plasma versus lcd displays quotation

Contrast ratio is a measure to compare the darkest black with the whitest white. Plasma TVs score well on this parameter with a contrast ratio of up to 3000:1. LCD TVs have a contrast ratio of up to 1000:1; however, this metric is calculated differently for LCDs so it"s not an apples-to-apples comparison. Plasma TVs, in general, offer a better contrast than LCDs.

Older models of Plasma TVs can suffer from burn-in produced by static images. After extended periods, stationary images "burn in" the screen and produce an after-image ghost which remains permanently on the screen. This no longer affects new Plasma displays, as they continually shift the image around to prevent the image from being stationary.

LCD TVs do not suffer from burn-in. However, it is possible for individual pixels on an LCD screen to burn out. This causes small, visible, black or white dots to appear on the screen.

Plasma TVs are capable of displaying deeper blacks. Improved black levels help render better those difficult-to-define quality attributes like picture depth, scene detail - especially in television and movie scenes where lots of dark and light content is shown simultaneously, and color richness. Indirectly, a better black level also leads to better rendering of picture contrast.

In comparison, the nature of LCD technology – where a backlight shines through the LCD layer – makes it hard for it to achieve true blacks, i.e. true absence of light. There is always some light leakage from adjacent picture elements in an LCD panel.

LCD TV displays reproduce colours by manipulating light waves and subtracting colours from white light. This makes it more difficult for maintaining colour accuracy and vibrancy. But, LCD TVs have colour information benefits from the higher-than-average number of pixels per square inch found in their displays.

In plasma TVs, each pixel contains red, green, and blue elements, which work in conjunction to create 16.77 million colours. Colour information is more accurately reproduced with plasma TV technology than it is with any other display technology, including LCD TVs.

Plasma TV displays refresh and handle rapid movements in video about as well as normal CRT TVs. LCD TVs were originally designed for computer data displays, and not video. Refresh rates are therefore not as good, but LCD TVs are fast catching up.

LCD TVs life span is typically 50,000-60,000 hours, which equates to about 6 years of 24/7 use. However, LCD TVs will actually last as long as its backlight does, and those bulbs can be replaced - so in essence there"s nothing which can wear out.

The life span for Plasma TVs is 25,000 to 30,000 hours, which equates to about 3 years of 24/7 usage before the TV fades to half the original brightness.

Plasma TVs do not use Mercury while LCD TVs do in their CCFL backlight. However, this issue is a red herring. Most common high-efficieny phosphorescent lamps use mercury and it is not a big deal. The amount of mercury used in LCD TVs is very small and besides, the user never comes in contact with it.

Most electronics retailers carry both LCD and Plasma TVs, including Best Buy, Amazon.com, Wal-Mart, Dell, Target, P.C. Richard & Son, Sears, Costco and hhgregg.com.

With so much new technology on the market, it"s difficult to know what flat panel TV will suit you best. Plasma and LCD are two popular types of TVs that each has its strengths and weaknesses. It"s important for you to assess your viewing preferences to ensure that you purchase a high quality TV that will provide you with your ideal viewing needs. Read the tips listed below and learn about how to tell the difference between plasma and LCD.

Color contrast One of the first differences that people point out about plasmas and LCDs is the color contrast -- making blacks blacker and whites whiter. Because of the way that plasma TVs are designed, they"re better at delivering sharper color levels than LCD displays. If you"re a TV and movie enthusiast, having distinct color contrast is a must [source: Miller].

Space and energy conservation Those who want to be energy efficient should consider the amount of power that your TV is going to use. When comparing the same size TV screens, LCDs are proven to be more energy efficient than plasmas. As well, LCDs tend to be thinner and lighter than plasmas with the same size screen [source: Kindig].

Motion handling When tech critics discuss the issue of motion handling, they"re referring to how motion is displayed on the TV screen. Ideally, the motion should be natural and crisp. When motion handling is impaired, the actions appear blurry or lagging. There is a general consensus that plasmas outperform LCD displays in the area of motion handling. If you"re an avid sports viewer, precise and clean motion handling is necessary [source: Kindig].

Price Plasma screens are generally cheaper than LCDs. Sometimes the price difference can be quite large, with a plasma screen costing $1000 less than a comparable LCD [source: Miller]. //]]]]> ]]>

This article highlights the pros and cons of plasma versus LCD as applicable to a television display. It also presents a set of guidelines to help you determine where either of these two flat panel display technologies fit best.

Though both LCD and plasma displays come in the form of slim flat panel displays, yet from a technology perspective, these two flat panel displays process the image in a totally different manner.

Plasma uses a matrix of tiny gas plasma cells that are charged by precise electrical voltages to emit light and hence to create the picture image. Liquid Crystal Displays (LCD) panels - work by trapping a liquid crystal solution between two sheets of polarized glass. When an electric current is passed through the liquid crystals, they change the polarization of the light passing through them in response to the electric voltage – as a result of which, more or less light is able to pass through the polarized glass on the face of the display.

Size: For the time being, collision between plasma television and LCD TV occur in the 40 to 50 inch screen range. In reality, LCD TVs top out at around 45" – meaning that for bigger screen sizes, a plasma display is your only real option if what you are after is a direct-view TV system. On the other hand, at the smaller end of spectrum, namely 15" to 36" TVs, LCD is the way to go if what you want is something stylish and slim (at under 4-inches in depth).

Picture Quality, Contrast and Color Saturation: Both plasma and the latest TFT-LCD flat panel displays are capable of producing excellent picture quality – with bright, crisp clear images.

However, plasma flat panel displays are more suitable for basic home theater usage than LCD. The gas cell structure within a plasma display is such that there is no light leaking between adjacent cells (or pixels). This renders plasma displays capable of displaying deeper blacks – hence better contrast and detail in television and movie scenes where lots of dark and light content is shown simultaneously.

In comparison, the nature of LCD technology – where a backlight shines through the LCD layer – means that it is hard for it to achieve true blacks (i.e. true absence of light) as there is always some light leakage from adjacent pixels.

This does not mean that LCD panel s are not suitable as TV screens; today’s LCD TV sets make use of extreme high contrast panels that are capable of displaying deeper blacks, yet the latest plasma TV sets still have a slight edge over LCD when it comes to contrast levels.

The situation is somewhat similar when it comes to color saturation. Again, it is the different display structure between LCD and plasma that is the reason behind the difference between the two technologies in this respect, and though both are capable of handling color in an exceptional manner, yet plasma displays still lead in this respect - producing more accurate and vibrant colors.

Viewing-angle:Plasma Television sets – like their CRT TV counterpart - typically have better viewing angles than LCD. The viewing angle represents how far one can sit on either side of the screen away from the center, without experiencing significant deterioration in picture quality – mainly as a result of color shifts and reduced contrast.

Though recent developments in LCD technology means that this is less of an issue with some of the latest LCD TV sets boosting a viewing angle of 160 to 170 degrees vertically and horizontally, yet it is always best to check. The tendency – especially with cheaper sets – is that the deterioration in picture quality is more accentuated with LCD than with plasma displays.

Burn-In: As with all phosphor-based displays, plasma displays are prone to burn-in, or image retention. Screen burn-in occurs when an image is left for too long on the screen – resulting in a ghost of the image burned on the screen. Surely, keeping the brightness and contrast levels down will help reduce the risk of burn-in.

While some brands of plasma displays are more prone than others to burn-in, yet in general, plasma screens are more prone to suffer permanent burn-in during their first 200 hours of use; the reason being that fresh phosphors burn more intensely as they are ignited.

Worst still is the prolonged presentation of static displays, such as the use of black or gray bars to view a 4:3 picture in its original format on a wide screen display; this will result in a permanent burn-in. Once permanent burn-in occurs, the damaged phosphors cannot produce the same levels of light output as the other phosphors around them do.

Viewing distance: It seems that the pixel size and shape of an LCD panel renders a smoother picture than an equivalently sized plasma panel for the same pixel count.

This means that even if your viewing distance falls within the recommended distance of approximately twice the screen width, if this is less than at least nine feet, most probably you will be better off with an LCD TV.

Life-time: The rare gases used in plasma display panels have a life and will fade over use. Earlier plasma TV sets had a quoted half-lifetime of between 20,000hrs, following which the image brightness will fall to half its original value. However, the latest plasma displays can boost anything between 30,000 and 60,000 hours. On the other hand, LCD displays have a guaranteed lifetime of between 50,000hrs and 60,000 hours. This degradation in image brightness takes place gradually over time.

Now, the average household in the US replaces their TV set every 7 years. Taking a conservative figure of 30,000 hours for either technology, this corresponds to well over 6hrs usage a day - every day - for over a period of 14 years! In other words, both plasma and LCD displays are extremely stable and reliable devices. This means that life-time should not be an issue with either display technology.

At the same time, keep in mind that there is no way to re-generate the gases in a plasma display or to repair any ‘dead’ pixels in an LCD display – the only option in such circumstances will be to replace the display.

Response:Some LCD panels – especially on older generation models - had a tendency to blur images particularly during fast moving scenes in movies and sports. However, recent advancement in LCD technology means that response times are such that there is no noticeable difference in performance between LCD and plasma TV sets in this regard.

Power requirements: The advantage here goes to LCD panels as these consume less electricity. Estimates show that the use of LCD panels can result in some 30% power savings for the same screen size than plasma display.

Price: Price is always a big issue when it comes to choosing your TV display. Although prices online vary considerably, yet LCD TV sets tend to be more expensive than Plasma Televisions. The main reason behind this price gap is that the production process for plasma technology still supports a better yield and thus carries a pricing advantage – especially at the large screen end of the market.

This contrasts heavily with LCD display technology where an estimate 30 to 40 per cent of all manufactured panels will have to be discarded as a result of defects leading to what are known as "bad-pixels".

There is a market for both plasma and LCD displays - Plasma gives you a bigger screen for your dollar, deeper blacks, but then LCD do not suffer from burn-in and at the smaller end of the market (less than 40-inch screen size)

We live in a world of choice. In each moment, we are presented with the opportunity to choose from an array of options. The truth is, though, that we do not always make our choices consciously. Sometimes, instead of choosing what is best for our personal requirements, we fall in the trap of commercial tricks and purchase a product we do not need. When we want to make a choice based on facts and objective reasoning exclusively, we need to methodically analyze and compare each product based on the criteria we value. In this essay, I will try to do that when choosing between the two most popular types of TVs: LCD and plasma. When entering the technical department of any supermarket or a high-tech store, many people ask themselves whether a LCD TV is better than a plasma TV, or vice versa. To answer this question, we need to compare the two products based on several relevant technical criteria.

As a result of such technical differences, a conclusion can be drawn that plasma TV sets are better in comparison to LCD TV sets when it comes to lighting (Howard, TV Comparisons: Modern). Also, many users have noted that plasma screens give an enhanced black color display as compared to LCD screens. In addition, a plasma TV affords better viewing angles.

Another crucial criterion to consider whenever we compare two products of everyday use is the pricing range. The price of any TV set depends on the display diameter and the stylistic configuration of the device. One may spend up to a million dollars on a TV set that was designed and custom made exclusively for their interior, and may even be inlaid with precious stones or a designer label. However, when we aim to compare two products based on their cost, we need to select two equally-sized, factory-made for mass consumption products of one or two popular brands, and compare their prices. An average plasma TV is cheaper than an LCD TV.This is largely due to the fact that a plasma TV costs less to assemble, thus translating into a lower price (Fields, Price Comparisons of Viewing). The price criterion once again speaks in favor of the plasma TV. At the same time, when taking the price factor into account, we have to understand its changeability. Since LCD TVs are a much more current technological invention than the plasma TV, there is a high possibility that the price of LCD products will decrease palpably in the near future, as technological progress offers us new alternatives.

At the same time, it is logical to assume that the LCD TV will also have some considerable advantages that help it successfully compete with the plasma TV on store shelves and in consumers’ households. One such important advantage of the LCD TV would be its lifespan. LCD TVs have a longer lifespan as opposed to the plasma TV (Franz, TV Statistics). It also has superior screen resolution. This would be a decisive factor to choose LCD over plasma for those consumers who enjoy playing high-resolution video games on their TVs. However, this would not greatly matter to an average TV viewer, since a plasma TV perfectly copes with the other tasks of a regular TV set without any resolution imperfections for the viewer.

