Let me start by advising you that I am quite new to all this. I recently purchased a Samsung LE40M86BD. I was talked into buying all the usual "good" cables etc, but my picture is not to the standard I was hoping. Having read a fair bit before I took the plunge I realise the the general opinion is that the picture from an old CRT set will be better than lcd or plasma, but some of the channels are truly awful. I get a lot of blurring of people when they move and some channels are really bitty and grainy. Is there anything I can do to try to resolve this or is this just the way it is? Thanks in advance. Edit : I see people referring to calibrating their sets. Sorry I don't know how to do this?
Slightly disappointed buyer
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
He is presuming you're feeding your TV a rubbish quality signal so the TV can't really do anything better with it and that's why it looks that bad.
Choices are to get SkyHD, only watch DVD's, buy a better tv capable of handling lower quality standard definition pictures better, or put up with it..
Choices are to get SkyHD, only watch DVD's, buy a better tv capable of handling lower quality standard definition pictures better, or put up with it..
[quote user="vector"]
Edit : I see people referring to calibrating their sets. Sorry I don't know how to do this?[/quote]
Go to Google and search for "Samsung M86/M87 Settings Thread" (include the quotes).
Edit : I see people referring to calibrating their sets. Sorry I don't know how to do this?[/quote]
Go to Google and search for "Samsung M86/M87 Settings Thread" (include the quotes).
[quote user="vector"] I see people referring to calibrating their sets. Sorry I don't know how to do this?[/quote]
Here you go - click here for a guide to making more of your TV.
As well as contrast/colour/brightness tweaking, it's particularly worth trying things with and without 'picture-optimising' modes, which can often make things worse rather than better (sharpening modes, especially, which tend to introduce digital noise).
Here you go - click here for a guide to making more of your TV.
As well as contrast/colour/brightness tweaking, it's particularly worth trying things with and without 'picture-optimising' modes, which can often make things worse rather than better (sharpening modes, especially, which tend to introduce digital noise).
[quote user="JoelSim"]I've seen this before on a Samsung. Wouldn't touch them myself.[/quote]
I have a Samsung and haven't a clue what you are talking about!
I have a Samsung and haven't a clue what you are talking about!
[quote user="Axum"]
He is presuming you're feeding your TV a rubbish quality signal
[/quote]
No, not presuming that at all - just saying that some Freeview channels use very low bitrates, which makes them prone to looking soft, blocking (where bunches of pixels become obvious) and so on.
Arguably a set with less resolution or sharpness will make such channels look better, or obviously a smaller screen, but in many cases it's a matter of 'don't shoot the messenger'.
You can often make these channels look better with less contrast and sharpness, and by turning off some of the picture processing, but until we get more Freeview bandwidth available, and broadcasters use it to improve quality, not just cram in more services, the problem will remain.
He is presuming you're feeding your TV a rubbish quality signal
[/quote]
No, not presuming that at all - just saying that some Freeview channels use very low bitrates, which makes them prone to looking soft, blocking (where bunches of pixels become obvious) and so on.
Arguably a set with less resolution or sharpness will make such channels look better, or obviously a smaller screen, but in many cases it's a matter of 'don't shoot the messenger'.
You can often make these channels look better with less contrast and sharpness, and by turning off some of the picture processing, but until we get more Freeview bandwidth available, and broadcasters use it to improve quality, not just cram in more services, the problem will remain.
One other question is how close are you sitting to your 40 inch? If you are sitting the same distance as your previous (whatever it was but smaller TV) then effectively you are sitting closer to the image which may explain some of your problem.
[quote user="Eddiewood"][quote user="JoelSim"]I've seen this before on a Samsung. Wouldn't touch them myself.[/quote]
I have a Samsung and haven't a clue what you are talking about![/quote]
The ghosting effect.
And the fact that everything looks too realistic, ie films and TV dramas don't seem to have the mood they were shot with. I can't explain it but having been used to my Panasonic, the Samsung was incredibly (and I mean incredibly) poor in my opinion. It was as if I'd filmed it myself in my front room on a cameraphone. Rubbish.
