I have to share my disappointmet with the the Dell 3008 test resultsin the area of Video and DVD.

Please look at this: "Scene from the Blu-ray film "300" (2.35:1 Cinemascope- format), played on PlayStation 3 via HDMI."

The movie is 2.35:1 but what the Dell 3008 shows is NOT 2.35:1 !

Compare with this: "Scene from the film "Matrix Reloaded" (2.35:1 Cinemascope format), played on PC via DVI-D."

See attachment #1 for comparison.

Obviously Blue-ray image is either cut from the sides or stretched vertically.
In both cases this NOT Full HD (1080p).

I know pretty well that this is a typical problem for many so-called Full HD monitors which in fact are cheap displays with poor scaling ability.
Now I am looking at the Dell 3008 closely to find out if in this case we have a true all-around multimedia monitor (for the first time from this brand!)
Disappointment!

How much is missing? Let's scale the undistorted image from PC up to the height of another distorted image (Scene from the film "Star Wars: Episode II" (2.35:1 Cinemascope format), played on PlayStation 3 via HDMI in PAL standard.)

I do not know how the reviewers could miss this fact.
See attachment #2.


Then the review says:"Film playback with 24p (24 Hz = 24 frames/second) is unfortunately not supported by the Dell 3008WFP."

How bad is this? The review calls this just "icing on the cake ".

Wait a minute, please. Icing on the cake??

I came across this Dell's problem when tried to play 1080p HD-DVD on the Dell 2707. Multiformat HD player LG played 1080p at 24Hz. The Dell 2707 showed nothing. At the same time a reference monitor next to it showed 1080p at 24Hz without any problem.
See attachment #3.

So, if somebody is planning to buy the Dell 3008 he will have to buy another HD player just because this "perfect all-round multimedia monitor" cannot play regular 1080p 24fps?

Is it just "icing on the cake"?

In my strong opinion this is not just "icing on the cake". This is what "perfect all-round multimedia monitor" MUST do. It it does not - it fails.

Let's put everything together.

Based on the pictures provided in the review:

1. The Dell 3008 does distort 1080p and regular DVD images from a stand alone device via any input including HDMI.
2. The Dell 3008 does not support 1080p at 24fps at all.

If both is true (looks like it is!) there is literally NO Full HD on this monitor at all.

This is absolutely unacceptable for a brand new "flagship" "all-round multimedia monitor" with an astronomical price.
Isn't $2000 enough to get an "all-round multimedia monitor" without technical limitations typical for cheap models?

Has the Dell passed DVD and Video Test?
Can anybody say "Yes"? I don't think so.

The only question left.
It looks like the distorted videos provided when played in the full screen mode (with interpolation).
So there is a little space for the hope that video is not distorted in 1:1 playback. How can we know that?

If 1:1 playback loks the same (cut or in any other way distorted) as the Full screen one - this monitor cannot be considered as all-round multimedia monitor.

In this case the final mark "very good" has to be changed to "good" at most.

Thank you.

Foreword:
The pictures are only intended as examples and have in some cases been taken on different days. Since in doing so we are unable to recreate exactly the same conditions, slight differences may appear in the photos because of the distance at which the camera is placed, slight tilting of the panel, etc. Only when we explicitly select pictures for comparison and display them as such in the test are the pictures suitable for a comparison.

Note on the pictures:
The pictures below were cut from the original image material as precisely as possible and the comparison shows that the difference in that case is just minimal (Page format: matrix 2.35:1 and 300 2.4:1).

Dear Andi, thank you for the reply.

I have done a little more homework.
You gave me a reason to extend my HD library. So Blue-ray "300" is on my display now. This is a reference monitor.
I open the same scene from "300", take a photo and compare with prad.de Dell 3008 review image.

Quoted

slight differences may appear in the photos because of the distance at which the camera is placed, slight tilting of the panel, etc.

OK, I'm not going to compare color reproduction detailes "Dell 3008 vs proper image". What I'm doing is simple geometry. For that purpose published photos are well suitable.

Let's go step by step.

1. To prevent any doubts - the full image of the reference monitor. Attachment #1.

2. See Attachment #2. Monitor screen format check.
The whole viewable areas of the Dell 3008 and the reference monitor compared.
Result: pictures from prad.de are valid and good for a comparison - they demonstrate correct proportions of the panel - about 1.6:1. The difference ("the camera is placed, slight tilting of the panel, etc") is about nothing (somewhat 1.585: 1 vs 1.59 or so). It does not matter if any color tone difference is present.
What does matter - proper video format!