Ultimately, technology matters less when it comes to obtaining such a popular domestic device as a TV set. After all, it is about the reliability and safety of the device that every member of your family will use practically every day. Having compared the two most popular types of TV sets, I came to the conclusion that there should be no controversy between LCD TVs and plasma TVs. It is not about which TV set is more worth its cost, or which is better-selling, but about the purpose for which the TV set is being used. Notwithstanding the similarities between plasma and LCD TV sets, their understated differences might be crucial when taking into consideration the TV’s use, the environment, and location.

Buying the largest, most costly TV set that will occupy no less than a whole wall in your living room might not be one of the smartest decisions for a household with children and pets, while it would perfectly suit a hi-tech apartment of a young business person. Consumers should remember a couple of basic tips when choosing one type of TV over the other. For instance, if you want to fit a TV set into a huge space, then a plasma TV will do better due to the wider viewing angle and the lower price of big sizes. The debate about which TV set is better is far from over. In the end, the question lies more in the hands of the consumer. Next time you buy a plasma or LCD TV set, do not be surprised if your neighbor criticizes your choice.

No native resolution. Currently, the only display technology capable of multi-syncing (displaying different resolutions and refresh rates without the need for scaling).Display lag is extremely low due to its nature, which does not have the ability to store image data before output, unlike LCDs, plasma displays and OLED displays.

Later on in the 1990’s I started hearing about flat screen plasma televisions, but they were over $15,000.00 back then, and you rarely saw them anywhere.  In addition, DVD players and digital high definition television broadcasts weren’t readily available at the time.  There was, however, already talk of the possible upcoming advances in video display technology.  As this technology advanced I became more and more interested in big screen flat panel television sets.

It was in 2005 when I bought my first Plasma TV.  I bought a Panasonic 50” plasma TV, and I am still amazed at the picture quality.  We chose a Plasma TV over an LCD TV because, to me, standing in the store looking at dozens of TV screens side by side, consistently, the plasma displays looked more natural, seamless, detailed, and brilliant.  Also, for some reason, LCD TVs seemed to fatigue my eyes trying to focus on the picture.  Over the years I’ve learned why it is that a Plasma TV is so much better looking to me.  The key difference is in how the viewing screen is made–and it’s a big difference.

Plasma TVs rely on hundreds of thousands of tiny individual plasma light bulbs to make up the picture similar to the way pixels on an old CRT screen made a picture.  Each individual light bulb is lit to a precise brightness level and color according to the electronic signal sent to it.  The number of these light bulbs on an individual screen is equivalent to the native screen resolution.

LCD TVs have hundreds of thousands of tiny liquid crystal cells that open and close to a precise level when power is applied to them.  These liquid crystal cells let light through the screen from a constant fluorescent backlight, similar to how window blinds allow sunlight to pass through as they are opened and closed. The number of these cells on an individual screen is equivalent to the native screen resolution.

An LED TV is just an LCD TV that uses LED backlights instead of a fluorescent backlight, so they share most of the same basic characteristics as LCD TVs.

What this means is that with a Plasma TV you are looking directly at the source of light, and with LCD and LED TVs you are looking through “a set of blinds” to the light source, which causes a lot of problems.

One problem the “blind effect” causes is a decreased viewing angle.  With an LCD or LED TV you will see the best picture if you are sitting directly in front of the TV.  The picture will degrade and darken with every degree of angle you move farther from direct center of the TV –until you can’t see the picture at all on the screen.  With a Plasma TV, since you are looking directly at the light source there is no “cut off angle”. That means you can see the screen as vividly looking at it from the side or the top as you can directly in front of it.  This allows everyone in the room to enjoy the same beautiful, bright picture, no matter where they are located or whether they are standing, sitting, or lying down.

Another problem the “blind effect” causes is a reduced contrast ratio in LCD and LED TVs compared with Plasma TVs.  Contrast ratio is the comparison of the blackest black to the whitest white and allows you to see details in a dark picture.  A visible example of a high contrast ratio vs. a low contrast ratio is being able to see individual strands of hair on a dark-haired person on the screen vs. seeing a dark blob of hair with no visible strands on a low contrast ratio screen.  It’s easier to achieve high contrast ratios on a plasma screen than on an LCD screen because it’s easier to turn an individual light bulb off on a plasma screen and make the pixel completely dark than it is to close the blinds on an LCD cell and block all the light out to make it completely dark.  Remember, the light source for an LCD TV is a fluorescent backlight that is always on.  And, again, if you aren’t sitting directly in front of the LCD TV the contrast ratio will suffer greatly as the viewing angle increases, while there is no such problem with Plasma TVs.  LCD TVs are getting better at this, but they are still just trying to match what Plasma TVs already do naturally, and using a lot of expensive technology to do it.

The biggest problem the “blind effect” causes is called motion blur.  And this is where there is really no comparison between the two technologies.  Until about 4 years ago, Plasma TV manufacturers didn’t even advertise a specification on this issue, because for them, it doesn’t exist.  There is no motion lag, drag, or blur in plasma TVs, nor is there side-to-side judder when panning because each individual pixel creates its own color, basically in an instant, as needed.  In LCD and LED TVs, the LCD cells have to mechanically open and close to filter the light and create color, and regulate the brightness of an individual pixel.  This means there is a time element involved to get “the blinds” turned to the correct angle.  This causes the picture to blur when objects move quickly across the screen, or when a camera pans and the background moves across the screen quickly.  The LCD cells can’t accurately keep up with this, while Plasma cells have no trouble.  LCD and LED manufacturers advertise their specs on “Refresh Rate” to compare this problem between LCD TVs.  The basic refresh rate used to be 60 hz (60 times per second) on older LCD TVs.  Today the more common refresh rate on LCD and LED TVs is 120 hz, which has reduced this problem.  You can pay extra and get an LCD TV with a 240 hz or even a 480 hz refresh rate.  To demonstrate how this is not a problem for Plasma TVs, Plasma TV manufacturers started advertising a 600 hz refresh rate on basic Plasma TVs a few years ago, even though that number is actually not real because the problem is non-existent in Plasma TVs.

