Sony's 1,000,000:1 contrast BRAVIAs launch in Japan October 10
By Richard Lawler 
posted Aug 28th 2008 4:23AM
posted Aug 28th 2008 4:23AM
posted Aug 28th 2008 4:23AM
The percentage of returned gadgets that have nothing wrong with them.
Of the $13.8 billion worth of returned products in 2007, only 5 percent were because gadgets were actually broken, according to a 2008 study.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I'm going to be selling Billion to 1 contrast ratio flat panels soon. I am doing this, they will be pricey, and I will never be held accountable for my obvious lies since no consumer regulation prevents manufacturers from marketing this kind of lies.
And since there is no test equipment that any cowsumers can employ to measure 1,000,000 to 1 contrast ratio, then I am safe in knowing no cowsumer can prove my 1,000,000,000 to 1 contrast ratio is a fraud.
And at Xmas I'll be offer a zillion to 1 contrast ratio, but you must pass a moron cowsumer test by sending me lots of money, first, before I'll even consider allowing you to by it.
you misspelled consu...oh, I get it...
Just FYI, the 1,000,000:1 dynamic contrast ratio is technically not a lie, but it is most assuredly a misleading statement and is just as bad as a flat out lie. The way most manufacturers achieve these ridiculously high contrast ratios is to literally complete turn off the screen to get the black level. Like literally, they unplug it completely and measure the output from the screen. Then they turn it on and crank the voltage to the output as high as it will go on full white. Like so high that any higher and the set would fail, then they measure that output to get the which level. These two numbers (the black level from a completely unpowered screen and the white level from an overpowered output) are technically what the screen is capable of, though you would NEVER EVER see this happen in a practical setting. Even the regular contrast ratios are usually misleading because they simply measure a full black scene compared to a full white scene, never a scene with black and white together. They're essentially telling you what the screen is capable of, not what it can actually do while doing something useful like watching a movie or playing a game.
Crap, I meant "white level" not "which level".
So essentially, if you're buying a TV from a good manufacturer (Panasonic, Pioneer, Sony, etc.) you don't really need to worry about contrast ratio anymore. We've basically gotten to the point where contrast ratios are so good on TVs these days (especially from Plasmas) that any improvement doesn't do a whole lot.
Stop telling me your TV has 1,000,000:1 while your competitor only has 80,000:1. Who gives a monkey's crap. I can't tell the difference anyway.
Too bad Zillion is not a real number.
Nice spelling. Where you from?
Tvs have gotten so good that improvement doesn't do a lot? Are you fucking crazy? Do you have ANY idea what you're talking about?? Do you even know what contrast ratio is and WHY it's so important???????????
What is the result of bad contrast ratio? Do you know?? I'll describe it and PLEASE if I am wrong, tell me so!!!!!!!!!
Dark outside evening scene....you can see some moon light but its mostly dark. As you jove your eyes from the darker area of the screen to the lighter, you see the darker shades of blacks, then dark greys, then lighter greys eventually turning into the white moon color.
You will be able to see bands of color instead of a nice clean smooth transition from dark to white. I'm not talking about a rapidly moving scene, a steady one or one that moves slowly.
Those "bands" of colors are caused by bad contrast. Do you know why...NEMO moment..... DO YOU DO YOU DO YOU?????????????????
Because the tv has such bad contrast, it CANNOT determine what color to produce. This is sometimes confused with mosquito noise which is produced because of over compression and the fact that the tv cannot determine what those pixels should produce so it guesses...you get mosquito noise.
LCD tech is NOWHERE NEAR that of CRT tech! Now you have progressive tech that is nice, definitely better than watching interlaced but LCD tech SUCKS and will NEVER EVER be anywhere close to that of CRT.
Save your money and just wait until newer tech comes out!!!! Don't spend your money on corporate lies to get you to think they are producing a better tv!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i think your comment needs more hysteria to be convincing
Correction to my "CANNOT determine what color to produce" statement.....
It should read...it CANNOT produce the correct color. Determining and being able to produce it are different things, thus the tv MAY be able to determine it....but it sure as hell can't produce it!
@ Loban
1,000,000 is a lie. The dynamic contrast numbers only make sense in relation to previous bogus stats. What light meter are they using to calculate such high numbers?
Johnny, I'm no TV expert, but you're associating contrast ratio with color gradation. I love to be proven wrong sometimes. Can you school me on how they relate?
There is so much contrast, the blacks are white and the whites black. So sayeth the contrast gods.
Last!
Who cares what the newest LCD's contrast ratios' are or old CRT's. With the improvements in Plasma technology, like the fact it's almost impossible now to get "image burn-in", you would have to be stupid to buy an LCD. Not only is the contrast ratio of a good plasma higher (and when I say good I am not talking about a cheap Vizio), but they have 480Hz processing compared to the new "240Hz" on an LCD. Now granted though, the 480Hz on a plasma is different than 240Hz on an LCD, it is still far superior. And put your Sony LCD next to my Pioneer plasma so you can see what a real TV looks like. So waste your hard earned money on an LCD with the newest technology instead of buying a TV that is and has always has been the best.... a plasma.
Laservue will blow plasma and all LCDs away, I'm tired of stage lighting not being represented by TV's which can't represent purple. Laservue scores on both luminance and chrominance, amplitude resolution (read contrast ratio), and color accuracy. Plasma doesn't have a chance, since it is still based on phosphors, like CRTs.
Sorry about the last sentence, it was a long day.
Corey....
What do YOU think causes it? Please explain. Why post if you're not going to enlighten us?
These kinds of contrasts doesn't say a thing about picture-quality.
What they do is letting the tv producing the most bright picture it can do with the backlight fully open. Then they do a black as possible picture with the blacklight as low as possible and the difference is the dynamic contrast.
Why is this useless? Because you will never look at a picture that way. However: there is a different and realistic way to measure contrast and that is with the ANSI-methode where they let the tv produce a picture of black and white fields like in a chessboard. Then they measure the difference between the white and the black fields and you got a more realistic contrast that is telling you something about picture quality.
Samsung dynamic contrasts are a joke because the're lcd's have a much lower contrast than a plasma and that's why more and more people see that the picture quality on a plasma is so much more beautiful. Not to speak of the bad motion resolution of the lcd's. People want nothing less than full hd, but they don't know that the motion resolution of a full hd lcdtv drops from 1080 lines to 300-650 lines. A full hd plasma shows 900 lines when showing a moving picture like movies etc. Even my hdready plasma is sharper and has a higher motion resolution than a full hd lcd! Specs specs specs....it doesn't say much!
The bandlines have nothing to do with contrast, but with how many colours the screen can show (8bit of 10bit). When the tv cannot show the amount of colours in a picture than it should do, you will see these lines.