Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
KidDynamite
Feb 11, 2005



FilthyImp posted:

I like the guy who hadn't posted here in 6 months acting as tone police and gatekeeper.

This Snapfish did make me wonder what effect the semiconductor shortage is going to have on the 22 and 23 generations of TVs though.

And kind of tangential to everything but people apparently loving love the miniLED ipads that just came out.

Can't even find a G1 or an 83 inch C1. The supply chain is hosed.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Tricky Ed
Aug 18, 2010

It is important to avoid confusion. This is the one that's okay to lick.




So right now the 77" CX (LG, 2020) and the 77" A80J (Sony, 2021) are both in my budget range for a TV ($3050 LG, $3500 Sony, both Costco with a free refill). I went looking at them today and in their demo loops I didn't really spot anything that would sway me one way or the other. From reviews, the Sony has better motion processing, but I still saw some judder in a fast panning shot and I didn't get to see the same scene on the LG so I can't say whether it's better or not. I haven't seen a G1 and am informed that it is unlikely that I will.

I was able to look at a C1 vs the CX/GX, and an A90J vs the A80J, and couldn't really tell a difference there, either, but again, there were no side by side demos with the same size screen. Like, the A90J looked a little sharper to me than the A80J, but that could also be down to pixel density comparing the smaller A90 to the bigger A80. Also the A90 isn't available at 77" for Reasons.

Am I correct in thinking of the A80J as being equivalent to a B1 and the A90J as a C1, or are the models closer together on the Sony side? Is it more like C1/G1?

From my perspective I think the combination of the better sound, newer processor, and higher number of HDMI 2.1 ports on the Sony makes it worth the price difference over the CX. From reading reviews, I prefer the Sony OS as well though I haven't lived with either so I can't say for sure. VRR is not a concern for me at the moment and I am assuming the Sony firmware will be updated before I can find a PS5. Am I missing other benefits of the CX?

For reference:
83" A90J: $8000 - Nope
77" G1: $infinite - Can't get one
77" C1: $3800 - Bit too high, but would stretch if it were obviously superior
77" A80J: $3500 - In the acceptable range
77" GX: $3500 - Also acceptable range, not sure the form factor's worth the price over the CX
77" CX: $3050 - An excellent TV at a good price, but I think the processor's what's making me think I want a 2021 model.

If anyone knows of screaming deals better than the above I'd love to hear them.

serebralassazin
Feb 20, 2004
I wish I had something clever to say.


My friend got a A90J a few weeks ago. I was able to watch it for a bit and it is a very nice set. I didn't get a chance to watch tons of stuff on it though. It was noticeably brighter than my LG B9 in Dolby Vision. The speakers sounded pretty drat good also. He has it wall mounted but the stand has a nice flat configuration with the feet on the sides if you choose not to wall mount. Google TV or whatever it is called now is way better than older android TV software I played around with on Sony TVs from a few years ago. He was thinking about the G1 as well but, no one knew when it would actually be available for sale at the time (don't even know if you can find one now) and the A90J gets brighter which he wanted. From when we were researching I do believe the LG TVs have an edge in gaming features as they are G-Sync, FreeSync, HGIG compatible.

FilthyImp
Sep 30, 2002

Nope



The Sony's are supposed to have the better image processors for film. I don't know how it would stack up against the brighter G1 panel, though.

FWIW the judder on my B9 is noticeable so if you spotted some on the Sony it's likely a hair worse on the LG.

Senor Tron
May 25, 2006




FilthyImp posted:

Yes, I'm more OLED than man now

Look, if you come in complaining about a half-page derail being "videophile" lecturing and then Karen up the place with "I know I overpaid for an average TV" don't get your panties in a bunch when people point out you could have overpaid for a better product with the exact criteria you were looking for


The same poo poo happens in the Used Car recc thread. It happens in the other building/buying recommendation threads. Get over it.

E: as far as I can tell, the 2020 version of Frame *still* doesn't have FALD, or any local dimming at all, so the poster's request for reference material for the set is even more confounding.
More money than sense or an insane premium on aesthetics. Which, ok, cool.