The bottom line is, you can spend a lot of unnecessary money for a top of the line LCD or LED TV with all the latest technology that is just trying to match the picture quality that a basic Plasma TV has always been able to deliver.  Today, a 50”, 720p, Panasonic Plasma TV similar to the one I paid over $3500.00 for about 6 years ago, will cost about $700.00.  A name brand high contrast ratio, high refresh rate 50” LCD TV will cost over $1000.00, and a similar quality LED TV will cost you over $1200.00.  Let your eyes be the judge, and don’t think that just because one TV costs more than another that it is automatically a better product.

Buying a TV and wondering what type of display tech is better? We’ve got the lowdown for you in this LCD vs Plasma buying guide. These two technologies produce images through vastly different processes, and each comes with a different set of pros and cons. So before we dive head first into which type of screen is better and why, it’s helpful to understand the technology behind each type of screen. Don’t worry, it’s not as complex as you might think.

LCD is short for liquid crystal display, and while the TVs made with this tech come in a few different varieties (namely CCFL-backlit and LED-backlit), the panels they use are the same. LCD panels are typically composed of two sheets of polarized material with a liquid crystal solution between them, so when an electric current passes through the liquid, it causes the crystals to align so that light can (or can’t) pass through. Think of each crystal as a shutter or gate, either allowing light to pass through or blocking it out. After passing through the frontmost polarized pane, the light then passes through a color filter that leaves it either red, green, or blue. Each cluster of red green and blue makes up one pixel on the screen. By selectively illuminating the colors within each pixel, a wide range of hues can be produced on the larger display.

Plasma displays work in an entirely different way. Instead of using a backlight and a set of filters to illuminate pixels on the screen, images on a plasma TVs are created by ionized gas (plasma) that lights up when you run an electrical current through it. The easiest way to undertand it is by thinking of each individual subpixel on the TV as a tiny neon light, or perhaps a miniature version of the florescent tubes you might be sitting under right now. The pixels that make up a plasma display are almost exactly the same technology, just on a much smaller scale.

For those of you who care to understand the science behind it all, here’s how the magic happens: An electrode applies an electrical current to a small cell filled with a noble gas mixture (usually neon and xenon). This excites the gas, ionizing it and transforming it into a plasma. This plasma emits ultraviolet light – which we can’t see – but when the UV light hits a phosphor coating that lines each cell, it causes the phosphor to glow and put out light that we can see. Depending on which particular phosphor the cell is coated with, it will create a red, green, or blue glow. Just like with LCD displays, each cluster of red green and blue subpixels makes up one pixel on the screen (see header image).

Due to the fact that plasma displays have the ability to completely turn off individual pixels, they boast far better black levels than LCD displays. Although LCD tech has improved over the years, the panels still aren’t that great at blocking out light completely, which makes it really hard for them to achieve true blackness on dark scenes. This is especially true of CCFL-backlit LCD screens. Some LED-backlit LCD TVs with local dimming can achieve black levels comparable to those of plasma TVs, but they’re generally much more expensive.

Because of the way they’re designed, plasma TV’s are also better at controlling the relative level of brightness of each red, blue, or green subpixel, so they typically produce greater contrast, more realistically textured images, and richer colors than their LCD counterparts.

Plasma displays also tend to have much better viewing angles than LCD TVs, mostly because the polarizing filters on LCD panels tend to cut out light that isn’t traveling straight forward. Since plasma displays don’t rely on filters to manage the light you see, their pictures can be enjoyed from a relatively wide angle without losing any integrity. Some higher end LCD TV’s incorporate technology to improve viewing angle, but most still aren’t on par with plasma displays.

When images move quickly across a screen, sometimes the pixels on an LCD panel can’t turn on and off fast enough, which results in what we call motion blur. Plasma screens generally don’t have this problem because the florescent phosphor coating in each subpixel stops glowing just a few nanoseconds after the electrode turns off, but LCD screens take a bit longer. This is because the crystals that control the flow of light (ie, shutters) take some extra time to open and close. That being said, however, many newer LCD screens feature refresh rates of 12oHz or faster, which effectively cuts out the problem of motion blur. Lower-end models might still have this drawback though, so be sure to check refresh rates before you buy anything.

If you’ve done even a small amount of research on plasma screens, there’s a good chance you’ve come across a thing called burn-in. This refers to an image that persists on the screen even after the image that created it is long gone – kinda like when somebody shines a flashlight in your face and you can still see streaks when you close your eyes. Burn-in works in the same way, but on your TV. If something bright stays on a plasma screen for too long (like CNN’s ticker or the Discovery Channel logo) it can sometimes leave a visible ghost behind after the image has gone away. This was a big problem in early plasma displays, but burn-in has largely been eradicated now that manufacturers have devised ways to cycle power to the phosphors and keep them from staying lit for too long. Still, it’s probably not a good idea to leave a static image on your screen for days on end.

Plasma TV’s are much more power-hungry than their LCD counterparts. Generally speaking, a CCFL-backlit LCD screen consumes about half the power of a plasma screen of the same size, and a LED-backlit LCD screen uses even less power than that. Depending on the cost of electricity where you live, you might want to factor in power costs if you’re thinking about buying a plasma TV.

Despite all the advances plasma technology has seen over the years, it still can’t match the brightness enjoyed by LED or CCFL-backlit LCD screens. This makes LCD TVs a better option for rooms with lots of light – especially since plasma TVs almost always have glossy, reflective screens.

So which type of TV should you go with? It depends on a few different factors, but if you’re looking for the best picture at the lowest price, definitely go with a plasma TV. Plasma sets cost roughly as much as your typical CCFL-backlit LCD TV, but offer a picture that’s on par with or better than some of the best, most expensive LED TV’s on the market.

However, if your home theater setup is in a room that’s got a lot of windows and ambient light pouring in, or you just have to have the thinnest TV on your block, you might want to opt for an LCD TV. So long as it’s within your budget, we recommend buying an LED-backlit or edgelit LCD TV – they’re thinner, prettier, and more energy-efficient than their CCFL cousins, but also more expensive. CCFL-backlit LCD TVs should only be a last resort – avoid them if at all possible.

