Inferiority Of LCD Monitors

D

Delta99

n00b
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
38
Why are computer LCD monitors inferior by a large margin compared to HDTV's? HDTV's have 10 bit color and LCD monitors only a measly 8 bit. Why do they make them like that?
 
itachi183 said:
Heck, my CRT has 32bit color, how about that
Click to expand...

Bits per pixel is not the same color scale as the panel color rating system. An 8-bit LCD can display at least 24bpp color.

http://compreviews.about.com/od/multimedia/a/LCDColor.htm

8-Bit vs. 6-Bit

Now color depth was previous referred to by the total number of colors that the screen can render, but when referring to LCD panels the number of levels that each color can render is used instead. This can make things difficult to understand, but to demonstrate, we will look at the mathematics of it. For example, 24-bit or true color is comprised of three colors each with 8-bits of color. Mathematically, this is represented as:

* 2^8 x 2^8 x 2^8 = 256 x 256 x 256 = 16,777,216

High-speed LCD monitors typically reduce the number of bits for each color to 6 instead of the standard 8. This 6-bit color will generate far fewer colors than 8-bit as we see when we do the math:

* 2^6 x 2^6 x 2^6 = 64 x 64 x 64 = 262,144

This is far fewer than the true color display such that it would be noticeable to the human eye. To get around this problem, the manufacturers employ a technique referred to as dithering. This is an effect where nearby pixels use slightly varying shades or color that trick the human eye into perceiving the desired color even though it isn't truly that color. A color newspaper photo is a good way to see this effect in practice. (In print the effect is called half-tones.) By using this technique, the manufacturers claim to achieve a color depth close to that of the true color displays.
Click to expand...
 
Try using HDTV as PC monitor for 12 hours. And I actually doubt very much, that these TVs can do 10 bit colours without dithering,
 
If you ask me, the LCD panel industry is driving LCD quality into the ground. Everything is low-quality TN, moving to even wider (and less useful) 16:9 computer monitors, have text or discoloration issues, and charging a small fortune for it anyway.

And most people do not know, or care, enough to know they are getting ripped off.
 
night_2004 said:
If you ask me, the LCD panel industry is driving LCD quality into the ground. Everything is low-quality TN, moving to even wider (and less useful) 16:9 computer monitors, have text or discoloration issues, and charging a small fortune for it anyway.

And most people do not know, or care, enough to know they are getting ripped off.
Click to expand...

Yup, they just think "Woot, I got 16:9 and it's FLAT!!!"..and ignores the reduced IQ :rolleyes:
 
Atech said:
Here hoping that OLED will change that, because I am not going to degrade my visual experince, period.
Click to expand...

OLED won't change a thing, it's a technological dead end - they cannot increase the life of the organic compounds used and it fades very quickly with extended usage. OLED is OK for a television, but a monitor would start to be unusable within 18 months.

SED is what we need to be waiting for, works in a similar fashion to a television (exciting phosphors) but instead of 1 cathode ray arrangement, each pixel is its own cathode ray arrangement. All the benefits of CRT with all the benefits of LCD...that's called "win win". :D
 
philjohn said:
OLED won't change a thing, it's a technological dead end - they cannot increase the life of the organic compounds used and it fades very quickly with extended usage. OLED is OK for a television, but a monitor would start to be unusable within 18 months.

SED is what we need to be waiting for, works in a similar fashion to a television (exciting phosphors) but instead of 1 cathode ray arrangement, each pixel is its own cathode ray arrangement. All the benefits of CRT with all the benefits of LCD...that's called "win win". :D
Click to expand...

My bad, confused OLED with SED, but yes, the visuals of CRT in an LCD format...now that is a step-up, not a step-down ;)
 
Delta99 said:
Why are computer LCD monitors inferior by a large margin compared to HDTV's? HDTV's have 10 bit color and LCD monitors only a measly 8 bit. Why do they make them like that?
Click to expand...

There are no 10bit per channel HD sources though AFAIK. Blu-ray is 8bits per channel.
 
Biges said:
Try using HDTV as PC monitor for 12 hours. And I actually doubt very much, that these TVs can do 10 bit colours without dithering,
Click to expand...


So you dont recommend using a HDTV for a monitor even if it is 1080p? I just bought a dell E228wfp (which is beautiful) and was debating getting the stupid big White westinghouse 37in that everyone is freaking over on this board.

I like big but at the end of the day quality is more important.
 
Me wonders why there are no 24" plasma screens. I would have snatched one of those up in a heartbeat instead of waiting a year to research LCD's.

