Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

flatpanelshd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 61 posts

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#51

Post by zamadatix »

klausa wrote: post #40
zamadatix wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because matte vs glossy is a separate discussion from cheap vs premium. The former is about marching the expected viewing conditions and the latter is about how advanced it tries to be about doing so. If you want the most optimal possible viewing experience you need to combine multiple aspects like that, not just buy a premium device.

> Because matte vs glossy is a separate discussion from cheap vs premium. My whole complaint is that it increasingly isn’t! If I wanted a “premium” variant of Steam Deck, I had no choice to opt out of matte coating. If I want the best TV panel possible from Sony, it only comes with the matte coating. I’m fine with the option for matte being there for folks who like this! I just want to be able to opt-out of it, if I…

About half the time in the last few years Sony's flagship OLED and Mini LED options have been glossy. When they haven't, they've been semi-glossy. Short of every model being duplicated, 50% of the time is all one can hope for.

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#52

Post by bayindirh »

lnenad wrote: post #48
bayindirh wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have seen burn-in personally in my couple of early OLED devices, and saw them pretty quickly, so when I was buying my only TV and seen that RTINGS tests, I decided on an LCD. My OLED devices fared fine for a lot of years, but I'm not sold on OLED on large surfaces, and a good quality, dynamic backlit LCD is more than enough for my needs.

I don't know what "early" represents for you so cannot comment on that but my close to 10 year old 55 inch tv still doesn't have it. Either way there's something about OLEDs that my eyes prefer, I cannot verbalize it. Maybe it's placebo :)

https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/longevity-burn-in-test-updat...

When you look at that, there are CNN artifacts in some of the TVs as early as 2 months and 4 months. That's early enough for me.

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#53

Post by jorvi »

klausa wrote: post #46
jorvi wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't really need to do a challenge: https://i.rtings.com/images/optimal-viewing-distance-televis... If you own a 50" 2160p ("4K") TV and are sitting more than 1.8m / 6ft away, you're already at the edge of being able to perceive any resolution increase over 1080p. For a 65" TV, its about 2.5m / 8ft. So no, at typical viewing distance you are very unlikely to notice a sharpness decrease. Tangentially related, but…

I’m at 65” and less than 2m away, and I absolutely can tell when text is not rendered at native resolution, which is why I’m also confident I’d be able to notice the matte coating too. (I am also probably like three standard deviations _more annoyed_ by the blurriness than an average person, I’m more than willing to believe that an average person wouldn’t be able to tell, or at least wouldn’t be bothered by it anywhe…

Well yeah, at that distance you are supposed to notice the difference in resolution, and presumably the difference between matte and glossy. Most living room situations aren't like that though.

Btw, that page in general is great if you want to optimize your viewing experience: https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/size-to-distance-r... :)

I'm also someone who cares enough about fidelity to do 10-point tuning on my displays and speakers, so I get your frustration!

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#54

Post by drcongo »

klausa wrote: post #46
jorvi wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't really need to do a challenge: https://i.rtings.com/images/optimal-viewing-distance-televis... If you own a 50" 2160p ("4K") TV and are sitting more than 1.8m / 6ft away, you're already at the edge of being able to perceive any resolution increase over 1080p. For a 65" TV, its about 2.5m / 8ft. So no, at typical viewing distance you are very unlikely to notice a sharpness decrease. Tangentially related, but…

I’m at 65” and less than 2m away, and I absolutely can tell when text is not rendered at native resolution, which is why I’m also confident I’d be able to notice the matte coating too. (I am also probably like three standard deviations _more annoyed_ by the blurriness than an average person, I’m more than willing to believe that an average person wouldn’t be able to tell, or at least wouldn’t be bothered by it anywhe…

Good lord, <2m from a 65" screen? You'll get square eyes!

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#55

Post by Melatonic »

klausa wrote: post #4

What's with the recent trend of putting matte coatings on the most "premium" devices? This TV does it, the Steam Deck's done it, and it almost always looks terrible (the nano-etching on recent MBPs is _fine_; but still makes the text noticeably fuzzier). The market for top-end TVs is the people who _really_ care about image quality, why would you jeopardize that with a coating that makes it _worse_? I'm fine with thi…

I don't think "matte" needs to be blurry ?

Proper screen should be neither super glossy or super matte. From what I remember screens designed for color correction and whatnot are usually a sort of in between.

Could also be that at the TV size the outer screen itself is glass (which is naturally "glossy" but also much clearer and lower abbe value than any plastic) so a coating to reduce reflections might be ideal.

I doubt they're talking about the kind of crappy "matte" screen you might associate with an old ass Thinkpad laptop or something.

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#56

Post by Melatonic »

jorvi wrote: post #42
klausa wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d now be actually curious to do a Pepsi-style challenge to test this on myself. I give myself a ~low 40% chance of being able to tell within a minute when watching a TV show/movie _without subtitles_, maybe 60%ish with subtitles, and maybe low 80% if I was playing a game with any amount of text rendered on the screen.

You don't really need to do a challenge: https://i.rtings.com/images/optimal-viewing-distance-televis... If you own a 50" 2160p ("4K") TV and are sitting more than 1.8m / 6ft away, you're already at the edge of being able to perceive any resolution increase over 1080p. For a 65" TV, its about 2.5m / 8ft. So no, at typical viewing distance you are very unlikely to notice a sharpness decrease. Tangentially related, but…

Some of that info is now considered outdated.