There are two, competing flat panel technologies in the market today, Plasma and LCD. A lot of hype and hearsay surrounds both as to their relative merits. For the less well informed this can lead to confusion, and even to the wrong choice of display technology.

“Samsung produce both plasma and LCD products. Our largest LCD at the moment is 46 inches and above that in plasma we do 50 inches and 63 inches. We do intend, next year, to introduce a larger, probably 57 inches, LCD. That’s where the market is headed. Despite this size differential, we generally distinguish between the two technologies based on application.

For the uninitiated burn in is an effect whereby a plasma (or old CRT) display that shows the same static image for a long period of time can develop fatigue which leads to that image being “burnt in” to the screen.

James Atkins, of LG Electronics, explained the phenomenon. “People are wary of plasma because of burn in and sometimes I speak to people, who seem to be under the impression that if they leave something on the display for more than five minutes at a time, then it’s going to get burn in. But the reality is that to get something to burn in you’d have to leave it there a very extended period of time. And these days it happens no more than it used to on an old CRT. Admittedly the first generation of plasma screens suffered from it probably more than CRTs did, or at least faster. Now the displays are better and we have methods in place to alleviate it, or prevent it from becoming an issue.”

“When we talk to these customers it’s always burn in that’s the issue, not brightness, or response times or performance, but whether they will need to replace the screens before time. We have some customers who initially want plasma products but once we talk to them about burn in, and also simple things like the warranty, they change their minds.

However, LCD isn’t always the best solution in all situations. All the manufacturers who sell both technologies have a cut off point where LCD stops and plasma starts. So if you want a large display, say 60” or more, you have to buy plasma. And certainly plasma screens are available in larger sizes. Panasonic have a 103” product in the offing.

But why is there a size division at all? Even if the different technologies are useful for different applications, why can’t we simply have 15” plasma displays and 103” LCDs.

The short answer is a combination of technology and economics. It’s not currently possible to make a plasma display that small, and it’s far too expensive at the moment to make a 70” LCD. It’s likely that advances in production techniques will make larger LCD displays cheaper but, at the moment, if you have a couple of similar sized displays around the 40 inch mark the LCD is likely to cost you between 40 and 50% more than it’s plasma counterpart.

Alan Hemson cites another bone of contention. “There’s a feeling amongst some people, particularly AV guys, that plasma is better for video. My personal view is that LCD is catching up very quickly on this. Plasma screens also give better ‘blacks’ as opposed to LCD screens, but that’s often more about the ambient lighting conditions than the display itself.”

“When it actually comes down to picture differences, LCD is very good in very, very brightly lit conditions. Where plasma scores, is that it doesn’t rely on back lighting or illumination. If you look at an LCD in a show room under bright light, it looks fantastic, but if you watch something on it in low lighting conditions then suddenly all your blacks wash out. Conversely plasma can suffer the same problem is bright lighting conditions. LCD is therefore often popular in superstores and other brightly lit environments.”

The other factor than can affect visual performance of the flat displays is response time. This is characterised usually as the time it takes a display pixel to turn from black to white, although some companies will quote a grey to grey transition. Differences in response time are particularly evident in content that has a lot of movement, such as video. Traditionally plasma has had the edge in this area, although as Hemson and Catcheside both stated, LCD has made great strides in this respect. Unfortunately for LCD proponents, plasma technology is still getting faster as well. The time difference may only be measured in milliseconds, but the human eye is a sensitive beast and more than capable of spotting it.

Catcheside also notes that another criticism levelled at plasma is that it is more power hungry and less efficient than LCD. “We’ve done a lot of research into this claim to prove that it simply isn’t true. LCD has a continuous emission from its back light, whereas the plasma is only lighting the required pixels. If you average the use out over the lifetime of the display there is really nothing in it.”

“In terms of longevity and durability the two are similar. We wouldn’t say that one is more durable or longer lasting than the other. The standard time we quote for both plasma or LCD is 60,000 running hours.”

However, Samsung’s Hemson disagrees. “LCD is generally more durable for an outdoor application, and also has a longer life expectancy than plasma.”

At the current time, if you need a display that’s fifty or sixty inches in size you are left with little choice but plasma. And if you’re looking at something smaller than about 35-37” then LCD is likely to be your only option.

However, in the middle ground the choice then becomes more complex. Ultimately it’s a decision based on what type content your display is to be used for and also how important the quality of the image is. If the screen is to be used to show video or other fast moving content, in a situation such as a board room, where lighting levels can be controlled, then plasma still provides a better response time, and a much more attractive price point.

On the other hand, content that’s to be static for a long time where burn in is a real risk, or displayed in very bright conditions may well be better displayed on an LCD. Information screens in airports or railway stations are a case in point. In-store digital signage is another good example, where high ambient lighting could cause problems.

However, a lot of the time, things come down to budget. Despite advances in the technology, LCD panels are still, size for size, more expensive than plasma. Whilst some will tell you plasma is on the way out, such people should be ignored. Both technologies have considerable headroom for development, more so plasma, since it is in fact the younger of the two.

Neil Colquhoun Channel Business Manager for Panasonic summarises: “The fundamental trade off is that you offset the benefits of picture quality against the benefits of small size, but if you said to me 50” plasma or 50” LCD, I’d say that there was no contest. Plasma is still the best choice.”

Shoppers face many tough choices when looking for a new TV: How big should it be? What kinds of bells and whistles come with it? Here are the pros and cons of LED TVs versus plasma TVs to help you make that choice a little easier.

What is an LED TV, anyway? An LED TV is an LCD (liquid crystal display) TV that is back-lit with light-emitting diodes (LEDs). (There are actually two types of LCD TVs: LEDs, and ones with cold-cathode fluorescent lamp (CCFL) backlighting.)

Thomas Evans, associate vice president at Sharp Electronics, which sells LED TVs, says that LCD TVs are generally brighter than their plasma counterparts, making them ideal for rooms with a lot of light and spaces.

LED TVs are also more energy-efficient. Gene Ornstead, the director of TV products at the Los Angeles-based hardware maker ViewSonic, says that, on average, edge-lit LED TVs (which have the LEDs are located along the edges) consume 30 to 40% less power than plasma TVs.

