Plasma vs LCD Judder

[paleo]

So I have a 120hz LCD tv that's pretty sweet. The 120hz definitely improves judder but manipulates the picture to make it look 3D, and not like it's supposed to be. Great for some stuff like nature, but terrible for movies. It also causes some artifacting.

I figured I could completely eliminate judder by going Plasma (as well as getting more detail in dark movies), and much to my surprise, plasma's have this judder as well, and if not even worse! This can be easily noticed during credits scrolling at the end of a movie... all the words shake big time.

I guess this is just a flaw with the bluray technology? I'm assuming that even plasma's will start becoming 120hz?

Looks like CRT still remains king.

[Jon Lai]

I think you're mistaken.

1) Refresh rate isn't a concern on plasmas, only on LCDs. Refresh rate on plasmas are many times higher than LCDs.

2) 120Hz is not used to make things look 3D, but to eliminate 3:2 pulldown so the movie looks the way it's supposed to, and not like what you said, make the movie look like it's not the way it's supposed to.

[akademiks]

The artifacting may in fact be a part of the movie itself.
Not as a result of your TV being poor at video processing.
Not all movies are designed to look crisp and clean, and the artifacts may be the intent by the director and/or studio.

[sfu_lifer]

I think you're mistaken.

1) Refresh rate isn't a concern on plasmas, only on LCDs. Refresh rate on plasmas are many times higher than LCDs.

+1
That's why I went plasma. That and better contrast.

[paleo]

I know that the refresh rate is much better on plasmas, but that's not the point. I'm talking about slow camera pans being extremely jerky... i figured this was only a problem with LCD's, but I was mistaken... happens on plasmas too.

120hz is supposed to eliminate or reduce the jerkiness, which is does, but you're incorrect in saying that it makes the movies look like they are "supposed to"... in fact, it completely manipulates and reduces the "film" quality of the movie. Makes things look like a soap opera... movies don't look that way on a plasma, or at the movies!

I think you're mistaken.

1) Refresh rate isn't a concern on plasmas, only on LCDs. Refresh rate on plasmas are many times higher than LCDs.

2) 120Hz is not used to make things look 3D, but to eliminate 3:2 pulldown so the movie looks the way it's supposed to, and not like what you said, make the movie look like it's not the way it's supposed to.

[paleo]

I understand what you're saying, but what i'm referring to is the KNOWN artifacting with the 120hz auto motion plus processing. I tested it on Planet Earth bluray. With it off, you get the judder, but I could see eagles flying crisp and clear.... with it on, it removes the judder, but I could see a slight halo around the eagles making it less crisp. The technology just hasn't been perfected yet.

The artifacting may in fact be a part of the movie itself.
Not as a result of your TV being poor at video processing.
Not all movies are designed to look crisp and clean, and the artifacts may be the intent by the director and/or studio.

[paleo]

Definitely better contrast, with a price to pay for light reflections, but the response time isn't even an issue a 4ms... at least for my eyes anyway.

My big concern is judder, but plasma isn't the answer to that. But I guess it's the best it can get, unless this is simply a bluray issue.

Watch planet earth on bluray on your plasma... and look at the camera pan at the beginning of the one on mountains... VERY choppy.

+1
That's why I went plasma. That and better contrast.

[zzz3]

Definitely better contrast, with a price to pay for light reflections, but the response time isn't even an issue a 4ms... at least for my eyes anyway.

My big concern is judder, but plasma isn't the answer to that. But I guess it's the best it can get, unless this is simply a bluray issue.

Watch planet earth on bluray on your plasma... and look at the camera pan at the beginning of the one on mountains... VERY choppy.

What plasma do you have, pio has 72hz advanced (or smooth i forget since i dont really use it) mode which is probably the best out there...

[paleo]

Panasonic PZ85... I know Pioneer's are much better, but not even remotely in my price range.

What plasma do you have, pio has 72hz advanced (or smooth i forget since i dont really use it) mode which is probably the best out there...

