned on, which should be lowered. Then there's the dynamic contrast stuff, and of course you'd want YUV component cables instead of S-video. Prepare to abandon cheap DVD players as well ;)

[orfanotna]

The only thing that bugs me about these sets is WHY IN THE HELL ARE THEY 1366*768? Why not 1280*720 or 1280*768, or 1280*800, or one of the other resolutions that are much more useful ?

[OtakingGX]

The only thing that bugs me about these sets is WHY IN THE HELL ARE THEY 1366*768? Why not 1280*720 or 1280*768, or 1280*800, or one of the other resolutions that are much more useful ?Because 16:9 widescreen is the new 4:3? It's the standard cinematic widescreen format that makers settled on.

[orfanotna]

Because 16:9 widescreen is the new 4:3? It's the standard cinematic widescreen format that makers settled on.

No it's not. The standard format is 1280*720 (the other one is 1920*1080). If you're making a fixed-res HDTV set, why not use an actual HD resolution as the native resolution?

[london-boy]

The only thing that bugs me about these sets is WHY IN THE HELL ARE THEY 1366*768? Why not 1280*720 or 1280*768, or 1280*800, or one of the other resolutions that are much more useful ?

Because that retains PC's 768 vertical lines typical of the 1024x768 resolution but in a widescreen ratio.
It doesn't change much if anything when watching a 720p source, in fact it might give the set some space to do some mojo with its internal image processing system and make the image potentially better (in some cases it's the same, but i've never heard of a 1366x768 set producing "bad" 720p images)

[orfanotna]

Because that retains PC's 768 vertical lines typical of the 1024x768 resolution but in a widescreen ratio.
It doesn't change much if anything when watching a 720p source, in fact it might give the set some space to do some mojo with its internal image processing system and make the image potentially better (in some cases it's the same, but i've never heard of a 1366x768 set producing "bad" 720p images)

Yes, I've heard the "768 lines" argument a million times and it's stupid IMO. First of all, PCs can display all kinds of resolutions, my laptop screen is 1280*800 and it works just fine, I'm sure 1280*768 would work just fine too. Secondly, this is a TV not a monitor, so why not optimize it for TV viewing? Thirdly, I've never heard of a TV/monitor internal scaler that produced IQ better than the native resolution. That's usually the realm of standalone scalers (that would cost at least as much as the TV itself) and HTPCs.

[Bill]

I noticed it seems most Best Buy sets are the 1366X768

I think it seems to be the future trend, one way or another, not something that's phasing out.

[orfanotna]

I noticed it seems most Best Buy sets are the 1366X768

I think it seems to be the future trend, one way or another, not something that's phasing out.

Most of them are that res because most of them are using the same panel.

[london-boy]

Yes, I've heard the "768 lines" argument a million times and it's stupid IMO. First of all, PCs can display all kinds of resolutions, my laptop screen is 1280*800 and it works just fine, I'm sure 1280*768 would work just fine too. Secondly, this is a TV not a monitor, so why not optimize it for TV viewing? Thirdly, I've never heard of a TV/monitor internal scaler that produced IQ better than the native resolution. That's usually the realm of standalone scalers (that would cost at least as much as the TV itself) and HTPCs.




Well if it's stupid for you, fair enough. Not gonna try to convince you otherwise other than say there are reasons why they have that resolution, but it seems you're awfully opinionated already without knowing much.

[orfanotna]

Well if it's stupid for you, fair enough. Not gonna try to convince you otherwise other than say there are reasons why they have that resolution, but it seems you're awfully opinionated already without knowing much.

So enlighten me then, which of my points are wrong. And yes, there are reasons to have that res, but I think it creates more problems than it solves.

[london-boy]

So enlighten me then, which of my points are wrong. And yes, there are reasons to have that res, but I think it creates more problems than it solves.


What problems does it create if i may ask?

Your proposed resolutions of 1280x800 or 1280x768 are NOT 16:9 so they would create problems.

1280x720 is lower than 1366x768 so for computer work (most LCD tvs have PC inputs to work with PCs) the latter is preferred.

[Master-Mold]

I have read the X360 is supposed to have a really good internal scaler. Does anyone have a clue how the picture would look running on a 22" CRT that is NOT widescreen?

I am a stickler on visual integrity and I dont want a distorted image or some cruddy scaling.

[ERP]

I have read the X360 is supposed to have a really good internal scaler. Does anyone have a clue how the picture would look running on a 22" CRT that is NOT widescreen?

I am a stickler on visual integrity and I dont want a distorted image or some cruddy scaling.

There is no requirement for a Xenon title to support 4:3, and in that case the internal scaler will letterbax the output which would be the equivalent of being supersampled.

Having said that I would expect the vast majority of titles to support 4:3 natively.

