# Samsung Smart TV picture quality is terrible



## F1aReD

Hi,

I just recently purchased a 40" Samsung Smart TV, 120Hz LED (NOT 3D) to upgrade our bedroom tv (a Philips LCD). We have a 55" Samsung Smart TV in our living room that has amazing picture quality, so I didn't hesitate to buy another Samsung for the bedroom but.....

The picture quality is TERRIBLE. Even though it's 120Hz, it looks like a 60Hz and the contrast downright sucks. It's blotchy and pixelated, and the color is off. It doesn't look much better than our old LCD, and I paid almost $700 for it!

I've switched all the settings on the receiver, made sure it was on 1080, etc. Is there anything that would cause this? (like the HDMI cable?) I'll try to tweak the settings tonight, but if I can't get it to look good I plan on returning it.

Also, for the first week of ownership it randomly switched sources in the middle of watching TV...but it doesn't do it now? (And no I wasn't sitting on the remote, lol)


----------



## sigma1914

Adjusting settings should be the 1st thing you did. There's likely recommended settings available online, like at CNet or AVSforum.


----------



## Chuck W

What is the model number?

If it's a UN40F6300 or 6350, have a look in this threadt at avsforums: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1467138/official-samsung-un-f6300-series-led-tv-owners-thread

I know that different internal panels make a big difference, although I thought the 40's were pretty solid. It was the bigger sets that had bigger variances.

As an FYI, I have a UN40F6300 with a Samsung built internal panel and it's a fantastic picture.


----------



## peds48

F1aReD said:


> Hi,
> 
> The picture quality is TERRIBLE. Even though it's 120Hz, it looks like a 60Hz (


what makes you think 120 is better, as a matter of fact I would start by turning any advanced features off

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## F1aReD

I'm not sure what the model# is, I'll have to look when I get home. That's an interesting thread on avsforums, little confused though...I'll have to go through it again.

Isn't 120 Hz supposed to be better than 60Hz? I see a difference at home and at stores...not as pixelated at all. My living room tv (Samsung 55" LED smart tv, 3D, 120Hz) has amazing picture quality out of the box, best quality I have seen on any other tv anywhere.

The only setting I turned off was the "econo" light or whatever, the one that dims the tv depending on the light in the room. It looked like someone was turning a flashlight on and off.


----------



## peds48

since 120 is not natural it tends to add artifacts to the picture 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## satcrazy

120 HZ is supposed to greatly reduce fast motion blur [ like in sports]

Believe it or not, it could very well be the 3D capability on your 55" that makes the difference.

post your exact model number.

sigma's right, try the TV's settings first, if you can't get a better picture, you need to rethink this.

Oh, and a TV should NOT" randomly" do anything. If you notice this again during the return period, take it back.


----------



## F1aReD

The model # is UN40F5500AF.

I've been watching TV on it tonight, and it does look terrible haha. I don't know if "pixelated" is the right word for it...but it looks terrible especially around the lines of logos or words. Maybe blotchy is the right word? It's all chewed up around logos and letters and stuff.

This is all on Directv, I know blu ray would probably look better but I mostly watch regular TV...I've been comparing it to my 55", and that TV isn't pixelated or chewed up at all. It looks perfect. Maybe if you stare at it very closely you'll see some pixilation, but you can't help that it's just D*.

On the 40", you don't have to stare it's right in your face.


----------



## sigma1914

Try these settings

Movie Mode
BL 10
Contrast 98
Brightness 48
Sharp 0
Color 50
Tint G52/R48
Picture Size: Screen Fit
Color Space: Native
White Balance:
25, 25, 21, 20, 25, 36
Gamma -2
Color Temp: Warm 2

Everything else 0 or off


----------



## sigma1914

Or for each mode...