Depending on the brand, size and capabilities of the television, LED TVs can cost quite a bit more than plasma ones. For example, a 60-inch Samsung LED Smart TV costs almost $3,300 on the company"s website, while a 59-inch plasma Smart TV is priced at about $2,100.

"Plasma has been around longest," says Megan Magnuski, an internet and corporate sales rep at Abt Electronics, "so the technology has been refined and the cost is lower."

In addition to their affordability, plasma TVs tend to present better picture contrast and black levels than LED TVs, according to Crutchfield.com. This contrast makes plasma TVs a good fit for dark or dimly-lit rooms. When you are watching something with fast-moving images like a sports game or an action movie, plasma TVs will likely display a more fluid and crisp picture. LED TVs tend to have low refresh rates, meaning fast motion images may appear blurry, Magnuski says.

Plasma TVs are susceptible to glare because they have glass screens, Magnuski explains. This can be annoying if you are trying to watch television during the day and the afternoon sunlight is streaming through your window at just the right angle to obscure half of the screen. Plasma TVs also generate more heat and consume more power than LCD TVs.

Although it is no longer the problem it once was, there is still a chance that your plasma TV will be hit with what is referred to as "burn in." If you keep a stagnant image is on the screen for too long (if you pause a DVD, leave the TV on and don"t return for hours), the screen may retain that image. LCD TVs don"t have phosphors, which can cause "burn in," so you don"t have to worry about image retention.

If you"re in the market for a flat-screen television, then you probably have one big question you want answered: plasma vs. LCD; which one is right for you?

The two different camps of flat-panel display standards will, of course, gladly spruik the advantages of their own standard and the deficiencies of the other. But what type of display — plasma or LCD — is actually better? And which will give you more bang for your buck?

Plasma and LCD panels may look similar, but the flat screen and the thin profile are where the similarities end. Plasma screens, as the name suggests, use a matrix of tiny gas plasma cells charged by precise electrical voltages to create a picture. LCD (liquid crystal display) screens are in layman"s terms sandwiches made up of liquid crystal pushed in the space between two glass plates. Images are created by varying the amount of electrical charge applied to the crystals. Each technology has its strengths and weaknesses, as you"ll read below.

It"s not what"s happening behind the screen that"s important — it"s how the screen performs as a television that matters the most. In that regard, both plasma and LCD TV sets produce excellent pictures, and the differences between them aren"t as pronounced as they used to be. While the latest plasmas are particularly good, LCD sets are quickly catching up in terms of quality, with advances like LED backlighting.

For basic home cinema-like usage, plasma screens have a slight edge over LCDs. This is because plasma screens can still display blacks more accurately than LCDs can, which means better contrast and detail in dark scenes. The nature of LCD technology, where a backlight shines through the LCD layer, means that it"s hard for it to achieve true blacks because there"s always some light leakage from between pixels. As LCD/LED technologies such as polarising filters and dynamic backlights improve, the quality gap between the technologies grows narrower.

Apart from better contrast due to its ability to show deeper blacks, plasma screens typically have better viewing angles than LCD. Viewing angles are how far you can sit on either side of a screen before the picture"s quality is affected. You tend to see some brightness and colour shift when you"re on too much of an angle with LCDs, while a plasma"s picture remains fairly solid. Plasmas can also produce richer, more natural colours, due to both light leakage and to a limit on the hues that LCD can reproduce.

Plasma pundits will also tell you that some LCD screens have a tendency to blur images, particularly during fast-moving scenes in movies or in sport. While that was true for older generation LCD screens, newer models have improved significantly — so much so that the differences in performance between LCDs and plasmas in this regard is almost negligible. (While the pixel response time, measured in milliseconds (ms), can give you some indication of an LCD"s performance with fast-moving scenes, it"s not always reliable.)

Traditionally, the biggest advantage that plasmas have had over their LCD cousins is price, particularly in the large screen end of the market. Depending on the resolution, plasma is still able to beat most equivalently priced LCD screens. Plasmas currently sold in Australia generally run between 42 and 65 inches wide, with the cheapest 1024x768 standard-definition 42-inch selling for under AU$1000.

At present, the mainstream plasma size is 50 inches, but sizes of 60 inches and above are becoming more common. At these sizes, plasmas tend to be two thirds or less than the price of the equivalent LCD, due to the high manufacturing cost of LCD panels.

Apart from becoming increasingly price-competitive, LCD has the edge over plasma in several other key areas. LCDs tend to have a higher native resolution than plasmas of similar size, which means more pixels on the screen.

LCDs also tend to consume less power than plasma screens, with some of the newer "Eco" LCD panels able to use half of the power than equivalent plasmas, with the trade-off being lower brightness.

In terms of bulk, LCDs are also generally lighter than similar-sized plasmas, making it easier to move around or wall-mount. This is because LCDs use plastic in their screen make-up, whereas plasmas tend to use glass.

LCD pundits point to the belief that LCDs have a longer lifespan than plasma screens. While this may have been true of earlier plasma models — which dropped to half-brightness at 20,000 hours — many modern plasmas have the same 60,000-hour lifespan as LCDs. This means that both types of TVs will last for almost seven years if left on 24 hours a day.

You might have also heard that plasmas suffer from screen burn-in, an affliction not commonly associated with LCDs. Screen burn-in occurs when an image is left too long on a screen, resulting in a ghost of that image "burned in". Newer plasmas are less susceptible to this, thanks to improved technology and features such as screensavers, but burn-in can still be a problem. However, after a few days most burnt-in images will fade — they are no longer permanent.

If you"re in the market for a big-screen television — and we"re talking 50 inches and above — then we"d suggest plasma as a safe bet. Plasmas give you more bang for your buck at the big end of town, and while LCDs can give you better resolution, plasma still has the edge in terms of picture quality.

At the smaller end of things (17- to 42-inch TVs), LCD is the only way to go if you want something slim and tasteful. And the best thing is that LCDs are getting cheaper all the time.