[orfanotna]

What problems does it create if i may ask?

Unnecessary scaling in just about every situation.

Your proposed resolutions of 1280x800 or 1280x768 are NOT 16:9 so they would create problems.

Yes, you'll have thin black bars 24 pixels high each at the top and bottom of the screen (in case of 1280*768). If that's the price you pay for an unscaled image, I'm all for it.

1280x720 is lower than 1366x768 so for computer work (most LCD tvs have PC inputs to work with PCs) the latter is preferred.

This one I agree with, except that a) most people don't use TVs as monitors, and b) the 1024*768 res you get is much too low for just about any type of PC work.

[Master-Mold]

There is no requirement for a Xenon title to support 4:3, and in that case the internal scaler will letterbax the output which would be the equivalent of being supersampled.

Having said that I would expect the vast majority of titles to support 4:3 natively.

Good to know, thanks.

[robofunk]

Just so people know a representative from Bizarre Creations has said they think the Samsungs look best when hooked up with the VGA cable. The component cables come free with the system though.

[aeriic]

I'm getting the 32" version soon enough so i'll post lots of impressions. Needless to say i'll play with it much more and better than bloody Walmart employees ever will.

Whenever i get the bloody thing!!

Are you referring to the Sammy LN-R328W (http://product.samsung.com/cgi-bin/nabc/product/b2c_product_detail.jsp?eUser=&prod_id=LNR328WX%2fXAA) model?

Recently, I almost purchased the LN-R329D (http://product.samsung.com/cgi-bin/nabc/product/b2c_product_detail.jsp?eUser=&prod_id=LNR329DX%2fXAA) which has a similar screen, only it has a lower response time and it includes an ATSC (OTA) tuner. There's also a LN-R3228W (http://product.samsung.com/cgi-bin/nabc/product/b2c_product_detail.jsp?eUser=&prod_id=LNR3228WX%2fXAA) model which seems to be the all-black version of the LN-R328W. The picture on these screens is, indeed, very good. I visited BB several times to take a look. :wink: The reason I held off on the purchase, is that apparently the LN-R329D has some issues with ghosting when it comes to gaming (according to several hands-on reviews at avsforum). This is even with the display's 8ms response time. There's speculation that this may be due to the DNIe processing that it does on the picture.

So after holding off for a while, I started eyeing the Sony KDL-V32XBR1 BRAVIA (http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?ProductSKU=KDLV32XBR1&Dept=tvvideo&CategoryName=tv_flatpanel_26%22to42%22) which does seem to have superior picture and (apparently) no ghosting problems. Of course there's a catch. As usual, the Sony XBR model is about $400 more expensive than the Sammy. This brings it into the low $2000 range which is at the top of my budget. I figure: if I'm going to spend this amount of cash for a display, I might as well wait a couple more months and get a next-generation 37" 1080p display (which should also be in the same price range), or get the XBR at a lower price.

BB already has a 37" 1080p display by Westinghouse (LVM-37w1 (http://www.westinghousedigital.com/pc-26-3-37-lcd-video-monitor.aspx)) in the $1600 range, which is a steal. The catch: this model will soon be discontinued and be replaced by a better version. This is one of the very first 1080p displays of this size, so maybe something didn't go as planned...

[dubyateeeff]

The only thing that bugs me about these sets is WHY IN THE HELL ARE THEY 1366*768? Why not 1280*720 or 1280*768, or 1280*800, or one of the other resolutions that are much more useful ?

From what I read a few months back because it was cheaper to go from XGA to WideXGA (WXGA) than to create an all new panel, and its seems they just continued with that... (not that it makes any sense to me at all. But now that they started they probably wont stop because of cost and because regular consumers probably wont buy "a low res 720p TV" when you can get "a high res 1366 TV". They should market 720p as true HD...)

XGA = 1024*768 (4:3)
WXGA = 1366*768 (16:9 ish)

I dont think Ill bother with a WXGA screen and rather wait out for a good TV with true 720p. Not like most TVs has good scalers anyway... (And PC support for 1366 isnt that good, some gfx cards outputs 1365 as the closest resolution (which may or may not be scaled IIRC) and of course all TVs doesnt support that high input resolutions anyway but limits the input to 1024 (which is scaled)).

Oh and... (not that anyone will notice it but...)
1366/768=1,778645833...
16/9=1,77...
1280/720 =1,77...

EDIT: rephrased and clarified

[pascal]

Master-Mold

Probably the Samsung 23" LCD HDTV you saw was a 12ms panel. Did you saw any blur?
Samsung has 8ms panels too.
Some new Samsung HDTV have problems with 720p sources and need a firmware upgrade: http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=241782

Also Sony has 2 new HDTV series (S and V) which use the same 8ms Samsung panels but with different embedded electronics.