Again, I wasn't asking for some reference material to calibrate this thing to perfect blacks or HDR highlights brighter than the sun, because that isn't what we bought the set for. I bought it for the aesthetics primarily, and the fact it's a better screen than what I've had for the past 12 years is a bonus, so I figured this thread would know what the best things are to watch to see that improvement.

Like what's best to see the jump from 1080p to 4k? Is it worth seeking out 60fps content like The Hobbit?

Senor Tron fucked around with this message at 02:38 on May 30, 2021

FilthyImp
Sep 30, 2002

Nope



Senor Tron posted:

Like what's best to see the jump from 1080p to 4k? Is it worth seeking out 60fps content like The Hobbit?
The thread go-tos are things like the 4k Wizard of Oz / BladeRunner discs. I think Pacific Rim and Alien are also popular choices.

You can also do things like Spiderverse (the animation style has bunches of details like halftoning) or any of the Nature Docs that everyone loves.

Oh, and yes, do try to watch from a 4k player off of a 4k disc. You'll be wowed by whatever stream you can get, but you'll still get some compression on the image.

Tbh I'm not sure about HFR content.

Oh, btw, you're gonna find that broadcast TV usually shits out a 720p signal and even the 1080s are suspect and rife with compression blocks. I don't think cable is too much better.

FilthyImp fucked around with this message at 02:46 on May 30, 2021

tk
Dec 10, 2003



Nap Ghost

FilthyImp posted:

I like the guy who hadn't posted here in 6 months acting as tone police and gatekeeper.

I wasnít aware there was a minimum posting quota to maintain my membership.

quote:

And kind of tangential to everything but people apparently loving love the miniLED ipads that just came out.

Itís nice. It is extremely bright. If you are a person who watches a lot of movies in the sun, this is the device for you. In more normal environments itís definitely better than my 2-3 gens older iPad but nothing to write home about.

In a bit of a new problem for me: itís doesnít get dim enough. Old iPad gets a couple notches dimmer on the low end. In a very dark room the miniled is a bit uncomfortable on my eyes.

Arcsech
Aug 5, 2008


Senor Tron posted:

Like what's best to see the jump from 1080p to 4k? Is it worth seeking out 60fps content like The Hobbit?

Nature documentaries like Planet Earth 2, great action movies like The Matrix, Mad Max Fury Road, or the John Wick series, and Into the Spiderverse would be my recommendations.

60fps is fantastic for gaming, but I don't think I'd care nearly as much for movies.

Also thanks for not angryposting about how people don't like the TV you bought!

Matt Zerella
Oct 7, 2002


Yeah Blade Runner 2049 delivers both visually and sound wise if you're looking to push your system/see the difference.

My favorite scene for this is the daytime San Diego wastelands/LA sea wall sequence. And the scenes with Leto will show off the contrast when he's in his weird water chamber office.

Senor Tron
May 25, 2006




Those are some great suggestions, thanks!

The Question IRL
Jun 8, 2013

Only two contestants left! Here is Doom's chance for revenge...


I went looking online and they said that Ang Lee's Gemini Man has a 60 FPS version.

https://us.blu-raydisc.com/blog/latest_news/gemini-man-arrives-ultra-hd-blu-ray-60fps-frame-rate-dolby-vision/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX2vsvdq8nw

How does that look on a OLED?

Even on my S20 FE Galaxy phone (which is only 1080 but with 120hz refresh) it looks pretty good.

codo27
Apr 21, 2008




Wow thats amazing. And yet there are countless dinosaurs out there so wrought with dementia they will look at that and say "no I want slow motion like film is supposed to be"

BonoMan
Feb 20, 2002


Jade Ear Joe

codo27 posted:

Wow thats amazing. And yet there are countless dinosaurs out there so wrought with dementia they will look at that and say "no I want slow motion like film is supposed to be"

I mean... I'm sure people would get used to it but yeah my first reaction was a mix between film and a nature documentary. Just an odd feeling that took me out of "movie mode"

Rusty
Sep 28, 2001


Dinosaur Gum

I think I could also get used to it, it was less jarring as I watched it, but it really looks like a home movie or something to me.

