shmups.system11.org

Shmups Forum
 
* FAQ    * Search
 * Register  * Login 
It is currently Fri May 25, 2018 8:44 am View unanswered posts
View active topics



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 585 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 20  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Samsung F4500 plasma bargain for 480p sources
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 3:29 am 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
Guys, just a quick tidbit about current HDTVs and 480p scaling-- the recently discontinued Samsung PN51F4500 plasma TV has the best 480p image Ive ever witnessed with GC and Wii games, and does a stellar job with 240p, 480i, and 720p as well. Ive discussed it ad nauseum here at avsforum. http://www.avsforum.com/forum/167-plasma-flat-panel-displays/1474305-samsung-pnxxf4500-owners-thread.html

Mario Galaxy, Rebel Strike, F Zero GX, and Metroid Primes look so good you'll want to slap yourself in the face.

I have both the GC with the original Nintendo component cables and a Wii with some Rocketfish cables and have compared their outputs on the same set and there is very little difference in quality between the two. I believe the reason the Wiis output gets such a bad rap is that everyone always tests it on 1080p tvs, all of which have pretty poor 480p upscaling, in my opinion. Ive tested both of them on the the Sammy F4500 as well as my second favorite 480p set, a 36" Hitachi Ultravision Digital direct view CRT, which had native 480p and there is little visible difference. So, while I commend the effort to create an aftermarket GC cable to combat the terrible price of them these days, and being able to do your beloved GC a little justice, just getting a Wii and some quality (they do make a difference) component cables for it will get you an very close picture for far less money. But again, as a retro-gamer, I completely understand that people want to game on their 'cubes, Im only stating the results of my side by side testing to inform people that GC gaming on Wii does not produce a much inferior image, which is a pervasive misconception.

I bought my first F4500 last year in the fall after testing a Wii on it at the store-- it has impressed me so much I bought a second one this summer, and I bought an F5300 (1080p) set for a living room set as well (plasma all the way baby), they have been practically giving these sets away as plasma is now officially dead (as of Nov 30). The 5300 is an incredible set, but for 480p gaming the F4500s smack it down. You can still get these F4500s ( the 43" and the 51") new in the US for $299 and $399 respectively, and I think they sell it as the F4900 in Europe. Below are some photos of the Wii and the GC output on it. The photos look decent, but my camera is not the best and they dont do justice to what it looks like in person. FZero in 16:9 looks mind-bogglingly great on this set. Its a shame plasma has gone the way of the dodo. These sets will probably be available for a month or two, new, then thats it-- one of the greatest retro to 720p flat screen sets of all time will be gone forever... :(

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image


Last edited by Josh128 on Tue Dec 30, 2014 10:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:08 am 


User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2013
Posts: 753
I'm somewhat contemplating a plasma myself, but I think 16:9 480p is the sweet spot and that's about it. I can buy that looking nice, but the rest? With 240p it's very doubtful if it's even recognized as such (like on about any modern TV) and on the other hand the resolution is too small to display a real 720p signal. Also input lag... :|


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:53 am 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
Xan wrote:
I'm somewhat contemplating a plasma myself, but I think 16:9 480p is the sweet spot and that's about it. I can buy that looking nice, but the rest? With 240p it's very doubtful if it's even recognized as such (like on about any modern TV) and on the other hand the resolution is too small to display a real 720p signal. Also input lag... :|


Input lag on my F4500 is 32 to 48 ms compared to a CRT when using the component video feed and splitting the Y (Green) to feed the composite on the CRT to assure an accurate comparison. The way I compared is by taking photos of the in game timer running on FZero on both sets. Ive been gaming on CRTs for 30 years and the lag is absolutely unnoticable to me. There are very few sets, including LCD, that have much better input lag than that. Lag doesnt truly become noticable until you get above 48ms or view a zero lag display side by side. Certainly the difference between 16ms and 32ms is not worth mentioning. This set stomps all over any LCD you can put it against. As a retrogamer, I searched long and far for a flat screen that could go toe to toe with my previous 36" Hitachi Ultravision Digital 480p/1080i CRT, and I held off on buying ANY HDTV until I found out about this gem last year. Its the best all around gaming TV Ive ever seen-- the size, screen uniformity, motion resolution, contrast, and internal scaler are simply the best Ive tested, and that includes other 720p plasmas. I used to own a Panasonic TC-P50X60 plasma and the Sammy is on another level for picture quality.

240p IS recognized and looks FANTASTIC on the set. It has a dedicated 720x240p mode. 4:3 480i and 480p also look fantastic on it (sure you have black bars on the sides in 4:3 mode, theres no way around it on a 16:9 set unless you stretch the screen (big no no for me). Again, this is the hands down best MODERN TV you can get as a retro-gamer on up to 720p games. Please note Im using RGB modded retro systems through a CSY-2100 clone (SCART RGB to component converter) in the pictures here. The TV does such a good job that expensive scalers like the Framemeister are unnecessary with it.

Heres a couple shots of N64, NES, and SNES games on it (again, my camera is not the best, but this TV handles 240p fantastically). I have RGB modded all my retro systems. Note the shot showing the input lag of the F4500, F5300 plasmas vs a CRT-- 3 ticks on the 1/100th of a second timer on FZero SNES.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 5:27 am 


User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2013
Posts: 753
Is there any way to get scanlines on that 1024x768 panel, though? I know many on this forum prefer having them for 240p content, myself included. The games come off as a bit blocky looking without them.