[Master-Mold]

Master-Mold

Probably the Samsung 23" LCD HDTV you saw was a 12ms panel. Did you saw any blur?
Samsung has 8ms panels too.
Some new Samsung HDTV have problems with 720p sources and need a firmware upgrade: http://www.avforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=241782

Also Sony has 2 new HDTV series (S and V) which use the same 8ms Samsung panels but with different embedded electronics.

It was the 12MS one.

This one to be exact:http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7135771&type=product&id=1110265593688

No ghosting or blur playing CoD2 or Kameo.

[pascal]

Thanks for the info :)

From newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16889102021

[Fafalada]

There's speculation that this may be due to the DNIe processing that it does on the picture. You can disable the DNI.
At any rate, I bought one a couple of weeks back cuz I got a price offer that I couldn't really resist (I actually wanted a 40" model but they were already sold out). Anyway I didn't really notice ghosting problems so far - though I haven't tried many games on it yet.

Picture quality is nice though, as far as LCDs go, it's tough to beat IMO, though I was surprised these LCD tvs aren't as good with viewing angles as latest PC screens. (the viewing angle changes are similar to that of SXRDs).

I dont think Ill bother with a WXGA screen and rather wait out for a good TV with true 720p. That might be a long wait :P Pretty much every recent PDP/LCD I've looked at is WXGA. It might be better off just getting a 1080P display, PDPs are starting to support it, I figure it won't be long before bigger LCDs do.

[Carl B]

So after holding off for a while, I started eyeing the Sony KDL-V32XBR1 BRAVIA (http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?ProductSKU=KDLV32XBR1&Dept=tvvideo&CategoryName=tv_flatpanel_26%22to42%22) which does seem to have superior picture and (apparently) no ghosting problems. Of course there's a catch. As usual, the Sony XBR model is about $400 more expensive than the Sammy. This brings it into the low $2000 range which is at the top of my budget. I figure: if I'm going to spend this amount of cash for a display, I might as well wait a couple more months and get a next-generation 37" 1080p display (which should also be in the same price range), or get the XBR at a lower price.


The Bravia's are amazing, it's hard to deny.

[aeriic]

You can disable the DNI.
At any rate, I bought one a couple of weeks back cuz I got a price offer that I couldn't really resist (I actually wanted a 40" model but they were already sold out). Anyway I didn't really notice ghosting problems so far - though I haven't tried many games on it yet.

Picture quality is nice though, as far as LCDs go, it's tough to beat IMO, though I was surprised these LCD tvs aren't as good with viewing angles as latest PC screens. (the viewing angle changes are similar to that of SXRDs).

It's good that you have the choice of disabling it. Apparently this isn't an option on some of the newer Sammy sets. And I agree, the picture quality is very good for what you're paying. Hopefully my Dell LCD can hold me off for a little while. :???: I have an old 27" CRT TV that's itching to be handed down.

The Bravia's are amazing, it's hard to deny.

And it would look so nice in my room... :wink:

[Fafalada]

It's good that you have the choice of disabling it. Apparently this isn't an option on some of the newer Sammy sets.
I wonder why they'd do that hmm... Anyway it's interesting to observe the changes when you disable it. My LN-R329D also has some other 'auto' adjusting options available, such as auto-volume and auto-colorbalance (or something similar, I forgot exact name of the feature).
The volume thing can be nifty if you're in a building with noise sensitive neighbours - though personally I don't use it.

And I agree, the picture quality is very good for what you're paying. Hopefully my Dell LCD can hold me off for a little while.
Is it the 2405FPW? That's a great panel as well, I was very close to buying one earlier this year. Just can't decide if I want wide screen for my desktop or not...

[aeriic]

Is it the 2405FPW? That's a great panel as well, I was very close to buying one earlier this year. Just can't decide if I want wide screen for my desktop or not...

Na... As much as I tried to, I just couldn't justify replacing my 2001FP with the 2405FPW. My 2001 is pretty big, and I can imagine the 2405 must be enormous. Dell has some great deals with the 2405 sometimes. What makes you unsure about the widescreen? Personally, I wouldn't mind the extra real estate for when I'm working with two or more apps... Although the 2001 isn't too shabby in that area either.

[DeanA]

Is it the 2405FPW? That's a great panel as well, I was very close to buying one earlier this year. Just can't decide if I want wide screen for my desktop or not...
I was tempted to get a 2405FPW too.. the panel is great (in VGA/DVI mode), but when using the component inputs I noticed it had a tendency to overscan the image on the left & right.. cutting around 20 pixels off each edge (when given a 1280x720p image).. Is the same on all the units I've seen (and even on the cheaper Dell LCD TV's).. No amount of playing with the image settings sorted it out (even when zoomed/shifted using the Dell's setting, the clipping was still present).. So, in the end I bailed.. :(

As it is, I'll probably wait for PC panels to appear with HDCP support, given that everyone's going to be locking down their content over the next few years..