Inner Light
Jan 2, 2020





Picture quality good, but man is that movie dog crap. Why do ultra successful actors have this garbage phase, come on Will.

BonoMan
Feb 20, 2002


Jade Ear Joe

Like, that first shot, I totally expected the How It's Made VO to start describing how they make high speed trains

McCracAttack
Feb 21, 2006



BonoMan posted:

I mean... I'm sure people would get used to it but yeah my first reaction was a mix between film and a nature documentary. Just an odd feeling that took me out of "movie mode"

I'm surprised years of video games haven't broken me of that. But high frame rate live action still looks "cheap" for some reason. Guess I'm just going to be stuck with that association for life.

FilthyImp
Sep 30, 2002

Nope



I can get used to the motion look but the grading is just too real life to feel "cinematic".

The Question IRL
Jun 8, 2013

Only two contestants left! Here is Doom's chance for revenge...


That's interesting.

Like do we want our movies to have some artifical visual layer so we can enjoy it as entertainment?
That by showing it in some slower manner, a part of our brain says "don't worry with what you are seeing. It's not real, so it's not a problem if you are watching a man kill someone from miles away with a rifle or that this romcom has patriarchal messages."

If you action movies look too realistic do we run the risk of thinking "Hang on! Violence is bad! I never knew this before now."

FilthyImp
Sep 30, 2002

Nope



The Question IRL posted:

If you action movies look too realistic do we run the risk of thinking "Hang on! Violence is bad! I never knew this before now."
That's certainly what's happened with MK in the modern era. As the Fatalities in 9-11 got more realistic, with things like people's alimentary canal's getting tore our of their asses, players went "uh ew this isn't fun"

BonoMan
Feb 20, 2002


Jade Ear Joe

The Question IRL posted:

That's interesting.

Like do we want our movies to have some artifical visual layer so we can enjoy it as entertainment?
That by showing it in some slower manner, a part of our brain says "don't worry with what you are seeing. It's not real, so it's not a problem if you are watching a man kill someone from miles away with a rifle or that this romcom has patriarchal messages."

If you action movies look too realistic do we run the risk of thinking "Hang on! Violence is bad! I never knew this before now."

It's less about an issue of a moral dilemma to me as it is a certain value judgement you pass base on the biases ingrained by visual quality. If it feels like a Discovery channel documentary or something, that can (fair or not) affect how I enjoy it or think about performances, etc.

Again, something I could get used to and would likely forget about over time but you're asking millions of movie goers to all try to make that transition together and I just don't know if it'll ever happen.

Are there any other examples of this with scenes that actually benefit from the HFR? Because right now with that clip it's *different* but not necessarily better.

EL BROMANCE
Jun 10, 2006

COWABUNGA DUDES!



A reasonable look at the HFR stuff.

https://youtu.be/OaZnxAfcvY4

Technically itís cool, but I have zero interest in watching movies that look like video games and tech demos. Luckily itís not going to happen.

CLAM DOWN
Feb 13, 2007


RICKARUS

It's Moot baby!






Thank you for clamming down, all.

BonoMan
Feb 20, 2002


Jade Ear Joe

EL BROMANCE posted:

A reasonable look at the HFR stuff.

https://youtu.be/OaZnxAfcvY4

Technically itís cool, but I have zero interest in watching movies that look like video games and tech demos. Luckily itís not going to happen.

I like this takeway. Especially about the actors (when it looks so real - Will Smith only ever feels like Will Smith in a documentary... not a character. Because your brain is associated him visually with non-fiction/non-cinema stuff).

Mister Facetious
Apr 21, 2007

I think I died and woke up in L.A.,
I don't know how I wound up in this place...