Out of curiosity, do you know how the H4500 compares to your models?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 6:57 am 


User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 2060
Location: Kentucky
Wait, why is it a 4:3 resolution stretched onto a 16:9 panel? Who thought that one up?

I guess it would happen to work well with anamorphic widescreen content (Xbox, Wii, Gamecube, PS2), though it still seems asinine.


Also regarding the difference between the Gamecube and Wii's output, users on this forum have already proven that the Gamecube looks better. See here: http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=51789
Whether or not it's a big deal to the naked eye is up for debate, but as for it being a misconception that the Wii looks worse, that's wrong, it definitely does. If it weren't for this project from Unseen, I'd say that the price of the cables meant you shouldn't worry about it, but now that a cheap option's available, why not use the cube?

And just to throw on another thought, I really wish I could check this TV out in a store without committing to buying it. Does Best Buy have a decent no questions asked return policy I wonder?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 3:06 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
bobrocks95 wrote:
Wait, why is it a 4:3 resolution stretched onto a 16:9 panel? Who thought that one up?

I guess it would happen to work well with anamorphic widescreen content (Xbox, Wii, Gamecube, PS2), though it still seems asinine.


Also regarding the difference between the Gamecube and Wii's output, users on this forum have already proven that the Gamecube looks better. See here: http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=51789
Whether or not it's a big deal to the naked eye is up for debate, but as for it being a misconception that the Wii looks worse, that's wrong, it definitely does. If it weren't for this project from Unseen, I'd say that the price of the cables meant you shouldn't worry about it, but now that a cheap option's available, why not use the cube?

And just to throw on another thought, I really wish I could check this TV out in a store without committing to buying it. Does Best Buy have a decent no questions asked return policy I wonder?


Bob, not sure about your 16:9 vs. stretched 4:3 question-- but in a nutshell, on a 16:9 display, if you are running 4:3 content, you can either choose to display it in 4:3 mode on the set, or stretch it to fill the screen. I only stated that as a retro gamer, for my personal tastes, I DO NOT stretch 4:3 content, I choose to display it in 4:3 mode-- which either leaves black or light gray bars in the empty space on the sides (depending on which screen anti-image retention option you choose on the F4500). Call me a purist, but I want my NES games to look like they did when I was a kid-- I dont like "fat" Link or Mario!

About the Samsung PN51F4500-- Last year I actually took a modded Wii with component cables to my local Walmart and convinced them to allow me to try it on several TVs on display , and it was only then that I saw the massive difference in 480p image quality (and 240p, thanks to the Genesis emulator on the Wii that actually makes the system output native 240p when you select "native" in the graphics menu), that this set produces. I know in this day and age, no one seems to take anyones word at face value anymore, but I'll say this once-- there is no need to test-- I can guarantee you this set will get you the single best (and most CRT-like) 480p image you can get in an HDTV at this time. Because they are no longer produced (as of Nov 30) and are being massively marked down and liquidated, I highly doubt you will find any still on display at Best Buy or Walmart-- most likely if you want to test you will have to track down one on Craigslist and convince the seller to let you test it before you buy it. Best Buy still offers a few of them online, as do a few other retailers. It is important you dont mistake the F4500 (a 1024x768 anamorphic screen), for the F5300 (a native 1080p set), because I have both and the F4500 demolishes the F5300 when displaying 480p or 240p content.

I would be happy to send you more photos and possibly even video (though all I have is a Sony Digital 8 camcorder) to better inform you.

About the GC vs. Wii image debate-- sorry mate, I have both Wii and Gamecube (with official Nintendo component cables I purchased back in 2003) and there is ZERO discernable difference to the naked eye when running the same games at 480p output. I have had them both on the same set using a high quality, actively amplified, Audio Authority component switch running the same game (Soul Calibur 2, of which I have 2 copies) and there is no visible difference in game. ZERO. If an oscilloscope shows a minimal measured difference in the signal? Perhaps-- but is it noticable in game-- it is not.

Quality component cables CERTAINLY make a difference on the Wii (unlike HDMI cables in which a $3 cable produces identical images to a $50 cable)-- I had a massive problem using some cheap Ebay cables that introduced visible blurriness and in some instances "creeping ghost" artifacts in the Wii image-- it was only after checking line power quality, component switch quality, connections, possible interference from parallel cables, etc. that I went out on a limb purchased a nice set of Rocketfish cables for the Wii-- the difference was immediately visible IN GAME, without the use of patterns or scopes-- and compared to the GC there is absolutely no visible difference.

If you dont believe it, Im sorry-- but I would be willing to bet big money that with the naked eye, using FZero GX ( a game known for its brilliance and clarity ) that in a blind test of any number of 100 images of the game shown between the GC and the Wii (with my current setup) that no one would be able to correctly identify which system it was running on with a greater than 50% (pure chance) average accuracy .

Just as a sign of good faith to show you I dont have an agenda and Im not lying about owning the official Nintendo GC cables, here is a photo I just took to prove it.

Image


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:05 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
Xan wrote:
Is there any way to get scanlines on that 1024x768 panel, though? I know many on this forum prefer having them for 240p content, myself included. The games come off as a bit blocky looking without them.

Out of curiosity, do you know how the H4500 compares to your models?


About the scanlines, on 1080p panels, 240p games certainly look overly sharp and harsh, and thus many people like the look of emulated scanlines that you can produce either on a PC or with a device like the Framemeister. For example, my 1080p plasma, the PN51F5300, looks like ass with my CSY-2100 /RGB setup on 240p games, because of the sharpness and harshness. In this case, yes, emulated scanlines would look better.