On another note, I am kind of perplexed why the digital age is behind the old analog age in so many ways. I had digital cable for a few months but couldnt stand channel surfing when it took 3-5 seconds to load each channel. Back to analog cable I went. This weekend my wife and I were in a hotel with a LCD TV which scaled everything horizontally to fit the screen, thus making everything fatter. There was no way to turn off this inane "feature".

I present to you, digital age of TV and multimedia, a wholehearted "WTF???"
 
daveswantek said:
Because they cannot make the pixels small enough. they can barly do 1080 on a much bigger screen.

Do you really want a native res of 960 by 600.

Dave
Click to expand...

The real question is why would ANYONE want a "native resolution".

My CRT spans from <800x600 to >1600x1200...all "natively" :p
 
youre trying to compare 2 different things here... you can't do that.. its like comparing amd and intel again. each's got their pros and cons, live with it, if u dont like lcd's that much then stick with a funky big looking crt, and crt pictures will still be crisper than lcd images 99% of the time i bet. but that's how it is. lcd's are liquid panel, crt's are like glass dude.. theres no point in bashing a technological invention that you dont like..
 
Righty said:
So you dont recommend using a HDTV for a monitor even if it is 1080p? I just bought a dell E228wfp (which is beautiful) and was debating getting the stupid big White westinghouse 37in that everyone is freaking over on this board.

I like big but at the end of the day quality is more important.
Click to expand...
The LVM 37w3 is a monitor in every sense of the word, no tuners onboard, nada ;)
 
elito said:
youre trying to compare 2 different things here... you can't do that..
Click to expand...

Sure you can.

its like comparing amd and intel again. each's got their pros and cons,
Click to expand...

You just compared "two different things" and even admitted it. :p

To daveswantek - thanks for the clarification about plasmas.
 
night_2004 said:
Everything is low-quality TN, moving to even wider (and less useful) 16:9 computer monitors.
Click to expand...
Really? I've only seen two 16:9 lcd monitors on the market that you can buy (dell & acer). What's that, .05%?
 
mlewis said:
There are no 10bit per channel HD sources though AFAIK. Blu-ray is 8bits per channel.
Click to expand...

Not quite true.

Sonys HD camcorders support x.v.colour (xvYCC ) and Deep Colour.
Blu-Ray players you buy now support them but as you pointed out we are waiting for the media.
Some players can up-sample standard media to deep colour, I have no idea how good this is.

Films on current release can be easily re-released with deep colour/x.v.colour.
There is an impediment though, 10bit colour needs up to 25% more space and 12bit colour needs 50% more space so epic length films will have to wait for larger media.
There are a hybrids of Blu Ray media in/nearing production that have much higher capacity, so all is not lost.
(x.v.colour provides a larger gamut of colours, Deep Colour provides more bits per colour to use them)


HDMI 1.3 spec (Released June 22, 2006)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
Optionally supports Deep Color with 30-bit, 36-bit, and 48-bit xvYCC, sRGB, or YCbCr compared to 24-bit sRGB or YCbCr in previous HDMI versions
Click to expand...
Support for 16 bits per colour (48bit) and wide gamut.
Once Laser TV becomes mainstream (very wide gamut), this will be much wanted!
 
soulesschild said:
this thread is full of fail.
Click to expand...

This thread is the most important thread in "Displays". It's a discussion of why LCD monitors are inferior to HDTV's. This is a very important issue as many people use their monitors to watch HDTV and Bluray. If you don't like this important discussion get out of my thread.
 
night_2004 said:
If you ask me, the LCD panel industry is driving LCD quality into the ground. Everything is low-quality TN, moving to even wider (and less useful) 16:9 computer monitors, have text or discoloration issues, and charging a small fortune for it anyway.

And most people do not know, or care, enough to know they are getting ripped off.
Click to expand...

I am totally in agreement. These LCD's are totally over priced and the technology is not that advanced. We need new panel technology and new fast accurate high end color chips for these LCD displays.
 
Biges said:
Try using HDTV as PC monitor for 12 hours. And I actually doubt very much, that these TVs can do 10 bit colours without dithering,
Click to expand...

In what way would you say or explain LCD monitors pluses compared to HDTV's. What are some positive things about an LCD computer monitor compared to a HDTV?
 
Delta99, you really need to understand things more :)
8 bit colours vs 32 bit. 8 bit colours means 8 bit per coulour channel, i.e. 8 bit RED + 8 GREEN + 8 BLUE = 24 bit. However, usually term "32 bit" is used instead of 24, I don't know why. You can find more info here.
Dynamic contrast... here.
Please try to find some more info before saying something which could insult some members here. Google and Wikipedia are your friends and look at the links in my signature.
 
Biges said:
8 bit colours vs 32 bit. 8 bit colours means 8 bit per coulour channel, i.e. 8 bit RED + 8 GREEN + 8 BLUE = 24 bit. However, usually term "32 bit" is used instead of 24, I don't know why.
Click to expand...