3. Now we can compare the HD image itself.
Attachment #3.
It's obvious! Now we can see what is missing on the Dell 3008.
The picture on the Dell 3008 is cut from both sides. Can we suppose that prad.de reviewers intentionally cut mages before publishing them? Never!

Therefore this is the proof that the Dell 3008 cuts video.

"300" is 2.4:1 (information about 2.35:1 in the review is not correct).
The reference monitor shows true 2.4:1
The Dell 3008 shows ~2.2:1. About 9-10% of the image is missing.

Does it say only about a missing part of the image for the Dell 3008?
No!
It means that the rest of "Full HD" is always interpolated unless the reviewers kindly provide us with the image of 1:1 mode 1080p playback dot-for-dot 2.4:1.

Back to the Dell 3008 review conclusion.
"Scaling in video mode is also perfect. No matter what input the image signal is played over, the result is convincing, the aspect ratio correct."

According to the information we have so far, this statement is absolutely wrong. The Dell 3008 suffers the same scaling problems that many cheap monitors do.

I think prompt correction of the mistake in the review would be only a plus for such a respected resource like prad.de

Thank you.

Hello,
please find attached:

1.The scheme of the Dell 3008 overscan problem from comparison Blue-ray movie scene ("300") shown on prad.de review vs the proper view of the same scene. This is what really happens when 1080p is dispayed on the entire screen.

2. The scheme of what we can expect - same problem in 1:1 mode. This is very likely but still to be confirmed or denied.

Thank you.

We try to verify that and if you're right of course correct it. Does it only concern 2.4:1 or other formats as well?

Thank you!
I would be pleased to answer your question but I don't have the Dell 3008 in front of me.
I base my opinion on your test pictures.
The image of Blue-ray "300" is overscanned and cut - this is a fact #1.
Note: that was an image in Aspect mode.
So the scheme #1 is related to this case.

Overscan is a kind of disease that affects all formats over a particular input.
It may vary from one input to another but if it is present it affects everything.

Regarding 1:1 mode.
You have not provided "300" in that mode which is intended to be the true 1080p.
So the scheme #2 is what I just assume basing on the fact #1 and let's say medical history of the problem.
Overscannig in 1:1 may not be as obvious as in the whole screen.
It may or may not be cut because an excessive resolution gives a safety space (like in an airport - to skid out of a runway).
There may be 3 cases in 1:1 mode.
1. Good case - whatever the format is - it is displayed 1:1 dot-for-dot.
2. Bad case - image is overscanned (interpolated) about 8-10% with correct proportions. It means no true HD - always interpolation.
And this case is not very obvious. A hard working reviewer would find out what the actual size of the image is. It may be done by direct measurement or by taking an accurate photo, placing it in Photoshop, scaling to 2560x1600 and getting the actual image size easily.
3. Bad bad case - overscanned AND cut - this is easy to notice.

I remember your test of 2707 - very careful test of all the analog inputs with a stand alone device..
In the case of 3008 we have more inputs to check including HDMI and DVI.
We can expect a sort of overscanning with/or without distortion from all of them.
I guess this work is still to be done.

Thank you again.

Has there been any progress in researching the overscan problems. Since Prad also tests LCD-TVs it shouldn't be too hard to put them next to each other and look at the overscan issues which the topic starter described and see which kind of 1080 signals get scaled in the wrong way. I sure hope not all of the DVD and HD signals have the same problems Could you also verify that it is only Pal and Hd resolutions that suffer from this problem and not regular "PC" resolutions like 1900*1200.

Keep up the good work guys =)

The problem is that we sent back the Dell 3008WFP after reviewing and therefore can't just turn the display on and compare it to an lcd-tv...

In fact we discuss how to get the bottom of things because we understandably cannot just take albovins pictures and put them into the review without proving them by ourselves.

Why would you want to send it back I would have kept it

I should be getting my 3008 next week so I might be able to do some tests on it myself then, unfortunately I don't have a blue-ray player so I can only do regular DVD tests and downloaded HD content. Funnily enough not 1 review on the web noticed this problem so you should not feel too bad about it, but it would still be interesting to see which sources cause the overscan problems =)

In fact, the editor almost decided to keep/buy the Dell, but he likes to work with two displays (24/16:10 + 21/4:3) and two 30-incher are really over-the-top.

Videos and movies via PC-Softwareplayer are skaled correctly as far as I know. So it might depend from player and player-settings (format) as well as video-input, too. I wait in suspense for your experiences.