FilthyImp posted:

That's certainly what's happened with MK in the modern era. As the Fatalities in 9-11 got more realistic, with things like people's alimentary canal's getting tore our of their asses, players went "uh ew this isn't fun"

Pretty much why 9 was my last one; just a little too visceral for my taste.

RichterIX
Apr 11, 2003

I'm going to kill myself tomorrow.

Yeah, I think the issue for people with HFR is just due to the years of media we've always been exposed to. If all media from here on in was HFR we'd probably never hear complaints 30 years from now from people born after its advent. We, on the other hand, have spent years subconsciously associating 60 fps with documentary, news, and soap operas, and that's a tough association to break even though with current tech there's no reason to adhere to 24 fps.

It's kind of like when they had to add fake shift points to CVT transmissions because the lack of shifting was freaking people out

codo27
Apr 21, 2008



Mister Facetious posted:

Pretty much why 9 was my last one; just a little too visceral for my taste.

No MK10-11 was ruined by character variations (also all the new characters are half assed and bad)

The Question IRL
Jun 8, 2013

Only two contestants left! Here is Doom's chance for revenge...


RichterIX posted:

Yeah, I think the issue for people with HFR is just due to the years of media we've always been exposed to. If all media from here on in was HFR we'd probably never hear complaints 30 years from now from people born after its advent. We, on the other hand, have spent years subconsciously associating 60 fps with documentary, news, and soap operas, and that's a tough association to break even though with current tech there's no reason to adhere to 24 fps.

But we are getting generations raised on 60 fps in games and Mobile Phone footage. Surely that will bleed over to generations wanting to see that in their other media?

EL BROMANCE
Jun 10, 2006

COWABUNGA DUDES!



Thereís always been a distinctive difference between shooting video and film, and thatís not going to change. Want realism? Shoot and light for video. Want to tell a story? Shoot and light for film, even if youíre using non-film equipment to actually capture the image. Itís not like 24fps has been a technical limit for decades, itís shot like that because it suits the medium.

McCracAttack
Feb 21, 2006



The Question IRL posted:

But we are getting generations raised on 60 fps in games and Mobile Phone footage. Surely that will bleed over to generations wanting to see that in their other media?

The video game thing didn't help me. The phone example just means younger people will say "It looks like someone recorded this on their phone." The problem isn't that we haven't been exposed to 60 fps but rather the content we associate with 60 fps like soap operas and recorded interviews on the evening news.

Also, the high frame rate does give you a "clearer" look at what's happening which doesn't always help. It does look more realistic but it's realistic in the sense that it looks like you're watching actors on a movie set. Maybe that's just something the film makers need to account for in some way or another. Like how hair and makeup had to work differently once HDTV became a thing.

McCracAttack fucked around with this message at 23:13 on May 30, 2021

Mister Facetious
Apr 21, 2007

I think I died and woke up in L.A.,
I don't know how I wound up in this place...



codo27 posted:

No MK10-11 was ruined by character variations (also all the new characters are half assed and bad)

I'm not saying that's what ruined them, just why I stopped playing MK. I'm also not a horror movie person. Kill or be killed, I get, but graphic sadism makes me incredibly uncomfortable.

gay_crimes
Apr 12, 2008



They seem totally unnecessary and too detailed. The thought of someone out there being super into them feels weird, I feel bad for the people who have to research and animate the fatalities

RichterIX
Apr 11, 2003

I'm going to kill myself tomorrow.

The Question IRL posted:

But we are getting generations raised on 60 fps in games and Mobile Phone footage. Surely that will bleed over to generations wanting to see that in their other media?

Yeah, McCrac said what I was thinking anyway but this just further codifies it honestly. Games still just look like games (although you could make the case that there are certain games that try to evoke "film" as a visual medium more than others) and it's gotten to the point where YouTube videos have a pretty consistent "look" that has more in common with documentary TV than anything else

codo27
Apr 21, 2008



EL BROMANCE posted:

Thereís always been a distinctive difference between shooting video and film, and thatís not going to change. Want realism? Shoot and light for video. Want to tell a story? Shoot and light for film, even if youíre using non-film equipment to actually capture the image. Itís not like 24fps has been a technical limit for decades, itís shot like that because it suits the medium.