There has also been a lot of debate surrounding use in bright environments versus dark, cinema-like conditions. The traditional wisdom is that LCD performs better during the day due to its backlighting system, and that plasma works best in a dark environment, as it uses a glass front. Nonetheless, products like the non-reflective glass plasmas and LED-backlit LCD panels with their better blacks completely turn this logic on its head.

In the past couple of years, several new features have cropped up, but the most pertinent to this discussion is 3D. While it"s possible to manufacture a 3D screen with both LCD technology and plasma, based on our extensive testing, a plasma screen is the best at producing 3D images and reducing the artefact known as crosstalk, or ghosted imaging. Be aware that there is still very little content available in 3D, and that the technology is still evolving. Buy a set for its 2D abilities first, and then consider 3D.

While most screens are now full high-definition (1080p), resolution is a consideration when you"re looking at budget screens. Budget LCDs and plasmas feature either 1366x768 or 1024x768 (720p) resolutions. If you"re buying a screen that"s 42 inches or larger, though, there"s now no reason to get anything less than 1080p.

Good for still images and great for computer monitors as well. So, if you’re looking for a screen for TV and computer use, LCDs are an excellent option

Plasma TV production ended in 2015. However, they are still being used and sold in the secondary market. As a result, it"s helpful to understand how a Plasma TV works and how it compares to an LCD TV.

Within each cell, a narrow gap that contains an insulating layer, address electrode, and display electrode, separates two glass panels. In this process, neon-xenon gas is injected and sealed in plasma form during the manufacturing process.

When a Plasma TV is in use, the gas is electrically charged at specific intervals. The charged gas then strikes red, green, and blue phosphors, creating an image on the screen.

Each group of red, green, and blue phosphors is called a pixel (picture element — the individual red, green, and blue phosphors are called sub-pixels). Since Plasma TV pixels generate their light, they are referred to as "emissive" displays.

Plasma TVs can be made thin. However, even though the need for the bulky picture tube and electron beam scanning of those older CRT TVs is not required, Plasma TVs still employ burning phosphors to generate an image. As a result, Plasma TVs suffer from some of the drawbacks of CRT TVs, such as heat generation and possible screen burn-in of static images.

LCD crystals do not produce light, so they need an external source, such as fluorescent (CCFL/​HCFL) or LEDs, for the picture created by the LCD to become visible to the viewer.

Unlike a Plasma TV, since there are no phosphors that light up, less power is needed for operation, and the light source in an LCD TV generates less heat than a Plasma TV. There is no radiation emitted from the screen.

Plasma TVs are more vulnerable to burn-in of static images. However, this problem diminished over the years due to "pixel orbiting" and related technologies.

Potentially shorter display lifespan. Early models had 30,000 hours or 8 hours of viewing a day for nine years, which was less than LCD. However, screen lifespan improved and 60,000-hour lifespan rating became the standard, with some sets rated as high as 100,000 hours, due to technology improvements.

Not as good at tracking motion (fast-moving objects may exhibit lag artifacts). However, this has with the implementation of 120Hz screen refresh rates and 240Hz processing in most LCD sets, but that can result in the "Soap Opera Effect," in which film-based content sources look more like a videotape than film.

Narrower effective side-to-side viewing angle than Plasma. On LCD TVs, it is common to notice color fading or color shifting as you move your viewing position further to either side of the center point.

Although LCD TVs do not suffer from burn-in susceptibility, single pixels can burn out, causing small but visible, black or white dots to appear on the screen. Individual pixels are not fixable. Replacing the whole screen is the sole option if the pixel burnout becomes unbearable.

An LCD TV was typically more expensive than an equivalent-sized (and equivalent featured) Plasma TV. However, that is no longer a factor, since companies have ceased manufacturing Plasma TVs.

Manufacturers chose to incorporate 4K resolution only in LCD TVs, using LED back and edge-lighting, and, in the case of LG and Sony, incorporating 4K into TVs using OLED technology.

Although it was possible to incorporate 4K resolution display capability into a Plasma TV, it was prohibitively expensive. When the sales of Plasma TVs started declining, TV makers decided against bringing consumer-based 4K Ultra HD Plasma TVs to market, which was another factor in their demise. The only 4K Ultra HD Plasma TVs manufactured were for commercial application use.

TAIPEI (Reuters) - Plasma TV suppliers such as Panasonic maker Matsushita Electric, already outnumbered by the rival LCD camp, are expected to lose further ground as LCD TVs encroach on the 40-inch-class market, a plasma stronghold.A woman is silhouetted against a new sony "Bravia" flat panel LCD TV in Tokyo, August 30, 2006. Growing demand for higher-resolution television models is giving a leg up to LCD TVs, promoted by Sony and many others in Taiwan and South Korea, paving the way for consolidation among plasma companies, analysts say. REUTERS/Yuriko Nakao

Growing demand for higher-resolution models is also giving a leg up to liquid crystal display (LCD) TVs, promoted by Sony Corp.and many others in Taiwan and South Korea, paving the way for consolidation among plasma companies, analysts say.

It is technologically difficult and often costly for plasma makers to give a full high-definition function to models with a screen size of less than 50 inches, while LCD TV makers are aggressively promoting full HD models in that segment although prices are generally higher.

“This Christmas season probably is the last chance for (plasma TV makers) to promote 42-inch models. By this time next year probably there will be no price difference between plasma and LCD TVs,” Credit Suisse analyst Wanli Wang said.

He expects LCD TV prices to fall 30 percent or more in 2007, compared with a decline of 15 to 20 percent for plasma TVs, due to ample LCD panel supplies.

Sharp Corp.in August started LCD production at its Kameyama No. 2 plant, the world"s first to cut panels from eighth-generation glass substrates, which can yield eight 40-inch-class panels, compared with just three panels from the sixth-generation glass used at its first Kameyama plant.

DisplaySearch forecasts that the plasma TV market will start shrinking in 2009 after hitting $24 billion in 2008, while it sees LCD TV demand reaching $75 billion in 2008 and $93 billion in 2010 - a trend that will likely make companies offering both LCD and plasma lines think twice about their strategy.

South Korea"s Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.and LG Electronics Inc.as well as Japan"s Hitachi Ltd.offer both LCD and plasma TVs. Matsushita also sells both products, although it heavily bets on plasma.