Option - Dynamic - Standard - Movie



Backlight - 20 - 20 - 20

Contrast - 88 - 90 - 100

Brightness - 51 - 45 - 45

Sharpness - 0 - 0 - 0

Color - 50 - 50 - 50

Tint (G/R) - G50/R50 - G50/R50 - G50/R50

Dynamic Contrast - NA*1 - Off - Off

Black Tone - NA*1 - Off - Off

Flesh Tone - NA*1 - 0 - 0

Color Space - NA*1 - Auto - Auto

R Offset - NA*1 - 25 - 25

G Offset - NA*1 - 25 - 25

B Offset - NA*1 - 25 - 25

R Gain - NA*1 - 25 - 34

G Gain - NA*1 - 25 - 34

B Gain - NA*1 - 25 - 34

Gamma - NA*1 - 0 - 0

Motion Lighting - NA*1 - Off - Off

Color Temperature - Standard - Standard - Standard

Size - Acc. to Input Resolution - Acc. to Input Resolution - Acc. to Input Resolution

Digital Clean View - Off - Off - Off

MPEG Noise Filter - Off - Off - Off

HDMI Black Level - NA*2 - NA*2 - NA*2

Film Mode - Off - Off - Off

LED Motion - Off - Off - Off

(*1)The Advanced Settings are not available in Dynamic mode.

(*2)When inputting unprocessed YCbCr4:2:2 HDTV, Blu-ray, and DVD sources, HDMI black level is not available.


----------



## jimmie57

F1aReD said:


> The model # is UN40F5500AF.
> 
> I've been watching TV on it tonight, and it does look terrible haha. I don't know if "pixelated" is the right word for it...but it looks terrible especially around the lines of logos or words. Maybe blotchy is the right word? It's all chewed up around logos and letters and stuff.
> 
> This is all on Directv, I know blu ray would probably look better but I mostly watch regular TV...I've been comparing it to my 55", and that TV isn't pixelated or chewed up at all. It looks perfect. Maybe if you stare at it very closely you'll see some pixilation, but you can't help that it's just D*.
> 
> On the 40", you don't have to stare it's right in your face.


I have a Samsung 46" that is 120hz. For a long time I was having a problem with it while I was watching CNBC and the stock prices scrolling across the bottom of the screen. They were jerky and hard to read. I tried all setting in the DTV receiver and my TV settings. My Vizio was not doing the jerking so I knew it was not what was coming from the satellite.

Finally I turned the 120 hz OFF and instantly the numbers and letters scrolling on the screen were smooth.


----------



## jimmie57

F1aReD said:


> Hi,
> 
> I just recently purchased a 40" Samsung Smart TV, 120Hz LED (NOT 3D) to upgrade our bedroom tv (a Philips LCD). We have a 55" Samsung Smart TV in our living room that has amazing picture quality, so I didn't hesitate to buy another Samsung for the bedroom but.....
> 
> The picture quality is TERRIBLE. Even though it's 120Hz, it looks like a 60Hz and the contrast downright sucks. It's blotchy and pixelated, and the color is off. It doesn't look much better than our old LCD, and I paid almost $700 for it!
> 
> I've switched all the settings on the receiver, made sure it was on 1080, etc. Is there anything that would cause this? (like the HDMI cable?) I'll try to tweak the settings tonight, but if I can't get it to look good I plan on returning it.
> 
> Also, for the first week of ownership it randomly switched sources in the middle of watching TV...but it doesn't do it now? (And no I wasn't sitting on the remote, lol)


I run my TV with it set to Dynamic mode and then adjust the brightness and backlighting and color intensity down from there. If you look at the specs they all brag about the Dynamic Contrast. If you are not in Dynamic Mode you do not get that benefit. On my TV those settings for Black levels, etc. are grayed out when it is on Standard or Movie modes.

If the Sharpness is set to high it makes the picture very grainy. If the color is too high it almost creates a glow and bleed over effect for me. I have my Sharpness down to 20 and the Color to 42, the Backlight is on 85 and the Brightness is 50 and the Contrast is 85.
All TVs and all settings are different for each user. Where ever suits your eye the best.

My friend got a 55" Samsung LED recently. I was over to her house and she was bragging on how good her TV picture was. I told her to get a pen and paper. We then scrolled thru the available settings and she wrote down what they were. I then adjusted it. The first thing I did was turn on Dynamic mode and then reduce color, backlighting, brightness, color and sharpness. She then called her husband from the next room to come see what I had done to their TV picture. Both were very happy with it.
I also carried a center speaker for the system to go with the 2 external speakers she was using. Hooked it up to the Yamaha AVR and set it for the surround sound, etc.
Then we played the same thing back and she was thrilled with the surround sound.


----------



## damondlt

F1aReD said:


> The model # is UN40F5500AF.
> 
> I've been watching TV on it tonight, and it does look terrible haha. I don't know if "pixelated" is the right word for it...but it looks terrible especially around the lines of logos or words. Maybe blotchy is the right word? It's all chewed up around logos and letters and stuff.
> 
> This is all on Directv, I know blu ray would probably look better but I mostly watch regular TV...I've been comparing it to my 55", and that TV isn't pixelated or chewed up at all. It looks perfect. Maybe if you stare at it very closely you'll see some pixilation, but you can't help that it's just D*.
> 
> On the 40", you don't have to stare it's right in your face.


Take it back and buy a 6000 series.
I went through the same thing with a Similar Samsung
Except it was a 55 inch.

I took it right back and Bought a UN55FH6030 3D (Not Smart TV). And for $850 , Nothing I mean NOTHING compares to the PQ in that price range..
Only thing I wish it had more HDMI plugs.

And with over 300 reviews and only 10 under 3 stars from BestBuy. I would say its a very good model.

And they do make a 40 inch version.

http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/UN40FH6030FXZA
But if you Still prefer a Smart tv.
Then a 6300 is what you want.

But I have Rokus and LG 3D smart Blu ray. So internet ready tv isn't really required in my house.


----------



## peds48

satcrazy said:


> 120 HZ is supposed to greatly reduce fast motion blur [ like in sports]


you said it right, "supposed to" while you may see some benefits on sports channels they same may not be true for regular content

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## F1aReD

I tried a blu ray with the TV today, it looked damn near perfect, just a little grainy...It was probably just the movie though. Could it be something to do with my receiver or wiring? I went to Best Buy today and talked with someone about the 5500, he said they weren't great TV's in general but should look pretty good.

I'm not sure where they get there content from, but there's looked ALOT better than mine. The guy thought I was a total noob, asked if I was even watching HD or if I just "had the coaxial cable plugged in the back"...ha ha.


----------



## sigma1914

So you just won't try the settings huh?


----------



## CCarncross

Did you buy the tv just because your other Samsung looks good? Most of the tv manufacturer's make several model lines of tv's, sometimes ranging from crap to excellent, and with price tags to match. Where does that model fit in Samsung's line-up?


----------



## satcrazy

F1aReD said:


> I tried a blu ray with the TV today, it looked damn near perfect, just a little grainy...It was probably just the movie though. Could it be something to do with my receiver or wiring? I went to Best Buy today and talked with someone about the 5500, he said they weren't great TV's in general but should look pretty good.
> 
> I'm not sure where they get there content from, but there's looked ALOT better than mine. The guy thought I was a total noob, asked if I was even watching HD or if I just "had the coaxial cable plugged in the back"...ha ha.


Ya know, Sig went through the bother to post all those settings, the least you could do is try them, unless of course you intend on watching BD forever, haha.

If they don't work for you, think about what damondlt posted.

BB clerks would be my last choice for advice. At least the BB in my area.

Did you try what J57 suggested? Pretty much hands on stuff.


----------



## F1aReD

I am going to try the settings, I just haven't yet...I wanted to see what the blu ray would look like. I will be honest and say that I don't think changing the settings is going to do anything for the pixilation....but I did intend on trying them at least.

CCarncross, that is the only reason I bought it. I have a "Samsung SmartTV" that looks awesome, so I figured I'd buy another "Samsung SmartTV"..but I'm kind of disappointed. I'm not really sure where it falls in the model's, but I think it's on the lower end.

The TV I have in my living room is a UN55D6450UF...I bought the floor display from Sam's Club, so I don't really know how much it went for originally. There doesn't seem to be much info about it.


----------



## satcrazy

F1aReD said:


> I am going to try the settings, I just haven't yet...I wanted to see what the blu ray would look like. I will be honest and say that I don't think changing the settings is going to do anything for the pixilation....but I did intend on trying them at least.
> 
> CCarncross, that is the only reason I bought it. I have a "Samsung SmartTV" that looks awesome, so I figured I'd buy another "Samsung SmartTV"..but I'm kind of disappointed. I'm not really sure where it falls in the model's, but I think it's on the lower end.
> 
> The TV I have in my living room is a UN55D6450UF...I bought the floor display from Sam's Club, so I don't really know how much it went for originally. There doesn't seem to be much info about it.


Well,

Did you try turning off the 120hz, like J57 did? It would be interesting to see if that did anything.

I think if your not satisfied [ you will always be comparing the two, and at some point you'll wish you did this] consider the 6000 series, It could most definitely be a better tv.
Good luck!


----------



## jimmie57

F1aReD said:


> I am going to try the settings, I just haven't yet...I wanted to see what the blu ray would look like. I will be honest and say that I don't think changing the settings is going to do anything for the pixilation....but I did intend on trying them at least.
> 
> CCarncross, that is the only reason I bought it. I have a "Samsung SmartTV" that looks awesome, so I figured I'd buy another "Samsung SmartTV"..but I'm kind of disappointed. I'm not really sure where it falls in the model's, but I think it's on the lower end.
> 
> The TV I have in my living room is a UN55D6450UF...I bought the floor display from Sam's Club, *so I don't really know how much it went for originally. There doesn't seem to be much info about it.*


This TV has Clear Motion 480, not 120.
http://www.samsung.com/us/system/consumer/product/un/55/d6/un55d6450ufxza/7282_LED_55_6450_v8.pdf

This model is no longer made.
It appears the new version in a 40" is the 6500.
http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/all-products


----------



## damondlt

I wouldn't go by price to compair as much as model numbers. 

Most Samsung owners would agree that 6000 series and above are the better quality models. 
Anything under that are just price competitive economy models. 

And the picture quality your describing is common .
Same goes for the Sharp tvs. stay away from the 450,452,and 550 models. 

Sent from my PantechP8010 using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## F1aReD

Wow, I always thought it was 120. I never had the box or anything, I just saw it and it look good in the store..so I jumped on it before someone else bought it.

I tried all the settings, and actually Movie Mode with those settings looked very good. The pixilation went away and edges were smooth. It looked very very good. I think the brightness hides the pixilation; I switched it to Dynamic mode to try those settings (with the Movie Mode settings still intact) and it got VERY bright, and it was extremely pixilated, blotchy, looked terrible. I then adjusted the settings and looked pretty good but the color seemed a bit off.

Movie Mode with those settings by far looked the best. I'm going to watch it for a few days, I'll have to decide if the TV is worth what I paid for it, or if I should get something that's in the same price range but not Smart, I feel like I mostly paid for the "smart" portion of the TV and necessarily the PQ. I'd rather have the best PQ and not smart. 

Thanks for all the reply's.


----------



## Chuck W

F1aReD said:


> The model # is UN40F5500AF.
> 
> I've been watching TV on it tonight, and it does look terrible haha. I don't know if "pixelated" is the right word for it...but it looks terrible especially around the lines of logos or words. Maybe blotchy is the right word? It's all chewed up around logos and letters and stuff.
> 
> This is all on Directv, I know blu ray would probably look better but I mostly watch regular TV...I've been comparing it to my 55", and that TV isn't pixelated or chewed up at all. It looks perfect. Maybe if you stare at it very closely you'll see some pixilation, but you can't help that it's just D*.
> 
> On the 40", you don't have to stare it's right in your face.


As jimmie57 mentioned, that model is really only a 60hz refresh rate model that uses a thing called "Clear Motion" to simulate 120hz(the 6xx0 models are the actual 120hz sets).

I have the UN40F6300AFXZA model, which is really 120hz and I love it. Not sure what you paid for the 5500 model, but in looking at Best Buy, they list my model(the UN40F6300AFXZA) as being $30 *LESS* than the model you bought.


----------



## peds48

not sure there are "truly" 120Hz tv sets as all TV in USA is 60Hz making anything else just a feature enhancement 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## damondlt

Chuck W said:


> "Clear Motion" .


 Which Im sorry sucks! I barely have this feature turned on.
The 6030 has like 5 settings and I never go above the "clear" setting which is the lowest. Anything else durring movies just looks an abnormality.

Sent from my PantechP8010 using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## peds48

damondlt said:


> . Anything else durring movies just looks an abnormality.
> 
> Sent from my PantechP8010 using DBSTalk mobile app


exactly the reason why I don't use any of the these picture enhancements "features"

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Laxguy

Also one reason why my large TV is a plasma, and smaller ones are LED.....All have very good PQ, and all save one, are Sammys.


----------



## satcrazy

> Also one reason why my large TV is a plasma, and smaller ones are LED.....All have very good PQ, and all save one, are Sammys.


Lax, what is the plasma?


----------



## peds48

I also have Samsung plasma. best picture than LCD TVs 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Laxguy

satcrazy said:


> Lax, what is the plasma?


It's a Sammy.

HR44-200; Samsung 58" Plasma, PN58B650 [Living Room] from my profile.

It's now pushing 3 years, and going strong.


----------



## F1aReD

You know, it's funny...I finally returned the Samsung because I didn't feel it was worth the money. Went to Best Buy, looked at a few Samsung Smart TV's and saw a 6000 series...however that look terrible too! The writing on the screen was bleeding everywhere and it was all pixilated. The $399 Sharp next to it didn't have this...and neither did the LG LN54 above it...in fact, the LG looked great.

Decided on the LG...Got it home... and the PQ is 10x worse than the Samsung! I was thinking of Plasma, buy they only have big sizes and to be honest...I can't bring myself to buy something that doesn't look good in the store. (They only have Samsung plasma, and it looks pretty good...but the coloring is dull.) A Plasma would solve the pixilation issue for sure. I think. Ha ha.

I still have to play with the settings on the LG, but that might be returned too.


----------



## F1aReD

Also, I went to both Sam's Club and Best Buy and saw a few Samsung Smart TV's, I think they were an 8000 series or something along those lines. They were 55" and above and looked absolutely stunning! The PQ was awesome. For some reason, the lower end Samsung's (even the 6000 series) just don't look good. (to me).


----------



## Laxguy

F1aReD said:


> Also, I went to both Sam's Club and Best Buy and saw a few Samsung Smart TV's, I think they were an 8000 series or something along those lines. They were 55" and above and looked absolutely stunning! The PQ was awesome. For some reason, the lower end Samsung's (even the 6000 series) just don't look good. (to me).


Judging PQ at a big box store is a crap shoot at best. Sets, even if all set to default (torch) mode, are not adjusted as you would in your home. And seldom are the sets adjusted properly. If there's a big push by XYZ other sets may be made to look bad.

I'd do reviews rather than eyeballing at a store.


----------



## damondlt

F1aReD said:


> For some reason, the lower end Samsung's (even the 6000 series) just don't look good. (to me).


 Trust me in the price range the 6000's are about the best PQ your going to find in a 55 inch or smaller for less then $1000.

Sure you can spend more .

The sharp 60 inch 452 model for $900 was the biggest POS I ever had. Which is why I kept it only for one short month.

Now a $2000 Sharp im sure might have been a different story.

I got my Sammy 6030 home and what a world of difference.
You can't go by store displays. 
Go online and look at the reviews and read all the negative ones.

Sent from my PantechP8010 using DBSTalk mobile app


----------



## jimmie57

F1aReD said:


> You know, it's funny...I finally returned the Samsung because I didn't feel it was worth the money. Went to Best Buy, looked at a few Samsung Smart TV's and saw a 6000 series...however that look terrible too! The writing on the screen was bleeding everywhere and it was all pixilated. The $399 Sharp next to it didn't have this...and neither did the LG LN54 above it...in fact, the LG looked great.
> 
> Decided on the LG...Got it home... and the PQ is 10x worse than the Samsung! I was thinking of Plasma, buy they only have big sizes and to be honest...I can't bring myself to buy something that doesn't look good in the store. (They only have Samsung plasma, and it looks pretty good...but the coloring is dull.) A Plasma would solve the pixilation issue for sure. I think. Ha ha.
> 
> I still have to play with the settings on the LG, but that might be returned too.


I do not think the TVs you are looking at are "Pixelating". I believe what you are referring to is that the picture is "Grainy". That is most times caused by the set having way too much "Sharpness" .
If the TV looked good in the store, go back to the store and have them get you the remote. Go into the menu and check the settings it is set to. Take that home and duplicate it on your TV and see what you get.


----------



## jimmie57

Laxguy said:


> Judging PQ at a big box store is a crap shoot at best. Sets, even if all set to default (torch) mode, are not adjusted as you would in your home. And seldom are the sets adjusted properly. If there's a big push by XYZ other sets may be made to look bad.
> 
> I'd do reviews rather than eyeballing at a store.


I look at the reviews on the net, then go to the store, get them to give me the remote and let me adjust the picture to my liking.
I recently bought a 32" Sharp LED and 2 smaller LG LED TVs and I did this with each of them.
The Best Buy salesperson said that LG was fast catching Samsung if they have not caught them already.
The 2 LGs were for my grand daughters.
I adjusted the Sharp when I set it up and then tweaked it for several days after the initial settings to get it just like I like it.


----------



## acostapimps

I could definitely tell especially at Sears store which is plasma and what's LED, Plasma looks kind of dimmer(not too dim) but natural colors, and LED looks brighter but colors pop too much(doesn't look natural but too saturated) ie: grass look neon green, And when I was looking side by side, A image of a canyon or large field, I could see pixelation around the canyon on LED, with plasma only minimal, Large field is what gave it away from the grass, But in the store there's no good true comparison, since there not calibrated, with the LED strategically making them more appealing than the plasma, And you see why their more top selling than the plasma. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk


----------



## satcrazy

Anyone know anything about the Sammy's at wallyworld?

I didn't get a chance to write the model down, but I do remember it was a 6003. [ 50"]

Picture wasn't too bad, price was OK...

I was looking for plasma but wallmart doesn't carry them here.


----------



## peds48

[quote name="satcrazy" post.

I was looking for plasma but wallmart doesn't carry them here.[/quote]sadly plasma are almost extinct because people want thin TVs

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Laxguy

One has to be very careful with the numbers and descriptions at any big box store. Sometimes their version will omit things, or have some lesser quality components.


----------



## jimmie57

acostapimps said:


> I could definitely tell especially at Sears store which is plasma and what's LED, Plasma looks kind of dimmer(not too dim) but natural colors, and LED looks brighter but colors pop too much(doesn't look natural but too saturated) ie: grass look neon green, And when I was looking side by side, A image of a canyon or large field, I could see pixelation around the canyon on LED, with plasma only minimal, Large field is what gave it away from the grass, But in the store there's no good true comparison, since there not calibrated, with the LED strategically making them more appealing than the plasma, And you see why their more top selling than the plasma.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk


Most of the problems you describe with the LED picture can be adjusted out by turning down the back light about 15% and reducing or totally eliminating the Sharpness of the picture and then reducing the color by about 10 to 15 numbers.

The real difference I notice n Plasma TV sets is the ability to view it at an extreme angle that you can not do with an LED.


----------



## sigma1914

peds48 said:


> sadly plasma are almost extinct because people want thin TVs
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Plasma are very thin. My ST60 is just under 2 inches.


----------



## Laxguy

Get an OLED! About a half inch thick.....


----------



## satcrazy

sigma1914 said:


> Plasma are very thin. My ST60 is just under 2 inches.


My st 30 is thin enough as well.


----------



## satcrazy

Laxguy said:


> Get an OLED! About a half inch thick.....


Lax, your a funny guy :rolling: .

What are they going for now? Last I looked, out of my range.


----------



## satcrazy

Laxguy said:


> One has to be very careful with the numbers and descriptions at any big box store. Sometimes their version will omit things, or have some lesser quality components.


If I can't find a suitable plasma, what's critical in a lcd/led? I never really shopped for one before.


----------



## Laxguy

Prices have come



satcrazy said:


> Lax, your a funny guy :rolling: .
> 
> What are they going for now? Last I looked, out of my range.


Thanks!

OLEDs have come down in price, but are by no means cheap. I am pretty sure my next venture will be a 4k TV, surely so if there's a lot of content.


----------



## Laxguy

satcrazy said:


> If I can't find a suitable plasma, what's critical in a lcd/led? I never really shopped for one before.


I'd do all the reading I can at CNET and Consumer Reports. Larger LCDs may tend to show artifacts in fast moving pictures, esp. sports.


----------



## acostapimps

Or read reviews from Amazon or Best Buy if they carry it, Don't just look for the so-called expert reviews, And Consumer Reports you have to pay for subscription, if want to watch reviews there, Or just go to your local store if they carry it and adjust the picture settings if you can to compare.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## satcrazy

What size lcd/led if you think artifacts are a problem?

My plasma is 50 inch which no longer looks large to me. Of course artifacts are not a issue for my plasma.


----------



## Laxguy

satcrazy said:


> What size lcd/led if you think artifacts are a problem?
> 
> My plasma is 50 inch which no longer looks large to me. Of course artifacts are not a issue for my plasma.


It'd be a moving target over time. And higher end LEDs will have fewer artifacts, perhaps none worth mentioning. When I bought, I reckoned 40" and above should be plasma.


----------



## acostapimps

satcrazy said:


> My plasma is 50 inch which no longer looks large to me.


I said the same thing when I went from a 32 inch Sony Trinitron, That TV was a beast besides the screen, Was a real back breaker moving that thing literally. Still like that TV.


----------



## racton1

F1aReD said:


> Hi,
> 
> I just recently purchased a 40" Samsung Smart TV, 120Hz LED (NOT 3D) to upgrade our bedroom tv (a Philips LCD). We have a 55" Samsung Smart TV in our living room that has amazing picture quality, so I didn't hesitate to buy another Samsung for the bedroom but.....
> 
> The picture quality is TERRIBLE. Even though it's 120Hz, it looks like a 60Hz and the contrast downright sucks. It's blotchy and pixelated, and the color is off. It doesn't look much better than our old LCD, and I paid almost $700 for it!
> 
> I've switched all the settings on the receiver, made sure it was on 1080, etc. Is there anything that would cause this? (like the HDMI cable?) I'll try to tweak the settings tonight, but if I can't get it to look good I plan on returning it.
> 
> Also, for the first week of ownership it randomly switched sources in the middle of watching TV...but it doesn't do it now? (And no I wasn't sitting on the remote, lol)


----------



## racton1

I have a 
*Samsung - 55" Class (54.6" Diag.) - LED - 2160p - Smart - 4K Ultra HD TV with High Dynamic Range and it has a crappy picture.I hate it and I wish that I had bought a Sony or LG. *


----------



## jimmie57

racton1 said:


> I have a
> *Samsung - 55" Class (54.6" Diag.) - LED - 2160p - Smart - 4K Ultra HD TV with High Dynamic Range and it has a crappy picture.I hate it and I wish that I had bought a Sony or LG. *


What is the actual model number of this TV ?
If you have it set for HDR and are not feeding it an HDR stream it will look very washed out and dull.
Same in reverse, feeding it an HDR program and not set to use HDR.

Also, if you have ECO mode turned on it will automatically dim the picture to save energy and look like crap. Turn the ECO mode to OFF.


----------



## P Smith

the thread is three years old and should rest as new models selling now and should be discussed in new thread


----------



## racton1

jimmie57 said:


> What is the actual model number of this TV ?
> If you have it set for HDR and are not feeding it an HDR stream it will look very washed out and dull.
> Same in reverse, feeding it an HDR program and not set to use HDR.
> 
> Also, if you have ECO mode turned on it will automatically dim the picture to save energy and look like crap. Turn the ECO mode to OFF.


I have the Samsung 

UN55MU8000FXZA
It has the ECO mode off. I have tried the HDR on and off. If you look at a 4k movies, you just say UUUh. Not much difference in that and a 1080 picture.


----------



## Wolfmanjohn

Try setting the picture mode to "movie"; that should make things look more natural. Unless you got a bad one, the 8000s are a good tv with a pleasing picture.


----------



## Rich

racton1 said:


> I have the Samsung
> 
> UN55MU8000FXZA
> It has the ECO mode off. I have tried the HDR on and off. If you look at a 4k movies, you just say UUUh. Not much difference in that and a 1080 picture.


I have the previous year's 8000, a 60" KS8000. It has better specs than the MUs but I don't see much difference between 1080p upscaled and NF or Amazon's 4K content. It all looks really good. You should be satisfied with that set, no?

Rich


----------



## racton1

Rich said:


> I have the previous year's 8000, a 60" KS8000. It has better specs than the MUs but I don't see much difference between 1080p upscaled and NF or Amazon's 4K content. It all looks really good. You should be satisfied with that set, no?
> 
> Rich


I don't see any difference in Amazon's 4K or 1080 either. That is the point. A 4k should look way better than 1080. On my TV they both look very average.


----------



## P Smith

racton1 said:


> I don't see any difference in Amazon's 4K or 1080 either. That is the point. A 4k should look way better than 1080. On my TV they both look very average.


does you DL speed in a range 30-50 mbps ?


----------



## ejbvt

racton1 said:


> I don't see any difference in Amazon's 4K or 1080 either. That is the point. A 4k should look way better than 1080. On my TV they both look very average.


That's because there isn't much of a difference. Fanboys will see an amazing picture because they want to. 4K isn't like going SD to HD. I see a big difference in shadows, they are clearer in 4K but backgrounds and the like look exactly the same. "4K is like being there!" Shut up. That's what they said about HD.


----------



## jimmie57

ejbvt said:


> That's because there isn't much of a difference. Fanboys will see an amazing picture because they want to. 4K isn't like going SD to HD. I see a big difference in shadows, they are clearer in 4K but backgrounds and the like look exactly the same. "4K is like being there!" Shut up. That's what they said about HD.


One reason you don't see a huge difference is the excellent upscaling that most of the new 4K TVs are doing with the lower resolutions.
I am not running any 4K on my 4K TV but the picture is far superior to the 1080p TV that I replaced with this one.


----------



## MysteryMan

Source material, photography and Director's intent dictate the outcome of video. I've seen some 4K material that didn't look any different than 1080p and I've seen some 4K material that will blow you away.


----------



## Rich

racton1 said:


> I don't see any difference in Amazon's 4K or 1080 either. That is the point. A 4k should look way better than 1080. On my TV they both look very average.


I think the 4K sets spoil people. I go back and forth between 1080p plasmas and two 4K sets and the difference is very noticeable. I never thought I would see as much difference. Yeah, it's not the step up the shift from SD to HD was but it's still quite a step up. I thought I had the best sets available with the plasmas...wrong again.

Rich


----------



## Rich

ejbvt said:


> That's because there isn't much of a difference. Fanboys will see an amazing picture because they want to. 4K isn't like going SD to HD. I see a big difference in shadows, they are clearer in 4K but backgrounds and the like look exactly the same. "4K is like being there!" Shut up. That's what they said about HD.


I never heard anyone say things about HD like that. I have heard, "It's like looking thru a window" about my 4K sets. And it is. Can't say that about my plasmas.

Rich


----------



## Rich

P Smith said:


> does you DL speed in a range 30-50 mbps ?


Download speeds do make a real difference, good question.

Rich


----------



## Rich

jimmie57 said:


> One reason you don't see a huge difference is the excellent upscaling that most of the new 4K TVs are doing with the lower resolutions.
> *I am not running any 4K on my 4K TV but the picture is far superior to the 1080p TV that I replaced with this one.*


Agreed, far better. The upscaling alone is worth every penny these sets cost.

Rich


----------



## Rich

MysteryMan said:


> Source material, photography and Director's intent dictate the outcome of video. I've seen some 4K material that didn't look any different than 1080p and I've seen some 4K material that will blow you away.


I do hope NF starts renting UHD discs soon, the Samsung UHD players are really inexpensive now.

Rich


----------



## ejbvt

I will agree that watching HD on a 4K TV looks great. It is a slight improvement over my former HD set. I have previously described it as HD as HD should be. Most of the time, it looks nice and crisp. 4K on a 4K set looks great, too, it's just not the big deal everyone is making it out to be.

What do I know, if a show is good enough and only in SD, I will still watch it. The aspect ratio has to right, though...


----------



## Rich

ejbvt said:


> *I will agree that watching HD on a 4K TV looks great.* It is a slight improvement over my former HD set. I have previously described it as HD as HD should be. Most of the time, it looks nice and crisp. 4K on a 4K set looks great, too, it's just not the big deal everyone is making it out to be.
> 
> What do I know, if a show is good enough and only in SD, I will still watch it. The aspect ratio has to right, though...


Been saying that for over two years now. These things are just the best sets I've ever had...and I don't even bother checking to see what resolution the content I want to see is in. I have no intention of getting a 4K setup from D*, I'm perfectly happy with my sets at this moment.

Rich


----------