[DeanA]

The Bravia's are amazing, it's hard to deny.
I picked up the UK equivalent of the KDL-V32XBR1 (KDL-V32A12U) a few weeks ago.. it's a great set (only gripe would be that the audio is a little weak) so now I just need to get some HD content on it. I've still got my fingers crossed that my X360 shows up this year.. although that's sounding less likely by the day..

[Shifty Geezer]

What problems does it create if i may ask?How do the scalers handle fidelity? A single pixel on1280x720 would 'bleed' into adjacent pixels when scaled. Some pixels will alos be upscaled to positions between native pixel. eg. A white pixel at position 141 horizontally surrounded by black pixels would match perfectly onto a 1280x720 display. On an upscaled 1366x768 display this pixel would appear at (13661280)*141 = c. 150.5. That's halfway between pixels 150 and 151. You're not going to get a crisp white dot, unless they shift the pixel either side, but that means adding (an admittedly tiny) distortion.

Every upscaler (PC image based) I've ever seen loses a degree of fidelity when upscaling. I guess that doesn't show on movie content where the images don't come with that level of fidelity, but it probably will show on computer generated console content. I would expect the upscaled image to lose sharpness over the native 720p image. Something I'd be interested to witness.

And regards 1366x768 being better for computers, I presume the computers being attached are MCEs. As has been said computers can be set to output any old resolution; with programmable clocks I'd have thought 1280x720p wouldn't matter. Then if you're showing content on the TV the computer is scaling it. HD content is 720p so doesn't fit natively.

Basically, if the content is always going to be 720p whether it's off an HD optical disk or a downloaded movie stored on a MCD HDD, then a native 720p display makes sense, no? If no-one's ever going to release 768p content and the PC's can work fine without I don't see any point meself. Save dubyateeeff's explanation it's cheaper and easier.

[ihamoitc2005]

A Best Buy near me just got their X360 retail set-up in a couple days ago. The set-up looked really poor, I mean it was the bottom half of a kiosk with the LCD just sort of mounted on to the top of a shelf.

There was a pretty sizeable group of people around it watching CoD2 be played. After the pile of people dispersed I went to work on the LCD which was badly calibrated. I mean it couldnt have been worse if a blind monkey set it up. Just to clarify it was not even in widescreen mode and had 2" black borders on top and bottom and the image was squished.

After about a literal 15 minutes I got it looking good, I mean really good as if it were mine at home and I proceeded to finish the CoD2 demo. The LCD is a Samsung 23" that Best Buy and other retailers sell for $899 on sale. I was so impressed I am thinking about buying one, but other than some net reviews I wonder if any of you own it or have gamed on it for awhile in a home setting. After seeing Kameo and CoD2 looking very crisp in widescreen I want the same display.

I guess I could always run my X360 on my 22" NEC CRT monitor as planned or my 53" HDTV, but neither are widescreen and my Sony HDTV doesnt natively accept 720P so I fear it will look like poo.

Any help would be great:smile:

I suggest you purchase 32" wide-screen HD-ready LCD TV for same price as available on many sites.

[london-boy]

Shifty, the problem i believe is the fact that 720p panels (and therefore all the funny 1366x768 ones) are somehow a "stop-gap" solution till we get fully HD panels with 1920x1080 resolution.
Those panels will all have the same 1920x1080 resolution, with no strange things "in between" because that's the top resolution and that's it. Well, until they start pushing even higher resolutions but that will take some time.

The problem with LCD HDTVs is that there were 2 routes they came from and were targetted for, one was movies and one was PCs.

It's logical that the sets should be 1280x720, making things easier for everyone, but i think the whole situation of being "in between SD and FULL HD" makes it possible to have strange scenarios in between.

In the end these sets work mighty fine with 720p sources, with no problem whatsoever with regards to 1:1 pixel mapping. When downscaling 1080i/p material, they have the potential to show more detail than native 1280x720p sets because they have 127488 pixels more to pack detail in. Hardly a big difference i know, but that's one of the "reasons" the manufacturers come up with.

Other than that, it's just one of those things we shouldn't question too much, much like the decision to keeep the 50/60Hz divide even in new HDTVs, which thankfully can display both (or they wouldn't have the HD-Ready logo on them).

[Fafalada]

What makes you unsure about the widescreen? Personally, I wouldn't mind the extra real estate for when I'm working with two or more apps... Although the 2001 isn't too shabby in that area either.
Well, I already have a 20.1 which is pretty nicely sized - 24 basically just adds some horizontal area, it's not that much of a difference. And with the prices good 20" screens go for these days I might be better off to get another one of those instead of one 24".