It's a misnomer. People sometime use the term "32-bit" when they actually mean "24-bit".

Why does that happen? 'Cause people are stupid; like some people here in the forum (not referring to you).
 
lifanus said:
HELLO? WHY? BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS MADE IN CHINA... I LOVE CHINA!
Click to expand...

***OFF TOPIC RANT***

Arrgg!!!! China!!! Why did they fall off the economic map?? They basically stopped buying commodities (which caused commodity prices to decrease due to less demand) and the economy is not expected to grow more than 4% per year. So much for hoping for an average 12% - 18% annual return on mutual funds that investment in China

I suppose the demand destruction in China (and other countries too) allowed oil to drop to $82 a barrel (ticking upwards though).

***END OFF TOPIC RANT***
 
Delta99 said:
Why are computer LCD monitors inferior by a large margin compared to HDTV's? HDTV's have 10 bit color and LCD monitors only a measly 8 bit. Why do they make them like that?
Click to expand...

Neither HDTVs or LCDs are what I would consider 'pro' quality. LCDs are a color mosaic while CRT is a aligned image more akin to film quality. LCDs and HDTVs that are based on flat-panel technology typically all have crappy backlight systems that bleed, low contrast, poor pixel response, and non-customizable refresh rates. The only upside is the small footprint and weight.

If you look at the way DVD and high def optical content are put onto those mediums it's a joke. For example on DVD you're storing the content at 720x480 and then most likely stretching it out to 848x480 or something like that. With film it's still anamorphic, but it's film (no pixels). Even if you are able to get 1:1 mapping the inherent crappiness of optical video is the crux. Sure, it can look ok, but compared to the experience on the cutting room floor it's minimal at best. Kind of like seeing the source video for a youtube video. You'd want to watch the source, it looks better.

Even if there was some kind of standard 4:4:4 chroma subsampling and high-bit color you'd need to have a 500GB optical device to serve the capability of the color and contrast space. It doesn't exist.

Today it's about pumping out total crap for the masses. Most people don't care about anything and are so prideful they'll simply buy what some other idiot said was good then invite all their friends over to gloat.

The only technology that I think is somewhat acceptable for true video purity is DLP. The source is still pixelized (not film), but the way the micro-mirrors work is nice. If the ambient lighting is pitch black you'll have a near infinite contrast. But you see, if you're still watching some crap dvd you don't have the full 4:4:4.

It's not necessarily that HDTVs are superior to LCD monitors, it's that the content and delivery channel are mediocre to poor. If you've ever watched uncompressed HD footage I'm sure you'll agree. Once Sony gets out their 100GB brd it may be a interesting viewing experience, but for right now any over-the-air or broadband digital hd broadcast over sat or cable isn't delivering the bandwidth you want to see. It's a matter of time really. America has a huge footprint compared to smaller nations. Running fiber up and down that mofo will be a bitch. And even if you got fiber it's not like some godsend, still slow compared to how it could be.
 
Biges said:
Delta99, you really need to understand things more :)
8 bit colours vs 32 bit. 8 bit colours means 8 bit per coulour channel, i.e. 8 bit RED + 8 GREEN + 8 BLUE = 24 bit. However, usually term "32 bit" is used instead of 24, I don't know why.
Click to expand...
Two reasons:

1) 32 bit = RGBA (A = alpha)

2) It is orders of magnitude faster and easier for hardware to transfer 32 bits somewhere than it is to transfer 24 bits. It's a shame most people weren't around PCs when even 2D drawing wasn't accelerated, and when 24-bit graphics meant you could visibly see how everything on the screen is drawn. That's how slow everything was :)
 
nomu said:
No. Why would you even say that?
Click to expand...

Simple, Samsung uses 6-8 bit panels for their LCD monitors that has dynamic contrast ratio that tricks the eyes into making it look like it has a 10 bit HDTV color. Dithering as you explained. Do you understand now?
 
Biges said:
Delta99, you really need to understand things more :)
8 bit colours vs 32 bit. 8 bit colours means 8 bit per coulour channel, i.e. 8 bit RED + 8 GREEN + 8 BLUE = 24 bit. However, usually term "32 bit" is used instead of 24, I don't know why. You can find more info here.
Dynamic contrast... here.
Please try to find some more info before saying something which could insult some members here. Google and Wikipedia are your friends and look at the links in my signature.
Click to expand...

What??? There was nothing insulting about this post why are you saying that??? I needed information and an explanation on 8 bit LCD monitors compared too 10 bit HDTV. If someone has an inferior color panel and they cant accept the truth then that's just too damn bad right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top