Quote:
Originally Posted by dtvmcdonald
I would not say that the color itself of the new flat screens is much better.
It is the basic light intensity curves, which are obvious in B&W. The perfection of gray scale if of course better too. That's because they are all adjustable ... but most people don't do it. And in many cases the default so-called "correct" setting is artificially far to dim (to match the default too-dim screens of movie theaters).
I can and have gotten my old Sony Bravia and my CT-100 to be essentially perfect matches by adjusting the Sony gamma to match that of the CT-100,
which is not ideal. IF you adjust the Sony to the correct gamma, you can get either mid-tone hues to match, or high-tone hues to match, but not both at once. This is with the Sony hues correct. I can do the same with my high-end Dell "Photoshop edit" monitor. This is with the one additional adjustment I added to my CT-100 color matrix, which gives complete control. The correct setting is within the standard resistor tolerances, but noticeably off the nominal value.
The difficult hues are in the yellow vs yellow-green and purple vs. violet areas.
|
And, in the transmissive displays, the color converges to gray at low light scenes due to light leakage (loses color space). Is more obvious when compare against OLED.
Granted is the better quality on newer panels, allied with 100-point adjusting and internal processing. But is amusing to compare that very refined and advanced device against a simple and humble CRT color TV using all tube tech... if we consider all differences, is a miracle the results achieved by the old techs