In addition there's a lot more benefits your missing. 4K will be streamed at a higher overall bitrate with smaller artifacts and noise.

In addition HDR and 10 bit / 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 color can be huge differences in image quality on the right TV and source.

For the first example you could theoretically take a 4K signal and downscale to 1080P before display and theoretically get a lot of the benefits (assuming the person is far from their TV as you say). That being said a lot of people do sit closer and have larger TVs. And many people also have better vision than average.

Jumping from 4K to 8K I would say the differences are much less important given the massive file size increase. Many nicer cameras even only shoot in around "6K". Shooting higher resolution does allow you to do a bit of cropping and recomposing in post however which is nice. And of course things like stabilisation.

4K on phones though I think is truly dumb. Just wasting heat and battery life

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#57

Post by Melatonic »

klausa wrote: post #46
jorvi wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't really need to do a challenge: https://i.rtings.com/images/optimal-viewing-distance-televis... If you own a 50" 2160p ("4K") TV and are sitting more than 1.8m / 6ft away, you're already at the edge of being able to perceive any resolution increase over 1080p. For a 65" TV, its about 2.5m / 8ft. So no, at typical viewing distance you are very unlikely to notice a sharpness decrease. Tangentially related, but…

I’m at 65” and less than 2m away, and I absolutely can tell when text is not rendered at native resolution, which is why I’m also confident I’d be able to notice the matte coating too. (I am also probably like three standard deviations _more annoyed_ by the blurriness than an average person, I’m more than willing to believe that an average person wouldn’t be able to tell, or at least wouldn’t be bothered by it anywhe…

Are you sure you're just not comparing crappy screens (what you experience as "matte") with better ones ?

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#58

Post by klausa »

Melatonic wrote: post #57
klausa wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m at 65” and less than 2m away, and I absolutely can tell when text is not rendered at native resolution, which is why I’m also confident I’d be able to notice the matte coating too. (I am also probably like three standard deviations _more annoyed_ by the blurriness than an average person, I’m more than willing to believe that an average person wouldn’t be able to tell, or at least wouldn’t be bothered by it anywhe…

Are you sure you're just not comparing crappy screens (what you experience as "matte") with better ones ?

Yes, unless you wanna go down the line of "well actually Apple screens are not that good".

This is a semi-sponsored video from a scammy company that makes glossy displays, so you might want to take it with a grain of salt, but it talks about a real effect with (most, again, Apple's etching is _much_ better, but still _noticeable to me_) matte coatings: https://youtu.be/3mTV1TOblbA?t=124

There are people taking super-zoomed-in photos of their monitors all over reddit too, so you can judge how much haze/blurriness they add to the image:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrawidemasterrace/comments/18sb63... https://www.reddit.com/r/OLED_Gaming/comments/1jf2u54/the_di...

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#59

Post by klausa »

Melatonic wrote: post #56
jorvi wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't really need to do a challenge: https://i.rtings.com/images/optimal-viewing-distance-televis... If you own a 50" 2160p ("4K") TV and are sitting more than 1.8m / 6ft away, you're already at the edge of being able to perceive any resolution increase over 1080p. For a 65" TV, its about 2.5m / 8ft. So no, at typical viewing distance you are very unlikely to notice a sharpness decrease. Tangentially related, but…

Some of that info is now considered outdated. In addition there's a lot more benefits your missing. 4K will be streamed at a higher overall bitrate with smaller artifacts and noise. In addition HDR and 10 bit / 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 color can be huge differences in image quality on the right TV and source. For the first example you could theoretically take a 4K signal and downscale to 1080P before display and theoretically…

You're confusing "benefits of playing 4K-mastered media" and "benefits of having more pixels on the panel"; which is what the original point was about.

Re: Sony Launches Bravia 9 II and Bravia 7 II with 'True RGB'

#60

Post by jorvi »

Melatonic wrote: post #56
jorvi wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't really need to do a challenge: https://i.rtings.com/images/optimal-viewing-distance-televis... If you own a 50" 2160p ("4K") TV and are sitting more than 1.8m / 6ft away, you're already at the edge of being able to perceive any resolution increase over 1080p. For a 65" TV, its about 2.5m / 8ft. So no, at typical viewing distance you are very unlikely to notice a sharpness decrease. Tangentially related, but…

Some of that info is now considered outdated. In addition there's a lot more benefits your missing. 4K will be streamed at a higher overall bitrate with smaller artifacts and noise. In addition HDR and 10 bit / 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 color can be huge differences in image quality on the right TV and source. For the first example you could theoretically take a 4K signal and downscale to 1080P before display and theoretically…

The bitrate thing is certainly true, but at the bitrates that Netflix streams I'd almost rather have the same bitrate for a 1080P stream and then use my Shield to upscale it.

As for the color thing, 4:4:4 has very little material released in that format. And there's a reason we chose to compress 4:2:2 instead of 2:2:4, humans are just much less sensitive to color than to brightness. That's why HDR is so nice, the extra brightness steps.

People can certainly have better vision than 20/20 (which is taken as standard, although it is above average already).

And yup, 8K is unnecessary aside from maybe cinema front row seats. And 4K phones are indeed stupid haha. Interestingly enough, for example the Deck is plenty sharp at 720P which I personally would have never expected until owning it.

Post reply on HN