On the F4500 though, the 240p image is not nearly as harsh, and looks much closer to native CRT, so I find that scanlines are not necessary-- it looks GREAT when fed right out of the RGB to component converter!

That said though, because of the anamorphic 1024x768 res, you will have a tough time getting emulated scanlines to look right on it vs a native 1080p set, but again, I find them completely unnecessary (because this set looks so fantastic on its own).

About H4500, Im not CERTAIN, but I do believe it is the UK equivalent of the US F4500 I have here. I would most certainly recommend checking it out. Also, for anyone checking out these sets, be sure to turn "ECO-MODE" OFF, set the "Cell Light" to 20, and set "Sharpness" to 75 while using "Normal" preset. This obtuse tweek will give you a good indication of the sets ability with 480p and 240p content.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:22 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
Xan wrote:
I can buy that looking nice, but the rest? With 240p it's very doubtful if it's even recognized as such (like on about any modern TV) and on the other hand the resolution is too small to display a real 720p signal. Also input lag... :|



I can confirm that this set has the best 720p output I have ever seen, despite it being a 1024x768 amamorphic pixel panel. It is marketed as a 720p set-- the one I bought for my son is being used with an Xbox 360, and 720p games look RIDICULOUSLY good on it. Castlevania: Lords of Shadow and Lego Batman just look out of this world on it-- you would never know it wasnt a 1366x768 (true 720p) panel.

For that matter, you do realize that almost ZERO PS3 or Xbox 360 games are actually 720p right? I dont know of any that are 1366x768, which is what the old true 720p sets were-- furthermore, most of them (X360 and PS3 games) are not even actually 1280x720 resolution for that matter either. Go read some material on pixel counts for these games on sites like Eurogamer Digital Foundry and you will see that almost all of them are non-standard resolutions (usually a bit lower than 1280x720) and are internally upscaled by the systems to 720p.

So any objections to it being "not true" 720p are completely unwarranted. The truth of the matter is that vertical resolution is much more important to the human eye than horizontal resolution, and the 768p vertical res of the set is indentical to true 720p (1366x768) sets of several years ago.

Again, the proof is in the pudding-- 720p X360 games look incredible on it, as do 480p, 480i, and 240p games. Hell, even 1080p (supersampled, of course) games look great on it. The image quality and motion is something to behold if you are used to LCD sets. I'd bet my last dollar that this is the best all around gaming set you can buy if you are looking for a set that looks fantastic at ALL resolutions.


Last edited by Josh128 on Sat Dec 13, 2014 6:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:45 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 18087
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs
But still there might be a slight anti-aliasing / blur-reducing effect from the horizontal resolution downconversion, which may be what flags this to your eye as a "good" set.
The internal resolution of games is still a dirty secret for console gaming, so people will have to decide as they want on this one.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 6:27 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
Ed Oscuro wrote:
But still there might be a slight anti-aliasing / blur-reducing effect from the horizontal resolution downconversion, which may be what flags this to your eye as a "good" set.
The internal resolution of games is still a dirty secret for console gaming, so people will have to decide as they want on this one.



After much research, and spending time testing it against other sets (like the Panasonic Viera I used to own, which I sold BTW to get another one of these to replace it after comparing the two side by side), there appears to be several contributing factors as to what makes this set phenomenal for 240p, 480p, and 720p gaming--

First, there are the obvious and well documented image quality and motion advantages of plasma panels over LED lit LCD panels. I wont dwell too much on that. What I will say is that it holds some major advantages over even Panasonics own equivalent (in size, res, and price) TC-P50X60 plasma panel-- namely, much, much more realistic and vibrant color reproduction, a dedicated 720x240p screen mode ( the Panny recognized and treated 240p games as 480i), over double the contrast ratio, and the construction of the plasma panel itself-- between each row of RGB plasma cells is a visible black line, which the Panasonic doesnt have. The Panasonics cells appear to touch each other very closely on the top and the sides. These lines on the F4500 look like scanlines on a CRT, and may contribute to the much more pleasing image the set produces over the Panasonic. Of course, the 1024x768 resolution is also a contributing factor, but for reasons above (when compared to the Panasonic) cant take full credit for how well it looks in gaming. I think the quality of the internal scaler has a lot to do with it as well.

Last, of course, is the fact that being plasma, it is an "emissive" display rather than a "transmissive" display such as an LED lit LCD, which means that its phosphors actually emit Red, Green and Blue light as opposed to LED lit LCD displays, which have white backlights that shine through LCD crystals that arrange themselves to only let certain colors of the white backlight through. This, coupled with the "scanlines" between plasma cell rows-- give this set a distinctly CRT like image. One of the things that attracted me to this set was indeed how CRT-like it looked! Up until last year, all I owned was CRTs-- I never purchased an LCD because I had seen how terrible the GC and Wii looked on them (terrible indeed!), and I stuck with my early 2000's model HD Ready CRTs until last year, huge as they were.

All I can say is that even to this day this set impresses me, and goes tit for tat (and even betters, due to lack of CRT edge distortion) with the mighty HD Ready native 480p CRTs of the early to mid 2000's that I used to love. If you are a fan of CRT (as any retro-gamer should be) you will be in for a pleasant surprise as I believe this is one of, if not the most-CRT like sets ever made!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:05 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2013
Posts: 753
Ed Oscuro wrote:
But still there might be a slight anti-aliasing / blur-reducing effect from the horizontal resolution downconversion, which may be what flags this to your eye as a "good" set.
The internal resolution of games is still a dirty secret for console gaming, so people will have to decide as they want on this one.