Granted with the way 2405 price has been falling it might not be long before it won't matter if I get THAT as the extra display :)

but when using the component inputs I noticed it had a tendency to overscan the image on the left & right.. cutting around 20 pixels off each edge (when given a 1280x720p image).. Is the same on all the units I've seen (and even on the cheaper Dell LCD TV's).. No amount of playing with the image settings sorted it out (even when zoomed/shifted using the Dell's setting, the clipping was still present)..
Hmm, that is indeed odd. Could it be that the scaler gets screwy at that res? Anyway, I also read somewhere that you can only get 720P via component inputs on this screen, not that I would really plan to use it as TV.

[Carl B]

I picked up the UK equivalent of the KDL-V32XBR1 (KDL-V32A12U) a few weeks ago.. it's a great set (only gripe would be that the audio is a little weak) so now I just need to get some HD content on it. I've still got my fingers crossed that my X360 shows up this year.. although that's sounding less likely by the day..

Hey that's awesome - I don't suppose you guys get any sort of discount on those sets do you? I really have felt compelled by the Bravias, but as my initial post stated I don't see myself leaving my current projection set anytime soon, even though the picture quality on those Bravia's is super-impressive. Also I wish you luck in getting your 360 sometime soon-ish. For my part I'm glad that the employees of SCEE are willing to give a competitors product a full sampling; afterall it can only get the ideas swirling in those heads of yours all the more, right? :)

On the side, what games are you most looking forward to at the moment?

[DeanA]

Hey that's awesome - I don't suppose you guys get any sort of discount on those sets do you?
Yeah.. pretty good staff discount. Managed to pick it up for £1100.. :D
For my part I'm glad that the employees of SCEE are willing to give a competitors product a full sampling
I've had most of the consoles that have been out since I was a kid. The best games are spread out pretty evenly across the current 3 units (GC/XBox/PS2), and so I go where the good games are..
On the side, what games are you most looking forward to at the moment?
Hmm... Shadow Of The Colossus has got to be a must-buy title (when it's out in PAL territories). I'm currently playing the PS2 version of RE4, which is genius. For the 360, I've got PGR3 on order, but - strangely - I'm more interested in playing Geometry Wars 2.. Oblivion looks pretty nifty, as do some of the titles on Xbox Live Arcade.

---
Opinions I share here are my own, and should not be incorrectly interpreted as the views of SCEE, SCE, or Sony Corporation.

[london-boy]

All Sony employees get discounts on hardware. Another member here works for Sony here in London. Not a programmer, he manages the PAL games conversions business. Won't say who it is and he doesn't post very often. But basically he offered lots of stuff with cool discounts (i think it's a standard 20%? Not sure). PSP's and other things. Shame i was broke at the time and still today! :lol:

[rabidrabbit]

I'd like to hear from you people who have LCD TV's, how does your set handle black when viewed in a dark room.

I have a crappy Hyundai 17" 4:3 monitor/TV and in the daytime it looks ok, but at dark the blacks appear very washed out.

Are the "real" LCD TV's better in this respect?

[Carl B]

Yeah.. pretty good staff discount. Managed to pick it up for £1100.. :D

Psssh! That *is* good! :)

I've had most of the consoles that have been out since I was a kid. The best games are spread out pretty evenly across the current 3 units (GC/XBox/PS2), and so I go where the good games are..

Can't argue with that philosophy - just be sure to syphon off and expand on some of those cool ideas you might come across! (though I know you're not on the direct development side of things)

Hmm... Shadow Of The Colossus has got to be a must-buy title (when it's out in PAL territories). I'm currently playing the PS2 version of RE4, which is genius. For the 360, I've got PGR3 on order, but - strangely - I'm more interested in playing Geometry Wars 2.. Oblivion looks pretty nifty, as do some of the titles on Xbox Live Arcade.

Well I just meant on the 360 really, but I can't argue with your current PS2 choices either.

[jvd]

meh , the 27inch will be 500$ by june :-) mark my workds :-)

[london-boy]

I'd like to hear from you people who have LCD TV's, how does your set handle black when viewed in a dark room.

I have a crappy Hyundai 17" 4:3 monitor/TV and in the daytime it looks ok, but at dark the blacks appear very washed out.

Are the "real" LCD TV's better in this respect?

Even today, the best LCDs shouldn't be viewed in completely dark rooms. there should always be a light on, even faint.
Philip's Ambilight might sound gimmicky but it really makes such a huge difference i would buy one in a heartbeat if i had the money.
By Q1 2006 Philips LCDs will have 2 new technologies which will greatly improve on LCD's flaws, blacks and motion blur. They have licensed the tech so other manufacturers will be taking advantage of them.

Eventually we'll have HDR LCD displays at decent prices. Before that we will have SED's. Both will have great blacks and much improved image quality.