[Aske001]

Film looks a bit choppy because it's shot at 24 frames per second. They fit it to 60 fps TV by showing two out of three frames twice in succession. If the TV is a digital TV that needs to de-interlace the signal (480i or 1080i), it needs to detect the 3:2 pattern to avoid de-interlacing incorrectly and creating artifacts. Most TVs these days do this very well, so it's not an issue. In theory a TV that runs at 72 Hz or 120 Hz instead of 60 Hz can do this 3:2 de-interlacing even more smoothly, but it's not really an issue.

However, 3:2 pulldown and de-interlacing does nothing to make the film look less choppy, like the slight jerkiness when there's a smooth pan. People are just used to this and consider it the "film" look. TVs which have a "120 Hz" mode use artificial interpolation to try to smooth out this jerkiness by interpolating estimated frames in between the actual film frames. At its best it makes the film look smoother. But it also makes the film look less natural to many people, and inevitably it introduces artifacts by the process of frame interpolation.

[Jon Lai]

I know that the refresh rate is much better on plasmas, but that's not the point. I'm talking about slow camera pans being extremely jerky... i figured this was only a problem with LCD's, but I was mistaken... happens on plasmas too.

120hz is supposed to eliminate or reduce the jerkiness, which is does, but you're incorrect in saying that it makes the movies look like they are "supposed to"... in fact, it completely manipulates and reduces the "film" quality of the movie. Makes things look like a soap opera... movies don't look that way on a plasma, or at the movies!

I have no idea what you mean by jerikiness.

120Hz DOES make movies the way they're supposed to look, it's just that your eyes are so used to watching 3:2 pulldown that when you go back to 1:1 (or in reality it's more like 6:6) you get uneasy about it. Guess what - this is the way it's supposed to look.

[B0000rt]

I have no idea what you mean by jerikiness.

120Hz DOES make movies the way they're supposed to look, it's just that your eyes are so used to watching 3:2 pulldown that when you go back to 1:1 (or in reality it's more like 6:6) you get uneasy about it. Guess what - this is the way it's supposed to look.

Nah, you're wrong. 120Hz does make the images look different, when compared to say Theatrical releases (in movie theaters)

[paleo]

Yes and no. Yes it's the way it's supposed to look, but not entirely because of that one frame insertion... it "guesses" and makes mistakes. This results in awkward speed up parts where it looks like it's in fast motion for a couple of seconds. Even so, I highly doubt that the producer intends to make it look like you're right there; it completely defeats the purpose of film.

But yeah 120hz is the best we can get so far, and it can always be turned off. I always thought film was smooth at the theatre, but I guess on the big screen i never noticed?

I have no idea what you mean by jerikiness.

120Hz DOES make movies the way they're supposed to look, it's just that your eyes are so used to watching 3:2 pulldown that when you go back to 1:1 (or in reality it's more like 6:6) you get uneasy about it. Guess what - this is the way it's supposed to look.

[paleo]

Thank you! This sums it all up!

Film looks a bit choppy because it's shot at 24 frames per second. They fit it to 60 fps TV by showing two out of three frames twice in succession. If the TV is a digital TV that needs to de-interlace the signal (480i or 1080i), it needs to detect the 3:2 pattern to avoid de-interlacing incorrectly and creating artifacts. Most TVs these days do this very well, so it's not an issue. In theory a TV that runs at 72 Hz or 120 Hz instead of 60 Hz can do this 3:2 de-interlacing even more smoothly, but it's not really an issue.

However, 3:2 pulldown and de-interlacing does nothing to make the film look less choppy, like the slight jerkiness when there's a smooth pan. People are just used to this and consider it the "film" look. TVs which have a "120 Hz" mode use artificial interpolation to try to smooth out this jerkiness by interpolating estimated frames in between the actual film frames. At its best it makes the film look smoother. But it also makes the film look less natural to many people, and inevitably it introduces artifacts by the process of frame interpolation.

[paleo]

Yes, because of the above posts... theatrical uses 3:2 pulldown for film. You can the option of watching it that way by turning off your 120hz. But you will see judder, which could give you a headache. Turn on 120hz and it's like being there, although there is some artifacting and slight rapid forward frames due to processor errors. Looks awesome for some things like nature and porn, but not so much for movies.

Nah, you're wrong. 120Hz does make the images look different, when compared to say Theatrical releases.