I considered this as well actually, maybe the horizontal downscaling really does have a supersampling-like effect on the image. It's hard to assess without seeing the TV in real though.

Resolution of games is mostly known for 7th gen stuff (there is a list on beyond3d).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 7:41 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 09 Jun 2009
Posts: 583
Location: Mexico
Have you tried the 240p suite in the set? Would be curious about some patterns and screenshots of them.
_________________
The Policenauts Translation Project
240p Test Suite
XRGB Wiki


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sat Dec 13, 2014 10:42 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 2060
Location: Kentucky
Josh128 wrote:
I can confirm that this set has the best 720p output I have ever seen, despite it being a 1024x768 amamorphic pixel panel. It is marketed as a 720p set-- the one I bought for my son is being used with an Xbox 360, and 720p games look RIDICULOUSLY good on it. Castlevania: Lords of Shadow and Lego Batman just look out of this world on it-- you would never know it wasnt a 1366x768 (true 720p) panel.

For that matter, you do realize that almost ZERO PS3 or Xbox 360 games are actually 720p right? I dont know of any that are 1366x768, which is what the old true 720p sets were-- furthermore, most of them (X360 and PS3 games) are not even actually 1280x720 resolution for that matter either. Go read some material on pixel counts for these games on sites like Eurogamer Digital Foundry and you will see that almost all of them are non-standard resolutions (usually a bit lower than 1280x720) and are internally upscaled by the systems to 720p.

So any objections to it being "not true" 720p are completely unwarranted. The truth of the matter is that vertical resolution is much more important to the human eye than horizontal resolution, and the 768p vertical res of the set is indentical to true 720p (1366x768) sets of several years ago.

Again, the proof is in the pudding-- 720p X360 games look incredible on it, as do 480p, 480i, and 240p games. Hell, even 1080p (supersampled, of course) games look great on it. The image quality and motion is something to behold if you are used to LCD sets. I'd bet my last dollar that this is the best all around gaming set you can buy if you are looking for a set that looks fantastic at ALL resolutions.


Well, I'd just jump in to say that a "true" 720p set would actually be 1280x720, at least as far as I'm concerned. There have been very few of those made, in favor of 1366x768 panels for whatever reason, but I don't exactly know how that makes 768p more valid than an actual 720p res.

Josh128 wrote:
After much research, and spending time testing it against other sets (like the Panasonic Viera I used to own, which I sold BTW to get another one of these to replace it after comparing the two side by side), there appears to be several contributing factors as to what makes this set phenomenal for 240p, 480p, and 720p gaming--

First, there are the obvious and well documented image quality and motion advantages of plasma panels over LED lit LCD panels. I wont dwell too much on that. What I will say is that it holds some major advantages over even Panasonics own equivalent (in size, res, and price) TC-P50X60 plasma panel-- namely, much, much more realistic and vibrant color reproduction, a dedicated 720x240p screen mode ( the Panny recognized and treated 240p games as 480i), over double the contrast ratio, and the construction of the plasma panel itself-- between each row of RGB plasma cells is a visible black line, which the Panasonic doesnt have. The Panasonics cells appear to touch each other very closely on the top and the sides. These lines on the F4500 look like scanlines on a CRT, and may contribute to the much more pleasing image the set produces over the Panasonic. Of course, the 1024x768 resolution is also a contributing factor, but for reasons above (when compared to the Panasonic) cant take full credit for how well it looks in gaming. I think the quality of the internal scaler has a lot to do with it as well.


I've never heard anybody compliment the screen door effect before; it's regarded as one of the major downsides of plasmas by some. Closer-together pixels with less space between them is definitely a sign of higher-quality construction, other arguments aside.

Josh128 wrote:
Bob, not sure about your 16:9 vs. stretched 4:3 question-- but in a nutshell, on a 16:9 display, if you are running 4:3 content, you can either choose to display it in 4:3 mode on the set, or stretch it to fill the screen. I only stated that as a retro gamer, for my personal tastes, I DO NOT stretch 4:3 content, I choose to display it in 4:3 mode-- which either leaves black or light gray bars in the empty space on the sides (depending on which screen anti-image retention option you choose on the F4500). Call me a purist, but I want my NES games to look like they did when I was a kid-- I dont like "fat" Link or Mario!


Oh yeah, stretching is terrible, but I'm talking about the fact that the panel itself has a 4:3 resolution (1024x768), yet it's a widescreen television. So when you put it in "4:3 mode" wouldn't it closer to like 680x768 active pixels or something? It seems very odd to me, though I've seen other TVs that do the same thing.

Quote:
About the Samsung PN51F4500-- Last year I actually took a modded Wii with component cables to my local Walmart and convinced them to allow me to try it on several TVs on display , and it was only then that I saw the massive difference in 480p image quality (and 240p, thanks to the Genesis emulator on the Wii that actually makes the system output native 240p when you select "native" in the graphics menu), that this set produces. I know in this day and age, no one seems to take anyones word at face value anymore, but I'll say this once-- there is no need to test-- I can guarantee you this set will get you the single best (and most CRT-like) 480p image you can get in an HDTV at this time. Because they are no longer produced (as of Nov 30) and are being massively marked down and liquidated, I highly doubt you will find any still on display at Best Buy or Walmart-- most likely if you want to test you will have to track down one on Craigslist and convince the seller to let you test it before you buy it. Best Buy still offers a few of them online, as do a few other retailers. It is important you dont mistake the F4500 (a 1024x768 anamorphic screen), for the F5300 (a native 1080p set), because I have both and the F4500 demolishes the F5300 when displaying 480p or 240p content.


