Plasma vs LCD 3D TV

There has been a lot of buzz and excitement surrounding the recent announcements by a number of consumer electronic giants regarding the release of a host of 3D TVs in 2010. However, many consumers have been left scratching their heads trying to figure out whether Plasma or LCD TV technology will be better suited for the display of 3D content. While at first glance it may appear that both these technologies will provide the same experience, this guide will outline the various pros and cons of Plasma and LCD display technology and explain the significance of these with regards to the 3D capability of these displays.

Plasma 3D TV vs LCD 3D TV Refresh Rates

One of the primary battlegrounds when it comes to the LCD vs Plasma 3D TV conflict is the battle of 3D TV refresh rates. Unfortunately, there is a lot of misinformation flying around from both camps leaving you, the consumer, well and truly confused. So let’s begin by clarifying this once and for all. Currently, many LCD 3D TV manufacturers are marketing their 3D Displays with Refresh Rates of 120Hz, 240Hz and even 480Hz. Naively, we would expect that these numbers imply that a 240 Hz display is twice as fast and smother than a 120HZ display and that a 480Hz display will be 4 times better than a 120Hz LCD display. Of course, this is what the LCD TV manufacturers want the consumers to believe. The truth however, is quite different from what they would like to have us believe.

While these 3D LCD screens do have improved refresh rates, they still have problems when it comes to the display of fast moving video content. The fundamental reason for this is that LCD displays have a finite refresh rate for each pixel. When a fast moving scene is being displayed, the screen isn’t able to refresh each pixel fast enough to keep in sync with the motion and it leads to a blurring and ghosting of the image. This is especially an issue when it comes to watching sports on LCD TVs. 3D LCD TV manufacturers have certainly improved the pixel refresh rates of the screens but they are still a way away from being able to achieve true 240Hz/480Hz refresh rates. Instead, they rely on using some mathematical trickery and the choice of extremely favorable specifications to fudge the numbers so as to claim 240 and 480 Hz refresh rates thus tricking consumers into believing that the premium 480Hz 3D LCD TVs are actually 4 times faster than regular 120Hz LCD displays.

Unlike LCD TVs, Plasma 3D TVs do not suffer from any of these motion blur/ghosting issues to begin with. Plasma TVs have almost instantaneous pixel refresh rates and this results in a lack of ghosting and blurring in fast motion videos. In older Plasma TVs there used to be a motion trail effect due to the phosphor lag time of the plasma screen (the lag time is the time it takes the phosphor of the screen to stop glowing after it stops being excited). However, current 3D Plasma TV manufacturers have solved this problem by developing newer phosphors with extremely low lag times. To combat the Refresh Rate misinformation campaign being conducted by the LCD TV conglomerates, the Plasma TV makers have started to market a term called “Sub-field motion” or “Sub-field drive” numbers like 480Hz and 600Hz. This is obviously a ploy by the Plasma TV makers to beat the LCD consortium at their own game while also allowing consumers to understand that Plasma 3D TVs are indeed better when it comes to motion tracking and refresh rates than LCD 3D TVs. While it is certainly reprehensible that both camps have to stoop to such levels of misinformation to win consumers over, at least the Plasma TV makers are doing so to prove to the consumer that they do indeed offer a superior technology when it comes to screen refresh rate. Do check out our guide on Sub-field drive technology in Plasma 3D TVs to learn more about how and why Plasma 3D TVs offer better refresh rates and motion tracking.

Another important point to consider is that currently, only Plasma 3D TVs are capable of displaying a full 1080p picture, or 1080 lines of resolution when displaying video content. Even the best 3D LCD TVs to date can only achieve moving resolutions of 800-900 lines, not the full 1080p (even though they are rated as 1080p). Gary Merson (from HdGuru) performed extensive tests on this matter and Gizmodo reported on this in late 2007. You can find the article here – 1080p TVs Never Deliver 1080p Motion. This again has to do with the pixel response time limitation of LCD panels.  However, keep in mind that this isn’t a big deal breaker as most of us would be hard pressed to tell the difference between an image with 900 lines of resolution and 1080 lines of resolution in a video.

3D TV Refresh Rate Winner: Plasma TVs. Even though LCD panels have been improved to reduce motion blur and ghosting, they are still a ways away from matching Plasma TVs in this area.

Plasma 3D TV vs LCD 3D TV – Viewing Angles

When it comes to viewing angles, Plasma 3D TVs have a definite advantage over LCD TVs. This is largely due to the manner in which the light is created in each type of panel. In the case of Plasma TVs, individual phosphors on the TV screen are excited by UV light excitation (due to plasma discharges in each pixel) and as a result they glow and emit light in all directions. This property of the phosphors to emit light isotropically (i.e. in all directions) allows for excellent viewing angles in Plasma 3D displays. In the case of LCD displays, the TV backlight is directed normal to the TV screen. As a result, when you view the TV at oblique angles you get a less uniform light distribution. While LCD panels incorporate diffusive elements to enhance this light distribution and mitigate this effect, they are still not as effective, thus giving Plasma 3D TV’s the edge when it comes to viewing angles.

