Samsung is advertising them on TV, I saw the commerical for it on G4. Pretty pointless unless the source video is in 120hz.... And there aren' t any.

This is what I found on samsung' s site. They are now selling 120hz LCDs that are based on this prototype.

http://www.samsung.com/us/business/semiconductor/newsView.do?news_id=825.0

In a show of quality advancements, the largest LCD TV panel in mass production is also being demonstrated at the exhibition. Featuring proprietary 120Hz McFiTM (motion-compensated frame interpolation*) technology, the new 70” LCD display refreshes motion picture images at twice the speed of conventional 60Hz models. This doubles the number of frames per second, making moving images crystal clear.

This is load of marketing BS. The pixel on an LCD changes to the desired color and then stays that color until it is told to change to a differnet color, it doesn' t go back to black or white, it stays the color than instantly switches to the new color. So for example if a pixel was blue at 120hz it would be told to change to blue 2 times, which is the exact same thing as telling it to change to blue once. LOL at the suckers that buy a 120hz LCD.

ORIGINAL: locopuyo

Samsung is advertising them on TV, I saw the commerical for it on G4. Pretty pointless unless the source video is in 120hz.... And there aren' t any.

Not necessarily. Each frame would be scanned twice. When you go to the movie theater, each film frame is shown twice before the projector advances to the next one. If it were only shown once it would be so incredibly strobey that your head would hurt and you wouldn' t be able to handle the immense flicker.

I approve of 120Hz, but I do not approve of Samsung. Yuck.

PS - Also, the HDTV spec does allow for 120 frames per second.

but I do not approve of Samsung. Yuck.

I thought Samsung were a decent brand when it came to HD tvs?

Erm, why is there an emphasis back on Hz now? I thought we got over that with the death of CRT. I was always told that Hz does not matter on an LCD.

ORIGINAL: Duffman

but I do not approve of Samsung. Yuck.

I thought Samsung were a decent brand when it came to HD tvs?

They are, it' s just that Joe is an idiot.

Samsung is OK but certainly not great. Emofag may prefer them, but remember, he is just a troll. Sony is better. Many brands are better. Samsung is better than off-brand stuff you find super-cheap, but every Samsung TV I have seen has been unacceptable to me and I returned them the same day. If your standards aren' t sky-high like mine, then they' ll be OK.

I was always told that Hz does not matter on an LCD.

It' ll matter as LCD response time gets faster. Right now it probably doesn' t. Also keep in mind that LCD technology isn' t the end-all be-all of imaging. Other technologies exist and might benefit more from 120Hz.

Samsung makes the LCD screens for most Sony products, everything from TVs to the PSP.

Again Joe doesn' t know what he' s talking about.

Back up your statement with links, don' t just pull it out of your ass. You may be right, but prove it.

There is no flicker with LCD' s. Because the pixel changes directly from one color to the other. It isn' t like a DLP or CRT where it projects a pixel for a limited time.

So it doesn' t make a difference at all. And there are LCDs that have a 2 ms response time, that is enough for 500 frames per second. If they made 500hz LCD it would still be the same.

ORIGINAL: Joe Redifer

ORIGINAL: locopuyo

Samsung is advertising them on TV, I saw the commerical for it on G4. Pretty pointless unless the source video is in 120hz.... And there aren' t any.

Not necessarily. Each frame would be scanned twice. When you go to the movie theater, each film frame is shown twice before the projector advances to the next one. If it were only shown once it would be so incredibly strobey that your head would hurt and you wouldn' t be able to handle the immense flicker.

I approve of 120Hz, but I do not approve of Samsung. Yuck.

PS - Also, the HDTV spec does allow for 120 frames per second.

Perhaps you missed the part where I said that 120fps is in the HDTV spec. True, there' s nothing now to support it, but there might be in the future. The UK has been using 100Hz TVs for a while now, though I' m not sure if their LCDs go that high.

I suppose the proper test would be to look at one of these 120Hz TVs in action and see if you notice any difference or not before jumping to conclusions either way.

I like jumping to conclusions though. The only way they could make standard 1080p 60 hz tv look better using 120hz is by somehow creating a new frames. Which I suppose they might be able to do by averaging 2 frames and showing that one in between them. But that would create a slight delay and wouldn' t work well for games, and might even create a noticable delay between the audio and video.
Eventually if there are 120hz sources, sure it would look great, but they are claiming at making current sources look better, I call BS.

If they are interpolating frames, then that is something I would definitely NOT like. They' d have to have a hefty processor built in for that and you' re right, there is no way possible for it not to cause a delay since it' d have to see frame 2 before it could draw frame 1.5.

This would be great if videogames supported this speed, but actual video, nah. I' m happy with 24fps for movies as it is and I think 60fps for video looks too much like home movies or TV news.