It all depends on how much you want to wait, in the end if we keep waiting for "the next big thing" we will never buy anything.

[london-boy]

Are you referring to the Sammy LN-R328W (http://product.samsung.com/cgi-bin/nabc/product/b2c_product_detail.jsp?eUser=&prod_id=LNR328WX%2fXAA) model?

Missed that.

Yes that's the model i think. It has a different model number in the UK, it's called the LE32R51BDX, but it's the same model save from the SCART connections which i don't think are in the US version and will never be used by me anyway, and a Freeview tuner which will be different from the US version, which i guess has a HD tuner included instead (Europe don't have HD broadcasts over terrestrial aerials)

[MrWibble]

(Europe don't have HD broadcasts over terrestrial aerials)

Trials might begin in London next year for that...

[london-boy]

Trials might begin in London next year for that...

I KNOW!! I'm in posh and expensive Islington so i DEMAND good services and will do anything to be on the trial!! Can you say WORLD CUP IN HD!!! :shock:

[ihamoitc2005]

I'd like to hear from you people who have LCD TV's, how does your set handle black when viewed in a dark room.

I have a crappy Hyundai 17" 4:3 monitor/TV and in the daytime it looks ok, but at dark the blacks appear very washed out.

Are the "real" LCD TV's better in this respect?

I use a 32 Inch Hyundai 16:9 wide-screen LCD manufactured by LG. Contrast ratio rating is 1000:1, response time is 8ms, and black reproduction is best I have seen from LCD monitors but resolution is only 1366x768.

Specs are here. Perhaps some other sites have even lower price.

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1457786&Sku=H54-3202

[seismologist]

23" is pretty small. If you plan to use it for anything that's not widescreen there will be black bars on the sides and your viewing area goes down to like 17"

I had this problem with Morrowind on Xbox my 32" HDTV was just too small to read the text from across the room.

[london-boy]

23" is pretty small. If you plan to use it for anything that's not widescreen there will be black bars on the sides and your viewing area goes down to like 17"

I had this problem with Morrowind on Xbox my 32" HDTV was just too small to read the text from across the room.

23 or 32???

It all depends on the viewing distance really, but 32" is hardly small...

[Smak]

In the end these sets work mighty fine with 720p sources, with no problem whatsoever with regards to 1:1 pixel mapping. When downscaling 1080i/p material, they have the potential to show more detail than native 1280x720p sets because they have 127488 pixels more to pack detail in. Hardly a big difference i know, but that's one of the "reasons" the manufacturers come up with.

Assuming you are refering to LCD's with a native 1366x768 resolution will have 1:1 pixel mapping from 720p input sources? How will this work, black border to reduce resolution?

When using my 19" Samsung LCD monitor (1280x1024) with DVI connection I can run different resolutions but lock pixel mapping so 1024x768 would have borders around it not scaled to fit screen.

[london-boy]

Assuming you are refering to LCD's with a native 1366x768 resolution will have 1:1 pixel mapping from 720p input sources? How will this work, black border to reduce resolution?

When using my 19" Samsung LCD monitor (1280x1024) with DVI connection I can run different resolutions but lock pixel mapping so 1024x768 would have borders around it not scaled to fit screen.

Well, i'm pretty sure 1366x768 panels always scale the 720p image to fit the screen. I don't think there is an option to have a black canvas around the image so as to have 1:1 pixel mapping. Or at least, the option is not there on most LCDs cause i've never heard of such an option.
All this panic over native 720p or 1366x768 is very unnecessary, these sets handle 720p images like a bloody charm.

[Master-Mold]

Well, i'm pretty sure 1366x768 panels always scale the 720p image to fit the screen. I don't think there is an option to have a black canvas around the image so as to have 1:1 pixel mapping. Or at least, the option is not there on most LCDs cause i've never heard of such an option.
All this panic over native 720p or 1366x768 is very unnecessary, these sets handle 720p images like a bloody charm.

I specifically remember after I adjusted the Samsung in Best Buy to Widescreen mode there was little if any black borders or empty screen space. When I first got there it was set to "Panoramic View" and there were about 2" borders, but after my adjusting it looked woderful.

In other words it seemed very happy to be running at 720P and the image seemed no worse. As a matter of fact it looked damned good and was using almost every bit of the screen for the image. I hate black borders and I would have noticed if there were any.

[london-boy]

I specifically remember after I adjusted the Samsung in Best Buy to Widescreen mode there was little if any black borders or empty screen space. When I first got there it was set to "Panoramic View" and there were about 2" borders, but after my adjusting it looked woderful.

In other words it seemed very happy to be running at 720P and the image seemed no worse. As a matter of fact it looked damned good and was using almost every bit of the screen for the image. I hate black borders and I would have noticed if there were any.