Alright, I'll take your word on it having a great picture compared to any other HDTVs you can get today. But I already have an EDTV that works and looks great for 480p content. The only thing that would warrant me changing televisions is a direct comparison between my EDTV and this HDTV, which is why I wondered aloud if Best Buy has a return policy that would let me try it without consequence.

Quote:
About the GC vs. Wii image debate-- sorry mate, I have both Wii and Gamecube (with official Nintendo component cables I purchased back in 2003) and there is ZERO discernable difference to the naked eye when running the same games at 480p output. I have had them both on the same set using a high quality, actively amplified, Audio Authority component switch running the same game (Soul Calibur 2, of which I have 2 copies) and there is no visible difference in game. ZERO. If an oscilloscope shows a minimal measured difference in the signal? Perhaps-- but is it noticable in game-- it is not.

If you dont believe it, Im sorry-- but I would be willing to bet big money that with the naked eye, using FZero GX ( a game known for its brilliance and clarity ) that in a blind test of any number of 100 images of the game shown between the GC and the Wii (with my current setup) that no one would be able to correctly identify which system it was running on with a greater than 50% (pure chance) average accuracy .

Just as a sign of good faith to show you I dont have an agenda and Im not lying about owning the official Nintendo GC cables, here is a photo I just took to prove it.

Image


Haha, I believe that you have Gamecube cables and aren't trying to push Wii ones or anything. It's just that things are very subjective with this kind of stuff- maybe some notice a difference, while some don't. No scientific double-blind tests have been run or anything, so it's nice to hear as many practical opinions as possible.

And either way it won't stop me from hating the fact that I have to grab a Wiimote before I can play a Gamecube game :P


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 12:16 am 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
bobrocks95 wrote:

Well, I'd just jump in to say that a "true" 720p set would actually be 1280x720, at least as far as I'm concerned. There have been very few of those made, in favor of 1366x768 panels for whatever reason, but I don't exactly know how that makes 768p more valid than an actual 720p res.


As stated below, for the last 5+ years all 720p plasmas from all manufacturers were anamorphic 1024x768. I suppose research was done on IQ for 720p broadcast video and it was determined the visible difference when displaying 720p broadcasts between this res and true 1366x768 was negligable with modern scaling hardware in the sets. With that being the case, less pixels mean less production cost and issues, so there you go. As to why 1366x768 was the first 720p set standard? Probably because it is a standard PC resolution.



bobrocks95 wrote:
I've never heard anybody compliment the screen door effect before; it's regarded as one of the major downsides of plasmas by some. Closer-together pixels with less space between them is definitely a sign of higher-quality construction, other arguments aside.


It has absolutely nothing to do with higher quality construction-- not sure where you heard this. All Samsung plasma screens are designed this way, even the mighty Samsung F8500 plasma (which won the Value Electronics HDTV shootout back to back 2013 & 2014). http://www.twice.com/news/tv/samsung-s- ... otout/3423


That is a $3000 TV and one of the greatest plasmas of all time. Regardless of 720p or 1080p-- the Samsungs have the black lines between pixels. In any case, the effect on the F4500 lends to a very smooth, very CRT like image.


bobrocks95 wrote:
Oh yeah, stretching is terrible, but I'm talking about the fact that the panel itself has a 4:3 resolution (1024x768), yet it's a widescreen television. So when you put it in "4:3 mode" wouldn't it closer to like 680x768 active pixels or something? It seems very odd to me, though I've seen other TVs that do the same thing.


Probably so, but scaler does a stellar job-- when running 4:3 games in 4:3 mode you'd never know this set uses rectangular pixels without eyeballing the screen from a couple inches away! BTW all 720p sets from all plasma manufacturers (LG, Panasonic, Samsung) in the last 5 years or so have used amamorphic 1024x768 resolution for their 720p sets.


bobrocks95 wrote:
Alright, I'll take your word on it having a great picture compared to any other HDTVs you can get today. But I already have an EDTV that works and looks great for 480p content. The only thing that would warrant me changing televisions is a direct comparison between my EDTV and this HDTV, which is why I wondered aloud if Best Buy has a return policy that would let me try it without consequence.


Best Buy has a 14 day money back no questions asked return policy on all their sets, you could definitely
return it within that period if not satisfied. Thing about this plasma is that it was developed with the most mature plasma technology available-- it is one of the the thinnest plasma sets ever made, thinner than many LCDs! The color reproduction and contrast are TOP NOTCH, and there is no doubt resolution aside, it will smoke your old EDTV set in these departments. Also, and this is very important, the picture improves over time-- you will notice more "pop" in the picture as time goes on and the blacks settle in ( mine really started improving after about 250 hours of use).

Old time AV guys at AVSForums have stated that this set (at $400) would have been a REFERENCE QUALITY (read $$$$) set just a few years back, its that impressive. If you are in the market for a new set, I highly recommend you check it out while they are still available, there isnt a better price/ picture quality combo in all of TV.

Below is an article from CNET comparing this $400 720p plasma to an $1100 4k LCD set. Very interesting and eye opening read.

http://www.cnet.com/news/budget-tv-reso ... k-led-lcd/

http://televisions.reviewed.com/content ... -tv-review

http://www.hdtvhut.com/samsung-pn51f4500-review/


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 1:37 am 


User avatar

Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 18087
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs
Xan wrote:
Ed Oscuro wrote:
But still there might be a slight anti-aliasing / blur-reducing effect from the horizontal resolution downconversion, which may be what flags this to your eye as a "good" set.
The internal resolution of games is still a dirty secret for console gaming, so people will have to decide as they want on this one.

I considered this as well actually, maybe the horizontal downscaling really does have a supersampling-like effect on the image. It's hard to assess without seeing the TV in real though.

Resolution of games is mostly known for 7th gen stuff (there is a list on beyond3d).

I ran across an Amazon review that mentioned for 1080p there are some artifacts, but you have to look for them. For 720p the problem is going to be reduced of course.

It's also worth noting that DisplayLag has the PN43F4500 at 46ms and the PN51F4500 at 47. For comparison, the fastest plasma they've ranked is the Panasonic TC-60PU54, at 27ms, which is 11ms slower than what I'd expect to be the lowest possible input lag result for the Leo Bodnar tester. 20ms on top of that adds a frame and a half. Both are far off "Excellent" though the Panasonic is "great."

If money was no object, and the motion blur issues were fixed with strobing, OLED would dust any of these technologies. Then again, so would SED/FED. However, the fastest OLED's lag rating sits immediately between these two plasmas (at 36ms).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 2:30 am 


User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2012
Posts: 827
Location: San Jose, CA
Sooooo is this now an HDTV thread?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 2:41 am 


User avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 11057
Location: Germany
Quote:
As stated below, for the last 5+ years all 720p plasmas from all manufacturers were anamorphic 1024x768.

XGA has always been the standard on plasma panels in the 40/42" class. HDReady in the 50" class meant 1366x768 though and this has been a standard for many, many years. Only after Panasonic ditched HDReady completely a few years ago (in favor of Full HD on all plasma sizes), Samsung somehow felt the need to check into this resolution for 50+ inch sets as well. Obviously customers didn't care. Don't know about LG.

I saw the Samsung sometime last year and it's 240p ability aside, I doubt that you'd see worse from a Panasonic XGA set. Plasma was (and is) great if you're looking for that specific look - not too sharp (like a 1080p LCD with a XRGB) and especially on mediocre 480p signals (Cube and Wii and original XBox in parts) mid resolution plasmas are great. But on good 480p signals (DC, PS2), the resolution isn't enough to get all the detail clearly displayed. A 1-pixel checkerboard pattern on a 480p signal just looks blurred on a XGA panel, especially on an anamorphic one.

With other things, like superior black levels or motion resolution on plasma sets, there's little to discuss of course.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 2:59 am 



Joined: 05 Dec 2012
Posts: 387
ApolloBoy wrote:
Sooooo is this now an HDTV thread?


I'm really interested in this discussion and have been wondering about 720p plasma's for awhile...but I agree. Is there any way we can move this discussion and related posts to a new thread? It would be helpful for both subjects being discussed.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 2:36 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
Fudoh wrote:
Quote:
As stated below, for the last 5+ years all 720p plasmas from all manufacturers were anamorphic 1024x768.

XGA has always been the standard on plasma panels in the 40/42" class. HDReady in the 50" class meant 1366x768 though and this has been a standard for many, many years. Only after Panasonic ditched HDReady completely a few years ago (in favor of Full HD on all plasma sizes), Samsung somehow felt the need to check into this resolution for 50+ inch sets as well. Obviously customers didn't care. Don't know about LG.

I saw the Samsung sometime last year and it's 240p ability aside, I doubt that you'd see worse from a Panasonic XGA set. Plasma was (and is) great if you're looking for that specific look - not too sharp (like a 1080p LCD with a XRGB) and especially on mediocre 480p signals (Cube and Wii and original XBox in parts) mid resolution plasmas are great. But on good 480p signals (DC, PS2), the resolution isn't enough to get all the detail clearly displayed. A 1-pixel checkerboard pattern on a 480p signal just looks blurred on a XGA panel, especially on an anamorphic one.

With other things, like superior black levels or motion resolution on plasma sets, there's little to discuss of course.


Fudoh wrote:
I saw the Samsung sometime last year and it's 240p ability aside, I doubt that you'd see worse from a Panasonic XGA set. Plasma was (and is) great if you're looking for that specific look - not too sharp (like a 1080p LCD with a XRGB) and especially on mediocre 480p signals (Cube and Wii and original XBox in parts) mid resolution plasmas are great. But on good 480p signals (DC, PS2), the resolution isn't enough to get all the detail clearly displayed. A 1-pixel checkerboard pattern on a 480p signal just looks blurred on a XGA panel, especially on an anamorphic one.

With other things, like superior black levels or motion resolution on plasma sets, there's little to discuss of course.


First off guys, sorry to derail this thread-- we're off on a tangent but the initial point was how spectacular GC (and Wii) 480p looks on this set. It seems almost no one knows about this. We can move this to a different thread if required.

Fudoh, I can assure you, all anamorphic XGA (LG, Sammy, Panny) sets are not created equal-- as I stated earlier-- the last XGA Panasonic plasma panel ever produced, the 2013 TC-P50X60, is not even in the same ballpark as this set. I had one for about 6 months, and I bought it after my first F4500 Samsung because I found a deal too good to pass up and I had always heard that Panasonic plasmas "were the best". Well suffice to say, despite being equal in size and price to the F4500, the PQ of the Panasonic overall, and more importantly (for me, because I bought specifically for general gaming), 480p looked nowhere near as good as it did on the Samsung, no matter what tweaks I made to the Panasonic. I later read in several reviews that the image quality of the Panasonic X60 series was a serious disappointment, especially when compared to their higher tier sets. All XGA sets are not created equal.

