quote:
quote:
Going to the store and comparing them based upon what your eyes see is a bad idea
I keep hearing people say this and it makes me want to pull what's left of my hair out! Are you saying I should believe what I read but not what I see? The TV is going to be in your home, not anyone else's.
What you see in the store is not how any of those TVs are going to look on the wall in your house. That's the point. A properly calibrated TV for home use is going to look BAD in a brightly lit Best Buy or Walmart (where the majority of people purchase their TVs). If you have the opportunity to go to a premium AV store and have the reasonably replicate the lighting conditions of the room you intend on putting the TV in then by all means do it, but short of that it's unreasonable to expect what you see in the store to be what you see at home.
quote:
I GET the idea that you should not automatically exclude a TV simply because one store you saw it in has a picture on it you didn't like. And because you're not automatically excluding a particular model because the store might not have it set up correctly, it is a very good idea to visit several locations to see the TV displayed.
Comparing TVs based upon what you saw at one store vs. what you see at another is not a reasonable thing to do either. Why? Because your memory is flawed, so unless you have the TVs set up side by side in the same store, properly calibrated, in the correct lighting conditions you aren't going to be able to accurately determine the differences between sets. What looks good in one store may look bad in another, and without having the TV calibrated you won't be comparing apples to apples.
quote:
However, if you see one in there with a picture you really like, the durability (and other things) on reviews seems good, by all means, get it. Can the store be artificially making the TV look good? Doubtful.
Yes, the store does in fact make all TVs look better than they do. Some of it is unintentional and the nature of the environment. Bright flourescent lighting will make all TVs look good, because it washes out the blacks and makes them look darker than they actually are. Inky blacks make TVs look significantly better, it's why OLED TVs are the premium technology to date because they have what is essentially infinite contrast ratios (Their pixels are individually addressable and can be shut off when the picture dictates that the screen should be as dark as possible). I wouldn't put it past them to intentionally make the more pricey sets look better than the less expensive ones.
If you have the knowledge to calibrate a TV yourself, then by all means go for it, but it still won't be indicative of your home experience. It also requires way more time and knowledge to do that in store than it does to rely upon people that do the testing for you to determine how quality the set is. The job of a television is to reproduce content the way the individual who mastered the content intended. It is not supposed to go in adding information to attempt to make the picture looks better. The ability of a TV to reproduce content is scientifically measurable by checking true contrast ratios (not those listed on the box), color accuracy, and peak brightness.
If you follow the science you will end up with a list of TVs that will look good, and then you can determine which TV you prefer based upon price and styling. LG currently makes the best televisions (Their OLED line), Samsung currently makes the best LED TVs based upon picture quality and styling, Vizio makes the best bang for your buck display (similar picture quality to Samsung, some would say better, but the styling is worse).