Heh that's what i've been saying all along!!! :grin:

[MrWibble]

Well, i'm pretty sure 1366x768 panels always scale the 720p image to fit the screen. I don't think there is an option to have a black canvas around the image so as to have 1:1 pixel mapping. Or at least, the option is not there on most LCDs cause i've never heard of such an option.
All this panic over native 720p or 1366x768 is very unnecessary, these sets handle 720p images like a bloody charm.

Actually for FWIW, I dislike the fact that the image is not the "correct" resolution - it's quite noticeable (to me) that the image has been scaled.

Both my plasma and LCD tvs are this resolution, and it's something I've basically just had to accept.

In the case of DVD playback or watching TV I don't really care too much - the sources are lower-resolution and rarely have such an abundance of sharp detail that I need to see pixel-accurately. It doesn't concern me overly regarding PS2 stuff either, as that's also relatively low-res and although the picture I get from scaling it isn't pin-sharp, I can live with it.

I've even shelled out for a reasonably expensive external video scaler to make sure I'm getting the best possible picture, so it's something I do want to be as good as possible.

However with next-gen games I think it's going to bother me - I know it bothers me at work that most of the screens are not correctly set up.

If/when 1080p becomes the norm and both TVs and devices to connect to them support it natively, I'll be looking to upgrade.

It's just unfortunate (but necessary) that we have to go through a generation of devices that all have fairly random support for different "HD" modes while we wait for the market to stabilise.

[macabre]

From the 768res LCDs Philips have probably the best quality in scaling. I guess the Loewes are nice as well but also pricey.
Has anybody seen the BenQ DV3750 (http://benqsenseye.com/SenseyeProduct/Display/DV3750.htm) which has 1080res ? I`ve seen them in online shops for €1300 and I wonder how the quality is. There is also a 1080 set from Acer on the way.

[london-boy]

From the 768res LCDs Philips have probably the best quality in scaling. I guess the Loewes are nice as well but also pricey.
Has anybody seen the BenQ DV3750 (http://benqsenseye.com/SenseyeProduct/Display/DV3750.htm) which has 1080res ? I`ve seen them in online shops for €1300 and I wonder how the quality is. There is also a 1080 set from Acer on the way.

The Philips 37" 9830 is also a 1080 display. Amazing set but SO much more expensive than the competition, they make Sony look cheap.

[pipo]

In other words it seemed very happy to be running at 720P and the image seemed no worse. As a matter of fact it looked damned good and was using almost every bit of the screen for the image.

Just watched 3 different X360 pods using the full screen and I can only second this. It looks fab. I was looking for bleeding in the text (CoD2) but there was absolutely no problem at all: the picture is very sharp.

I still would like to see a native 1280x720 screen though, just to compare it. Problem is, over here there's no LCD with that rez to be found. Only beamers...

[randycat99]

Every upscaler (PC image based) I've ever seen loses a degree of fidelity when upscaling. I guess that doesn't show on movie content where the images don't come with that level of fidelity, but it probably will show on computer generated console content. I would expect the upscaled image to lose sharpness over the native 720p image. Something I'd be interested to witness.

I suspect this fidelity loss (or "scaler artifact", if you prefer) also manifests itself as a degree of "milky" characteristic added to the image (much like as if a subtle translucent white "layer" that has been added to the scene).

[Kill_Jade]

i saw the kiosk today and the tv looked pretty damn sweet. probably would look even better when properly calibrated.

but umm this is a little OT: anyone here in contact with Marconelly!? i really need to talk to him....

[Fox5]

Does 360 have just a VGA out cable or does it have a DVI cable as well? What resolutions can the VGA cable output? I know 720p is the standard for xbox games, but many PC LCD monitors cannot natively do that, they would need a higher res image(such as 1280x1024) with black borders. Is the focus of the VGA cable just for TVs with VGA inputs, or will Microsoft remember all the people with LCD monitors (of all sorts of odd resolutions, from 800x600 to 1600x1200) and their scaling needs?

[emacs]

No it's not. The standard format is 1280*720 (the other one is 1920*1080). If you're making a fixed-res HDTV set, why not use an actual HD resolution as the native resolution?

the 16 : 9 aspect is 1.778. 1366 divided by 768 is 1.778 but 1280 divided by 720 is 1.778 as well. it should be noted (probably again) that the vast majority of panels are manufactured by only three companies who, for some reason, use 768 lines.

[emacs]

Well, i'm pretty sure 1366x768 panels always scale the 720p image to fit the screen.
the Aquos line of LCDs from Sharp have several scaling options. i purchased the LC26D5U a few months ago (before it was replaced by the D4 and D6) and the panel displays 1.78, 1.85 and 2.35 images very well indeed.