So why does this matter for 3D content? It is only a major consideration if you have quite a few folk watching TV at the same time as you would like all of them to enjoy a good 3D experience. Improved viewing angles will provide a more enjoyable and uniform 3D display to even those viewers who are sitting away from the center of the screen.

3D TV Viewing Angle Winner: Plasma, but LCD TV viewing angles have improved substantially, especially on higher end LCD televisions. Additionally, unless you plan to have many people viewing your TV at wide angles, viewing angle will be a total non issue on most modern 3D TVs.

3D TV Screen Brightness

When it comes to the brightness of displays, LCD TVs have always had the upper hand on Plasma TVs. With newer LED backlight technology, LCD TVs have improved even further when it comes to the backlight brightness of the Television displays. Plasma 3D TVs on the other hand have a harder time upping the display brightness due to the nature of the technology (Plasma TVs do not rely on a backlight, but rather the spontaneous generation of light by phosphors on the screen when excited).

When it comes to 3D TVs, Screen brightness does have an important role to play because of the use of 3D glasses to view the 3D content. Both passive polarized 3D glasses and Active Shutter glasses cause a net loss in light transmission thus dimming the image that is perceived by our eyes. This is the same reason why 3D Movie projectors in the theaters are specially made to produce substantially brighter images so as to compensate for this optical transmission loss across 3D Glasses.

LCD/LED backlit 3D TVs will definitely have an advantage over Plasma 3D TVs in this aspect, although the Plasma TV manufacturers have developed new phosphors for their screens that glow brighter and help improve the 3D experience. I wouldn’t be too worried about the brightness levels in Plasma TVs since Panasonic’s 3D Plasma TV was voted as the best 3D TV on display at CES 2010 earlier this year.

3D TV Brightness Winner: LCD definitely takes the win here, but Plasma has improved greatly and from the look of things so far, both types of display technologies will be very capable of producing images that are bright enough for easy viewing with 3D glasses. However, if you typically view your TV in a bright room with lots of light

3D Gaming and Computing

3D gaming is going to be really big and is probably going to be one of the chief factors driving the adoption of 3D in our homes. Most people who has gamed on a good 3D TV monitor have responded very enthusiastically to this technology. Add to that the fact that there is no significant processing involved for 3D gaming (the images and the game are already in a virtual 3D space, so generating a different view for each eye is quite trivial), which is making it easy for publishing houses to push the development of 3D games.

As far as the Plasma vs LCD 3D debate is concerned when it comes to 3D gaming and computing, LCD technology definitely holds the upper hand over Plasma TVs. The reasons are two fold:

1. As explained above, the brightness advantage that LCD displays possess will help when it comes to gaming. Many gamers prefer to game with the monitor gamma turned up so that they don’t miss out dimmer details in their games. You definitely don’t want to be playing Call of Duty or any other FPS and missing out on subtle visual cues that would have helped you avoid another embarrassing frag/death.
2. LCD TV monitors also have the advantage of being able to push the resolution of the display up even for smaller screen sizes. If you are gaming on a PC, then you probably aren’t going to get anything larger than a 32 inch monitor. It is very hard to come by good quality, 1080p plasma 3D TVs at this size, and even if you did come across one, it would probably be unable to compete on the price front with equivalent 3D ready LCD monitors.

So are LCD 3D monitors definitively better than Plasma 3D monitors? Unfortunately the answer is never an easy one. LCD monitors do have the advantages mentioned above, but the one significant disadvantage they have in comparison to Plasma TVs is their long pixel refresh rate times which leads to ghosting and motion-blur issues. As explained at the beginning of this guide, 3D Plasma TVs are much better when it comes to the display of fast moving scenes.

Ultimately it is up to you to determine what factors matter the most to you so you can choose the appropriate 3D monitor for gaming and computing.

Winner for 3D Gaming and Computing: LCD, but only marginally. Plasma does have the crucial advantage of exhibiting very low ghosting/motion-blur as compared to LCD TV monitors.

The Plasma 3D TV vs LCD 3D TV Verdict

So which technology is best when it comes to 3D TVs? In our opinion, both technologies are extremely capable but we do believe that at the moment Plasma TVs do hold an edge over 3D LCD TVs. They show better color fidelity, faster refresh rates and improved black levels (although some of the most recent, high end LED LCD TVs are up to par with some of the best plasma TVs when it comes to black levels). However, you must keep in mind that there will be some variance between different 3D TV brands and models but on the whole we do believe that Plasma will be a better choice.