As for 1-pixel display patterns vs. 480p argument-- let me say this-- I have little doubt that a 1080p set would be able to replicate a 1 pixel 480p display pattern with more accuracy than a 1024x768 anamorphic panel-- after all, the horizontal resolution of full HD is an even 3x multiple of 640, and, if only 960 vertical pixels were employed, it would be an exact multiple of 480 for the vertical.

However--as someone who can appreciate trying to get the most natural PQ out of retro-consoles by using image processors, etc. I would be willing to bet serious money that if you were to see ANY of the PS2 generation of systems at either 480p or 480i on this set,on its own, side by side with ANY 1080p set (plasma, LCD, or even OLED), with any external processor of your choice, you would choose this set hands down, every single time. The image is that impressive. You see, when I first made this purchase, I agonized over whether to get it, or the 1080p version, the PN51F5300. A few months later, despite being THRILLED with every aspect of this set, I was in the market for a flat panel for my living room and decided to spend an extra $100 to get the F5300 (BFXZA model) over this one. When I first brought the F5300 home, I did not yet have my new entertainment center for my living room and thus had to place the set in the bedroom with my F4500-- I immediately began putting it through the paces, testing it with all my game systems, side by side with the F4500 (hence the picture above I posted showing FZero on 3 sets in the same shot).

Despite being a great set, comparable to a Panasonic S60 (and the BFXZA revision is even better, by some accounts), 480p and 480i game output on it did not even compare to what the F4500 produced. Despite, or perhaps in spite, of the increased resolution, the images looked very sharp, harsh, and perhaps even more importantly, UNNATURAL compared to the F4500. The best way I can put it is comparing it to one of the scaler reviews on your site, where you found you preferred setting the processor to output 720p vs. 1080p on a 1080p panel because the 720p setting looked much more pleasing and natural.

Have you ever experienced what a GC, Wii, Xbox, or DC, in progressive scan or VGA mode, looks like on a native 480p HD-Ready CRT? It looks WORLDS better than what you see when you connect these systems to a 1080p set, regardless of whether it is LCD or plasma. Well, to sum this up for you-- the image the 51" F4500 puts out when fed a 480p (and even 480i) signal looks extraordinarily similar to how it looks on a 480p native CRT. Theres no getting around that fact, and I guess you'd just have to see it to believe it. Its probably a combination of the internal scaler, the resolution, the color reproduction, and the contrast that do it.

Initially, I had some strange issues with 480i on this set (ghosting/trailing), but I discovered it was due to an option called "Digital Clean View"-- once I disabled it, I found this set has probably the best 480i de-interlacing I have ever seen, it looks remarkably close to 480p.

As for 240p, once again I found on my 1080p F5300, it looked sharp, harsh, and un-natural-- while on the F4500 it looks remarkably CRT-like. Without the addition of any external processors/scalers, I find the look completely satisfying. In order to better it, a 1080p set would absolutely HAVE to be paired with a Framemeister adding scanlines. But again, I find the F4500s native 240p to look so good that spending any money on additional processors would not be worth it. On 1080p sets, its an absolute necessity.

Its about all I can say about this-- the set is the worlds best kept secret for retro-gamers. RGB is a must, of course, when connecting the systems to it, but yeah. I HIGHLY recommend you get your hands on one to see. Im using a simple Ebay SCART to Component/YUV converter to get my retro systems to it. Very cheap and simple, thats it.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 4:46 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 1400
Josh128 wrote:
Image
Image


The F4500 is tempting for a secondary display. Are you really ok with the pillar bars that vary in brightness based on APL?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 5:16 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 2060
Location: Kentucky
My plasma does the same thing with pillar bars, and I wouldn't say it's terrible. On a plasma that new you could probably safely turn the bars off and not really risk any burn-in or uneven aging, especially if you're only using it as a secondary display


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 5:16 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 11057
Location: Germany
Quote:
Have you ever experienced what a GC, Wii, Xbox, or DC, in progressive scan or VGA mode, looks like on a native 480p HD-Ready CRT?

yes, I had a 31khz 29" 4:3 CRT before I got my first LCD in 2004.

Quote:
I HIGHLY recommend you get your hands on one to see. Im using a simple Ebay SCART to Component/YUV converter to get my retro systems to it. Very cheap and simple, thats it.

I already checked on availability over here, but it's not this easy to get and not as cheap as in the US.

Do you - by any chance - know for sure what's the difference between the F4500 and the H4500 models ?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 5:18 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2012
Posts: 827
Location: San Jose, CA
Josh128 wrote:
First off guys, sorry to derail this thread but I'm gonna derail it even further

Fixed.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Samsung F4500 plasma bargain for 480p sources
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 5:45 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 11057
Location: Germany
Thanks to Ghegs for splitting up the topic!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Samsung F4500 plasma bargain for 480p sources
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 5:57 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2013
Posts: 753
I just compared the sites for the F4500 and H4500, and if it's anything to go by, those TVs might not be identical. Even the exterior is different; the F4500 seems to have a translucent plastic (hard to tell on those pictures) stand, while it's black on the H4500. The H4500 also seems to lack "Clean View" noise removal and "Clear Image Panel" tech.