[Shifty Geezer]

Now, see, scaling. That's another pet hate I have with it. Since widescreen TVs appeared here in Old Blighty, people watch deformed TV. Most broadcasts are either 4:3 or 14:9, but TV's 'Smart' scaling always goes full screen, so people are rendered fat. Yet most users don't correct this and just watch it. And then when there is a 16:9 broadcast sometimes the aspect signal is lost or something and it's letterboxed on all sides, but people can't figure out which button to press (mothers mostly I guess!). All these variations are bad for people. They add confusion and drop average quality. If they want to make a change do it properly. Make sure the end user doesn't have to press a Zoom button to select the right aspect. It's not a difficult technology. It'd only need a bit of agreement. Seems to me technology 'progress'= big fat mess for 10-20 years while dumb shmucks try to get their act together!

[scooby_dooby]

My Hitachi is excellent, it knows when you get HD and automatically switches to 16:9, on 4:3 signal it stretches horizontally very slightly, and crops a little off the top and bottom for a nice fullscreen image with no fat people.

So, some TV's are 'smarter' than others.

[PiNkY]

Even if you had a 1280*720 panel you'd still not get a 1:1 pixel mapping on analog sources because of overscan.

[MrWibble]

Now, see, scaling. That's another pet hate I have with it. Since widescreen TVs appeared here in Old Blighty, people watch deformed TV. Most broadcasts are either 4:3 or 14:9, but TV's 'Smart' scaling always goes full screen, so people are rendered fat. Yet most users don't correct this and just watch it. And then when there is a 16:9 broadcast sometimes the aspect signal is lost or something and it's letterboxed on all sides, but people can't figure out which button to press (mothers mostly I guess!). All these variations are bad for people. They add confusion and drop average quality. If they want to make a change do it properly. Make sure the end user doesn't have to press a Zoom button to select the right aspect. It's not a difficult technology. It'd only need a bit of agreement. Seems to me technology 'progress'= big fat mess for 10-20 years while dumb shmucks try to get their act together!

I agree with you - but most of the problem is with the broadcasters and not the TV manufacturers. A lot of them just broadcast stuff in the wrong aspect ratio either by accident or possibly incompetence/inexperience.

Sometimes they even letterbox or pillarbox the picture at source and broadcast it non-anamorphically. It's great when they show a widescreen movie letterbox it to 4:3 ratio and then my widescreen TV pillarboxes the picture so that I'm watching a postage stamp with a huge black border all the way around...

Admitedly my parents TV was setup wrong when they first got it and I had to set it to auto-change the aspect, but it still gets it wrong a lot because the broadcasters screw up.

[MrWibble]

Even if you had a 1280*720 panel you'd still not get a 1:1 pixel mapping on analog sources because of overscan.

Which is really annoying because if you use analog VGA it can perfectly match the signal up to the pixels, so I really don't get why component can't do exactly the same. Strikes me that overscan is just a hangover from the bad-old-days of broadcasting and really should have been shot in the head with HD.

It's true though - if I output the same 1280x720 picture on both component and VGA to the same monitor, VGA is pixel perfect and component is a scaled, offset, overscanned mess... it's not even at the proper aspect ratio anymore either...

Fortunately for my home system everything in the signal path is digital until it gets turned into light.

[emacs]

Now, see, scaling. That's another pet hate I have with it. Since widescreen TVs appeared here in Old Blighty, people watch deformed TV
there are some media (DVD films for example) that do send the appropriate signal to the display device which results in the correct aspect ratio. i have several films on DVD that do this. i don't think this behaviour is a standard but if it were it's not followed by most. with my Sharp Aquous, i watch 1.33 content with 'sidebar'. with respect to 1.78, 1.85 or 2.35 it's either 'stretch' or 'zoom'. i think other LCD devices have similar viewing options.

[Shifty Geezer]

Maybe it's just the UK broadcasts that muck it up? DVD's tend to be okay. I think. I know anamorphics work correctly with autoselection by TV programmes don't. But that's the same for Digital Cable as well as Caveman technology.

[MrWibble]

Maybe it's just the UK broadcasts that muck it up? DVD's tend to be okay. I think. I know anamorphics work correctly with autoselection by TV programmes don't. But that's the same for Digital Cable as well as Caveman technology.

I'm getting a lot less problems these days than I used to, so maybe they're getting the hang of it. My PC (driving my main display) is better at spotting changes to the aspect than my LCD TV though. It's like the TV (a similar model Samsung to the one in question) doesn't like it when the aspect changes a lot (for example, during the advert breaks) but it's fine if I flick the channels around.

DVDs do usually seem to get the aspect ratio right, but some are incorrectly flagged regarding the frame-rate. If you have a player that wants to reconstitute the fields back into a progressive picture it can't usually rely on the information in the stream and needs to work it out by analysing the picture.

None of this stuff should be all that difficult...