LCD Motion Blur - Options/Alternatives

[JohnnyMalaria]

Reluctantly I am probably going to have to get an HDTV soon. Problem is all of the ones I've seen are dreadful except a few. All LCD ones (even the latest and greatest 'LED' etc) have that dreaded motion blur which I am very sensitive to. Basically, I cannot watch any of the LCD TV in my local Best Buy. Only the plasmas are watchable but I need a 37" (or 32") display, not >40".

So, are there any decent 37" HDTVs that don't have that nauseating motion blur?

Thanks in advance...

[jagabo]

I'm not sure I agree with them, but according to Displaymate.com:

The conclusions from everyone that participated in the Shoot-Out were consistent across the board and will likely surprise most consumers: there was essentially no visually detectable motion blur on any of the LCD HDTVs in all of the extensive live video content that we assembled. When people thought they saw motion blur, with only a handful of minor exceptions, the blur was either in the source video or a temporary visual illusion that disappeared when the segments in question were reviewed....

After extensive side-by-side objective testing with moving test patterns, moving photographs and live video we found that there was no visually detectable difference in motion blur performance for current mid to top-of-the-line LCD HDTVs, regardless of their Response Time, 60 or 120 Hz refresh rates, strobed LED backlighting, or motion enhancement processing. While there was considerable motion blur in the moving test patterns, motion blur was simply not visually detectable in real live video content during our extensive side-by-side testing.

http://www.displaymate.com/LCD_Response_Time_ShootOut.htm

[johns0]

I have a Sanyo dp-37647 37 inch hdtv i bought last year and i dont notice any motion blur at all even in fast action sequences,the only thing i notice is the scan judder which all tvs show.

[jagabo]

The place where I see motion blur on LCDs is in sports like soccer. When the camera is still you see lots of small detail in the grass. When the camera starts moving most of that detail disappears, only to reappear again with the camera stops moving. Of course, this is all via a cable TV feed so I can't say for sure if the problem is in the LCD or the overly compressed source.

This can also be seen on people's faces. When they are still you see lots of small details but when the move, even just a little bit, all that detail disappears. Again, this is cable TV so it could be the over compression.

I've been meaning to make some test videos to deterimine if it's the LCD or the over compression...

[johns0]

I would say it over compression cause cable companies get really cheap with their bandwidth,right now i can only d/l anything at 200kB a sec max where they promise 2mB all the time.

[MOVIEGEEK]

This Panasonic is highly rated:
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-VIERA-TC-L37S1-37-Inch-1080p/dp/B001U3YIM2/ref=dp_cp_ob_e_title_0

<40" plasmas are difficult to find because Panasonic discontinued them, you can find 40-50" plasmas but their days are numbered as well.
My guess is by 2012 the only plasmas you can get are 50"+ due to energy consumption.

[fritzi93]

When the camera starts moving most of that detail disappears, only to reappear again with the camera stops moving.

I was on the point of starting a thread to ask about that. Comcast HD cable here.

It's only noticeable occasionally. Just the other day, to relate the most egregious example, I was watching "Sunrise Earth" on my 42" plasma. Mostly the cameras are still, cutting from one to another. Once in a while there's a pan. Then I saw exactly what Jagabo describes. I don't see that on either my LCD (47", 120Hz) or the plasma (42", 60Hz) when playing Blu-Ray.

From time to time there's also some haloing in low-light scenes, which I feel certain is insufficient band width. Borderline signal?

As for sports, ESPN 720p feeds don't exhibit those problems, not that I can recall.

[filmboss80]

Johns0 hit the nail on the head about cable company overcompression. With NFL football games that are broadcast on the local station, I can switch between Comcast and my home antenna. Rapid motion is just fine OTA, but with cable -- yuck!

Yeah, fritzi93, you're not the only one to notice.

[JohnnyMalaria]

Thanks for the info guys.

I'm not sure in my case that it is excessive compression. The displays in BB were all showing the same in-store stuff (conveniently lots of animation or slow-moving real life to hide the limitations). All the LCDs had the blurring but the plasmas were great. Yesterday I was in a bar with two large plasma displays showing DirecTV programming (sports and news) and couldn't see any blurring with them.

[jagabo]

The place where I see motion blur on LCDs is in sports like soccer. When the camera is still you see lots of small detail in the grass. When the camera starts moving most of that detail disappears...

I've been meaning to make some test videos to deterimine if it's the LCD or the over compression...

Well I've run some of these tests now and there is very little motion blur caused by the LCD of my Samsung 4665. I took a sharp patch of grass from a very still shot in a soccer game and panned it around the screen via AviSynth (at 60 Hz, different speeds) and it does not blur. The same patch of grass from later frames of the captured soccer game were very blurry, even though the camera was panning quite slowly (pretty much ruling out motion blur in the camera) meaning the blurring was caused was the overcompressed transmission.

[samijubal]

This Panasonic is highly rated:
My guess is by 2012 the only plasmas you can get are 50"+ due to energy consumption.

This isn't true even now and will be even less so in the future. A properly calibrated plasma uses about the same amount of power as the same size LCD these days and they have the potential to use less than standard LCDs in the future. Plasmas turn pixels on/off while LCD backlights are always on.

Plasma still can't be beat for picture quality by anything available at this time.

[MOVIEGEEK]

This isn't true even now and will be even less so in the future. A properly calibrated plasma uses about the same amount of power as the same size LCD these days and they have the potential to use less than standard LCDs in the future. Plasmas turn pixels on/off while LCD backlights are always on.

Plasma still can't be beat for picture quality by anything available at this time.

Some plasma's are close to LCD when it comes to power consumption but the vast majority use more, you can go to cnet.com or crutchfield.com to see calibrated power consumption. LED backlights are very efficient and some models also turn off parts of the backlight.
I wasn't saying LCD have a better picture but with the current "green" trend we are in plasma's cannot meet the strict power efficiencies being mandated by the EPA and California lawmakers.
http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/a-look-at-californias-new-tv-energy-regs/

[samijubal]

And how much do those LED LCDs cost compared to plasma? For the normal consumer they aren't even an option. It'll take many years of TV viewing to make up the price difference between the two.

Panasonic will very soon, possibly next year, be producing plasmas with half the power consumption of current models, which will make them use less power than a comperable standard LCD.

To the OP, you could always get a used CRT TV. They can be found pretty cheap these days. After watching a plasma there's no way I'd EVER go back to all those CRT flaws but for overall picture quality it's hard to beat a good CRT.