Totally missed that the pillar bars are gray on those NES and SNES pictures, this further reinforces my opinion that a transcoder on a VGA CRT would be the better choice for 4:3 480p stuff, if one can deal with setting it blindly.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Samsung F4500 plasma bargain for 480p sources
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:54 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 2060
Location: Kentucky
Xan wrote:
I just compared the sites for the F4500 and H4500, and if it's anything to go by, those TVs might not be identical. Even the exterior is different; the F4500 seems to have a translucent plastic (hard to tell on those pictures) stand, while it's black on the H4500. The H4500 also seems to lack "Clean View" noise removal and "Clear Image Panel" tech.

Totally missed that the pillar bars are gray on those NES and SNES pictures, this further reinforces my opinion that a transcoder on a VGA CRT would be the better choice for 4:3 480p stuff, if one can deal with setting it blindly.


You can make the pillar bars black, white, or gray depending on your settings. It's a plasma thing to reduce uneven wear on the cells/pixels.

And hell, I'll just go buy one of these whenever my refund's processed for the bunk EDTV I just bought. Eyeballs are much more meaningful than words. Plus I'll borrow a nice camera from a friend if any sort of comparisons are noteworthy.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Samsung F4500 plasma bargain for 480p sources
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 8:35 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 09 Apr 2014
Posts: 1094
The photo post on here sold me on this set, but of course I missed most of the blowout pricing a few months back. I was even looking for a decent 720p set specifically for older games too.

Dang.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Samsung F4500 plasma bargain for 480p sources
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:13 pm 



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 258
Location: London, England, UK
I have the no longer available (might be available in Republic of Ireland) F4900 (F4500+ DVB-T2+ 3D).

The H4500 is just the 2014 version of the F4500, it has some stupid 'football mode' that zooms in on certain areas of a picture (3x3 grid).

Anyway, on mine the component input has weird lines and a scrolling interference affect, (Tested with the Wii/PS2/PS3/Extron VSC-700/CSY-2100 and quality cables). Otherwise the image is really good and 240p is recognised as different to 480i. e.g. 720x240 60p or 720x480 60i, it doesn't recognise 288p.

My F4900, has an RGB Scart input, it doesn't tell you the resolution/frequency like component, but its SO good. Even Metal Gear Solid looks good, Identical to PS3 over HDMI, and no interference.

Got pics, will update later.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Cloning the Gamecube component cable
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:43 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
RGB32E wrote:
The F4500 is tempting for a secondary display. Are you really ok with the pillar bars that vary in brightness based on APL?


If you choose, you can make them completely black. Personally, like you, I like them black-- but if you always play 4:3 content that way you risk uneven phosphor wear over long periods of time. So, I alternate from time to time fbetween the varying grey sidebars and the black ones.

These panels, like all plasmas, are susceptible to burn in or uneven screen wear if abused-- BUT, it has already been proven that the latest model Samsungs (of which this one is included) are much more resistant to such problems than plasmas of old and even the latest Panasonics. My oldest plasma (PN51F4500 AFXZA) is just over a year old and is used for about 60% gaming and 40% TV. To date it does not have a single mark of uneven wear or burn in on it. Fleeting IR? Yes, but when it occurs, it is usually gone within 30 seconds or so. The link below shows how a Samsung spanked two Panasonics in a burn in torture test.

http://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-plasma ... n-in-test/


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Samsung F4500 plasma bargain for 480p sources
PostPosted: Sun Dec 14, 2014 10:04 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Posts: 644
22point8 wrote:
I have the no longer available (might be available in Republic of Ireland) F4900 (F4500+ DVB-T2+ 3D).



Anyway, on mine the component input has weird lines and a scrolling interference affect, (Tested with the Wii/PS2/PS3/Extron VSC-700/CSY-2100 and quality cables). Otherwise the image is really good and 240p is recognised as different to 480i. e.g. 720x240 60p or 720x480 60i, it doesn't recognise 288p.


Got pics, will update later.


You need re-check your component cable and the switch (if any) you are using-- In the beginning, I had two problems with mine:

1.) Everything I sent to the set via component had some feint diagonal creeping lines that looked alot like "jailbars". They were only present when using my cheap mechanical component switch. When using direct cabling, it was crystal clear. Got a quality, actively amped component switch (an Audio Authority), and problem solved, the picture was as crystal clear as it was with direct cable.

2.) My Wii, with or without the new switch, exhibited some strange creeping "ghost" artifacts on all games when in progressive mode. I was using a set of cheap component cables off of Ebay, and had never noticed this in them before (coming from a Philips 480p CRT). They were there however, and I checked EVERYTHING trying to make them go away, nothing seemed to work. After trying every thing else, I ordered a set of Rocketfish Wii component cables from Ebay. The cables just oozed in apparent build quality, and fit so tight on the RCA jacks on the TV I was scared it was going to push them in! Once I plugged them in, there was an IMMEDIATELY recognizable difference. The entire picture seemed to be sharper, and the "creeping ghost lines" were gone. For good.

Just to make sure it wasnt a fluke, I disconnected them and re-connected the cheap Ebay specials-- the creeping lines were back, EXACTLY as they were before. They were definitely specific to that cable. I connected the Rocketfish cables back in and havent looked back since.

In short, what you are seeing is not normal-- are you using individual cables with a switch for your systems, or is it one of those 4 systems in 1 type cable?


As far as 240p, you are saying it has a dedicated 720x240/60p mode correct? When any given source is connected, you can hit the "Info" button on the remote an it will show you either 720x240/60p for 240p, 720x480/60i for 480i or 720x480/60p for 480p. At least the F4500's and F5300's do.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 585 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 20  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gara and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Space Pilot 3K template by Jakob Persson
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group