I have a Samsung and haven't a clue what you are talking about![/quote]
The ghosting effect.
And the fact that everything looks too realistic, ie films and TV dramas don't seem to have the mood they were shot with. I can't explain it but having been used to my Panasonic, the Samsung was incredibly (and I mean incredibly) poor in my opinion. It was as if I'd filmed it myself in my front room on a cameraphone. Rubbish.
[quote user="JoelSim"]
The ghosting effect.
And the fact that everything looks too realistic, ie films and TV dramas don't seem to have the mood they were shot with. I can't explain it but having been used to my Panasonic, the Samsung was incredibly (and I mean incredibly) poor in my opinion. It was as if I'd filmed it myself in my front room on a cameraphone. Rubbish.[/quote]
What is the basis for this viewpoint, have you owned one?
The ghosting effect.
And the fact that everything looks too realistic, ie films and TV dramas don't seem to have the mood they were shot with. I can't explain it but having been used to my Panasonic, the Samsung was incredibly (and I mean incredibly) poor in my opinion. It was as if I'd filmed it myself in my front room on a cameraphone. Rubbish.[/quote]
What is the basis for this viewpoint, have you owned one?
[quote user="Andrew Everard"][quote user="Axum"]
He is presuming you're feeding your TV a rubbish quality signal
[/quote]
No, not presuming that at all - just saying that some Freeview channels use very low bitrates, which makes them prone to looking soft, blocking (where bunches of pixels become obvious) and so on.
Arguably a set with less resolution or sharpness will make such channels look better, or obviously a smaller screen, but in many cases it's a matter of 'don't shoot the messenger'.
You can often make these channels look better with less contrast and sharpness, and by turning off some of the picture processing, but until we get more Freeview bandwidth available, and broadcasters use it to improve quality, not just cram in more services, the problem will remain.
[/quote]
I know what you're saying, but he didn't mention anything about Freeview, hence my use of the word "presuming", unless that tv has a built-in Freeview player and you know he's using it...
He is presuming you're feeding your TV a rubbish quality signal
[/quote]
No, not presuming that at all - just saying that some Freeview channels use very low bitrates, which makes them prone to looking soft, blocking (where bunches of pixels become obvious) and so on.
Arguably a set with less resolution or sharpness will make such channels look better, or obviously a smaller screen, but in many cases it's a matter of 'don't shoot the messenger'.
You can often make these channels look better with less contrast and sharpness, and by turning off some of the picture processing, but until we get more Freeview bandwidth available, and broadcasters use it to improve quality, not just cram in more services, the problem will remain.
[/quote]
I know what you're saying, but he didn't mention anything about Freeview, hence my use of the word "presuming", unless that tv has a built-in Freeview player and you know he's using it...
Gerrardasnails
Well-known member
[quote user="JoelSim"]No, but I used one for a week over Christmas and it was rubbish with a capital R.[/quote]
Then it wasn't set-up properly. There is no way that the panel on an M86 can be described as being "rubbish with a capital R".
Then it wasn't set-up properly. There is no way that the panel on an M86 can be described as being "rubbish with a capital R".
There are sets out there that are no great at displaying low bitrate freeview channels and there are sets that are great at upscalling them and then processing the picture so that its not as noticable, I have a Panasonic TH-37 PX70 with a Virgin V+ box, it scales well and the lower bit rate channels while poorer dont look at all bad. I would definaltly say go for a all round set as appose to ones that display great off-air pics, its the all round package and personally one area i have auditioned all Samsungs and IMHO they are not the best on freeview feeds, while excellent at DVD or HD content. The Pioneers and The Panas do this a lot better also would a high end Freeview box or good in build tuner
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Samsung announces a mysterious fourth version of the Galaxy S25 at Unpacked 2025- Started by What Hi-Fi?
- Replies: 0
Latest posts
-
-
-
Question Suggestions for foundational parts of a longer term vinyl setup- Latest: RTHerringbone
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram