On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 14:04:23 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

Ultimately, you and your eyes (and ears) are going to have
to make the decision. In plasma I would go with Samsung
or Panasonic, take a lookat LG is you want to but I'd avoid
buying an LG plasma.

I just remembered... Panasonic has a system that automatically raises the
cells' bias over time to compensate for a drop in inefficiency. It's
believed that this will slowly degraded the display's black level.

3D is available in all three technologies. I'm of the opinion that
it is more of a gimic than a real step forward. Certainly nothing
I have seen persuades me to believe the reason so many movies
are shot in 3-D is the producer is trying to disguise the fact they
have a mediocre script, poor actors, and a director who is well-
past his prime.

Oh, let's see... The Pixar 3D films are really awful, as was "Avatar".

And who can forget "Dial M for Murder", one of the past-his-prime
Hitchcock's very worst films? Ditto for "Hondo", "Kiss Me, Kate", and "It
Came from Outer Space". All of it 3D dreck.

You left out other 'magnificent' 3D movies, such as 'Gorilla at
Large', 'Bawana Devil', 'It came from Outer Space', 'Cat-Women of the
Moon'. And who could forget 'Jaws 3-D', no matter how hard they
tried.

You inclusion of 'Avatar' is rather instructive. While Cameron has
done some good work, 'Avatar' was a prime example of stunning CGI
images masking a very pedestrian script and average (at best) acting.

PlainBill