“The larger panels become, the more important response speeds for moving images are. In this point, plasma still excels,” Matsushita President Fumio Ohtsubo told reporters last month.

CPT’s Wu agrees that plasma panels, especially 50-inch and larger ones, do excel LCDs in some aspects of picture quality, but he says the sheer size of the LCD camp will help LCD panels overcome whatever drawbacks they have in a timely manner.

About 80 percent of global flat screen R&D spending is being allocated to LCD panels, and the remaining 20 percent to plasma and some other technologies, Credit Suisse’s Wang said.

In a potential sign of slowing plasma TV demand, Japan"s top three plasma TV makers -- Matsushita, Hitachi and Pioneer Corp.-- last month cut their unit sales forecasts by 8 to 20 percent for the year to March.

With the 40-inch-class market gradually taken over by LCD TVs, plasma models need to migrate to the market for 50-inch TVs and above, but demand is not as well developed there, analysts say.

“The United States accounts for more than 70 percent of demand for 50-inch plasma TVs and larger. In other words, there is virtually no 50-inch-class plasma TV market outside the United States,” DisplaySearch director Hisakazu Torii said.

Although demand is limited, competition is not necessarily mild. Instead of LCD models, plasma TVs will be pitting themselves against another strong rival, rear-projection TVs.

“If you take a long-term view on the plasma industry, prices are coming down and revenue will not be growing that much. That makes aggressive investments for future growth difficult,” iSuppli Japan director Junzo Masuda said.

A dedicated TV repair workshop offers affordable and high-quality repair of plasma TVs. You can contact us with any problem - the wizard will diagnose the equipment, identify the problem and fix it in the shortest possible time. Our masters use only original spare parts and parts in their work - we guarantee high quality and long life of equipment.

Failure of the plasma panel, which manifests itself in the complete or partial disappearance of the image. The specialist will carry out diagnostic works with the help of equipment and fix the problem.

If your plasma TV fails, you can call the repair masters to the house or deliver the TV directly to the service center. At the customer "s request, we deliver defective equipment to our service center on our own transport.

All repair works of plasma TVs are performed at fixed prices, which are voiced to the customer after the equipment diagnosis. In particularly difficult cases, longer diagnostics may be required using specialized equipment - the wizard will inform you after the initial inspection.

Attention - we do not repair and replace broken screens of plasma TVs. We accept plasma TVs of any models, brands, and manufacturers released after 2008 for diagnosis and repair. Call us and our specialists will advise you on any questions, ask the preliminary cost of repair, accept an application to leave at the specified address or deliver your faulty TV to our service center.

Don "t look for cheaper prices and questionable TV repair masters - our dedicated service center has a great reputation, plenty of feedback from satisfied customers and a vast network of suppliers of original parts and materials. Qualification and experience of TV repair masters will allow fixing your plasma quickly, qualitatively and at the best price in the city!

The first prototype for a plasma display monitor was invented in July 1964 at the University of Illinois by professors Donald Bitzer and Gene Slottow and then graduate student Robert Willson. However, it was not until after the advent of digital and other technologies that successful plasma televisions became possible. According to Wikipedia "a plasma display is an emissive flat panel display where light is created by phosphors excited by a plasma discharge between two flat panels of glass."

During the early sixties, the University of Illinois used regular televisions as computer monitors for their in-house computer network. Donald Bitzer, Gene Slottow, and Robert Willson (the inventors listed on the plasma display patent) researched plasma displays as an alternative to the cathode ray tube-based televisions sets being used. A cathode-ray display has to constantly refresh, which is okay for video and broadcasts but bad for displaying computer graphics. Donald Bitzer began the project and enlisted the help of Gene Slottow and Robert Willson. By July of 1964, the team had built the first plasma display panel with one single cell. Today"s plasma televisions use millions of cells.

After 1964, television broadcast companies considered developing plasma television as an alternative to televisions using cathode ray tubes. However, LCD or liquid crystal displays made possible flat-screen television that squelched the further commercial development of plasma display. It took many years for plasma televisions to became successful and they finally did due to the efforts of Larry Weber. University of Illinois author Jamie Hutchinson wrote that Larry Weber"s prototype sixty-inch plasma display, developed for Matsushita and bearing the Panasonic label, combined the size and resolution necessary for HDTV with the addition of thinness.

LED & LCD –LED and LCD televisions are the big players in the market today. They are basically the same backlit setup and each technology has similar perk/setbacks. LED and LCD televisions work excellent in bright rooms, they’ve outsold plasma televisions (and they have taken over the market). They consume less power, they’re thin/light to transport, and they’re bright. However, both LCD and LED televisions fall short when it comes to motion blur (on lower-end models), they sometimes have backlight issues, and they offer limited viewing angles.

Plasma –Although the plasma screen market has been declared “dead”, some still floating around on the market for a decent price. Plasma screens are known for working the best in dark/dimly lit areas, they have no motion blur, and they have the best black coloring in their picture. Unfortunately, plasma screens fall short when it comes to performing in rooms with lots of windows, so this might be a good purchase on the second-hand market for the basement. They’re bulkier than the competition, and they sometimes have image retention issues. Also, they consume more power and can make a buzzing noise.

People generally want to know the lifespan of a TV in years. The average life of LED TVs and LCD sets is typically somewhere from 4 to 7 years of active use. Most of us don’t watch our TVs twenty-four hours a day, so a simple calculation on your watching habits can give you a good estimate. If you watched for 6 hours a day, you could theoretically multiply that lifespan by 4 (6×4=24), giving you 16 to 28 years.

Considering the regular defects and issues that occur over time, LCD and LED televisions basically have the same lifespan. With each of these technologies, the likely failure will come in the form of a worn-out backlight, so decreasing your backlight levels can significantly extend your set’s lifespan. A higher-quality set with a better backlight can also net you a few more years of use.

Plasma screens look great, but are much more sensitive and have little warranty as they have ceased production. The added bulk also means it will be a little tougher to move around if you’re prone to rearranging rooms. If you choose to purchase a plasma screen, chances are it’s a second set, and you shouldn’t expect it to last forever. If longevity is a big factor, opt for newer technology.