This isn't good enough. Explain what it is about slow motion that is required for effective story telling? I really have to wonder if any of you can conjure up a good reason in favor of 24p other than "well I'm used to it" "its how its always been" etc etc.

FilthyImp
Sep 30, 2002

Nope



HFR is apparently so detailed that viewers pick up on micro-expressions and performances come off as more "acted" than 24fps.

There's also the growing pains that set, lights, Costumes Costumes makeup will go through as HFR causes the disciplines to adapt new standards -- i.e. the audiences that could tell things in The Hobbit were painted props, etc.

EL BROMANCE
Jun 10, 2006

COWABUNGA DUDES!



codo27 posted:

This isn't good enough. Explain what it is about slow motion that is required for effective story telling? I really have to wonder if any of you can conjure up a good reason in favor of 24p other than "well I'm used to it" "its how its always been" etc etc.

I mean, I donít really have to. If HFR was effective for movies, directors (whether up and coming or experienced hands) would be tripping over themselves to shoot in it. In reality, itís a ton harder and more expensive to produce and thereís been virtually no market pushing for it. Just because something is possible it doesnít mean itís a necessity.

RichterIX
Apr 11, 2003

I'm going to kill myself tomorrow.

codo27 posted:

This isn't good enough. Explain what it is about slow motion that is required for effective story telling? I really have to wonder if any of you can conjure up a good reason in favor of 24p other than "well I'm used to it" "its how its always been" etc etc.

"Well I'm used to it" is sort of my point, only I would say it's more like "this perception is deeply ingrained by the way I've experienced media for my entire life." I'd agree with you that there's nothing about 24 fps that inherently makes it a better choice all other things being equal like set design, etc.

BonoMan
Feb 20, 2002


Jade Ear Joe

codo27 posted:

This isn't good enough. Explain what it is about slow motion that is required for effective story telling? I really have to wonder if any of you can conjure up a good reason in favor of 24p other than "well I'm used to it" "its how its always been" etc etc.

If people view HFR as "this feels like I'm watching actors in a documentary and not a movie"... Well you've destroyed all effective storytelling right there. I mean the entire method of narrative suspension of disbelief is based on manipulation of human perspective. So "it's what I'm used to viewing cinematic narratives in" is absolutely valid.

Harlock
Jan 15, 2006

Tap "A" to drink!!!



Howdy TV friends, just have a general question. Need to get a new bedroom TV to replace my trusty 12 year old Sony and I don't really want to break the bank for a TV that typically just sees some light usage.

My budget was really $300-400 and I see an assortment of Vizios/LG/TCL/Hisense in this range or is there one that's strictly the best in this class? Browsing RTINGS puts me in an infinite loop of TVs being beaten by one another for value. Are they all essentially the same at this level? Do the 'good' TVs start at $500 and up? Would like some opinions on this.

I'm looking for something 43-50 range.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BonoMan
Feb 20, 2002


Jade Ear Joe

Harlock posted:

Howdy TV friends, just have a general question. Need to get a new bedroom TV to replace my trusty 12 year old Sony and I don't really want to break the bank for a TV that typically just sees some light usage.

My budget was really $300-400 and I see an assortment of Vizios/LG/TCL/Hisense in this range or is there one that's strictly the best in this class? Browsing RTINGS puts me in an infinite loop of TVs being beaten by one another for value. Are they all essentially the same at this level? Do the 'good' TVs start at $500 and up? Would like some opinions on this.

I'm looking for something 43-50 range.

Anything you buy in that range that fits your size and budget for a bedroom TV is likely going to do the job just fine. So you're not really going to go wrong. But I do prefer the TCL Roku interface so I'd say 4 or 5 series TCL. Hisense after that. Vizio after that. LG you're going to want to stay away from unless you're getting an OLED.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply