OLED VS 4K (UHD)...? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 09:05 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
VinnyS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50

OLED vs UHD? That is the question. At this year’s CES Show OLED TV’s, UHD TV’s and OLED UHD TV’s were the most popular attraction, but which one will a sure bet as far as a next-generation technology that will meaningfully improve content?

According to Joel Hruska from irproportal.com, OLED is the better tech.
Quote:
The reason is simple: OLED technology dramatically improves colour reproduction and clarity, even at 1920 x 1080. While its other benefits, like reduced power consumption, depend on the type of panel and the content being displayed, no one argues that OLED doesn’t create a better picture than traditional LCD. It doesn’t depend on your TV provider, a new Blu-ray player, or a premium streaming option from a service like Netflix. You don’t need to upgrade your set-top box or buy a third-party upscaler to see the advantage
Quote:
So, here’s an interesting question. Given that OLED’s progress in large panels has been evolutionary rather than revolutionary for several years and the global economy isn’t exactly in the best of shape, why are companies like LG moving with OLED now, rather than delaying it further?

The answer, I think, is related to the other technologies that were on display at CES this year. Television manufacturers are jockeying to introduce multiple new technologies and hoping that by doing so, they’ll be able to entice customers to swap up. The problems with OLEDs are well known, but how does the tech dovetail with the recent push for 4K television?

What about UHD TV’s?


Quote:
4K HDTVs were a huge presence at the show, despite the fact that there’s no 4K broadcast standard. What’s worse, at least from the whole “get practical use out of your television” angle, is that there’s no 4K standard for Blu-ray, either. The current BD specification tops out at 1080p24 or 1080i60. Could the standard be adjusted to account for this? Sure, but probably not without breaking backwards compatibility with current-generation Blu-ray players.

Quote:
OLED is still the surest bet as far as a next-generation technology that will meaningfully improve content. Everything else will take a great deal more cooperation. It’s entirely possible that 4K television won’t take off in broadcasting until the adoption of H.265, since that algorithm allows for higher quality than H.264 while consuming less bandwidth


So which one is more meaningful to you? OLED or a UHD (4K) TV?




Source

Get all your A/V News at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Like AVS Forum on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Follow AVS Forums on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

AVSForum
Bringing the AV Community Together
********************************************************
VinnyS is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 09:47 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,955
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 163 Post(s)
Liked: 130
This is a bad question. OLED can and will be supplied in UHD. Sony demoed a 4K (UHD) OLED Tv so you can't say which one is better.

Joel Hruska, obviously doesn't understand what UHD is.

The real question should be

OLED vs. LED/LCD.

Let me address this:

OLED offers more intense and saturated color to the eye. It offers a pixel based light source as opposed to a filter in front of a light source like LCD/LED. The negatives seem to be that it does not offer a time proven stable technology ( recall first Plasma burn in issues? OLED has some known long life trouble that needs to be resolved) and the blacks in the scene are so black and glossy, that you see room reflections. Available in the near future in both 2K and 4K versions. 3D capable

LED/LCD is a time proven technology that offers good quality in color. Cost is lower and plenty of choices on the shelf to buy right now. Available now in 2K and 4K versions. 3D capable.

Other valid questions:
3D Active shutter glasses or Passive FPR screens?
Panel TV or Front Projection system?
Buy Glasses 3DTV now or wait for one of the developing glasses free technologies to become available?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Don Landis
Don Landis is offline  
post #3 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 09:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 2,891
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 194 Post(s)
Liked: 206
I wouldn't be surprised if OLED never becomes mainstream while UHD is a near certainty to be readily available by next christmas.
stepmback likes this.
KidHorn is offline  
post #4 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 10:00 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
VinnyS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

This is a bad question. OLED can and will be supplied in UHD. Sony demoed a 4K (UHD) OLED Tv so you can't say which one is better.

Joel Hruska, obviously doesn't understand what UHD is.

The real question should be

OLED vs. LED/LCD.

Let me address this:

OLED offers more intense and saturated color to the eye. It offers a pixel based light source as opposed to a filter in front of a light source like LCD/LED. The negatives seem to be that it does not offer a time proven stable technology ( recall first Plasma burn in issues? OLED has some known long life trouble that needs to be resolved) and the blacks in the scene are so black and glossy, that you see room reflections. Available in the near future in both 2K and 4K versions. 3D capable

LED/LCD is a time proven technology that offers good quality in color. Cost is lower and plenty of choices on the shelf to buy right now. Available now in 2K and 4K versions. 3D capable.

Other valid questions:
3D Active shutter glasses or Passive FPR screens?
Panel TV or Front Projection system?
Buy Glasses 3DTV now or wait for one of the developing glasses free technologies to become available?

I have to disagree with you there Don. OLED has been having trouble manufacturing OLED planels and OLED as a technology has been out for some time now. Yet we are not seeing any developments. We hear manufactures announce OLED TV's but can't promise a release date. I believe it was Samsung has announced OLED TV release for sale last CES Show and we never saw anything in 2012.

UHD TV's are expensive, but that's not stopping people from buying them, it's a question of when is 4K content going to surface on to the market.

So it's a real race to the finish line to see which one will prevail. In an ideal world, yes an OLED UHD display, but not everyone is getting into that market.

Your other valid questions are good, but I think discussing the future of display technology is more where I was trying to get at here. Which one will a sure bet as far as a next-generation technology that will meaningfully improve content?

Get all your A/V News at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Like AVS Forum on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Follow AVS Forums on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

AVSForum
Bringing the AV Community Together
********************************************************
VinnyS is offline  
post #5 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 10:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
saprano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bronx NY
Posts: 3,396
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 249
If i had to choose 1, OLED. Improved color, infinite blacks. There's other advances to make besides more pixels.

But like Don Landis said, you can have both. So if i was to buy a TV now to it would have to be a 4K OLED display.

home theater addict
saprano is offline  
post #6 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 10:12 AM
Member
 
tsunami67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
since the TV's are getting larger and larger, and the gain is only if i don't have to sit farer away!

there is IMHO only one way to go: more and finer pixel. so im am for 8K wink.gif

there was one 8K and it has 33megapixel biggrin.gif that is imho the future.
tsunami67 is offline  
post #7 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 10:26 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
VinnyS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsunami67 View Post

since the TV's are getting larger and larger, and the gain is only if i don't have to sit farer away!

there is IMHO only one way to go: more and finer pixel. so im am for 8K wink.gif

there was one 8K and it has 33megapixel biggrin.gif that is imho the future.


I hear ya.
I haven't seen it for myself, but supposedly 8K resolution image gives you a sense of depth, almost like a three dimensional image. Apperently, so does a good 2K OLED display though. rolleyes.gif

Get all your A/V News at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Like AVS Forum on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Follow AVS Forums on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

AVSForum
Bringing the AV Community Together
********************************************************
VinnyS is offline  
post #8 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 10:27 AM
Member
 
greylight44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: out there
Posts: 74
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 20
I can't be sure yet. With a Pioneer Kuro with only 3100 hours on it, I won't be upgrading for at least 3 years. I am watching the OLED technology with interest. When I do upgrade though, it will be to a projector and screen for the HT. I would buy a 40''-50" OLED TV too if the technology stabilizes in the next 3-5 years.
greylight44 is offline  
post #9 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 11:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,923
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 257 Post(s)
Liked: 218
Several folks who saw 4K noticed that HD looks like SD next to UltraHD. OLED or 4K LED, not a choice i want to make.
8mile13 is offline  
post #10 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 11:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
repete66211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kansas City area
Posts: 1,568
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 209
Deeper blacks & better color vs. more pixels with no source material? I'll take quality over quantity every time. As others have said, OLED can go 4k but UHD will still have bad blacks.

repete66211 is offline  
post #11 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 01:04 PM
Member
 
gbickle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Whats the pixel fill ratio of OLED? ... same as LCD? ... I cant stand 1080p LCD Tvs.. I notice the digital look of them straight away because of the low pixel fill ratio.
DLP and SXRD Projectors are twice the pixel fill ratio and its very noticeable. The picture is so much smoother and more natural.
gbickle is offline  
post #12 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 01:34 PM
Member
 
tbris84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sarasota FL
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

Several folks who saw 4K noticed that HD looks like SD next to UltraHD. OLED or 4K LED, not a choice i want to make.

You mean a 4K set looks like SD compred to a UHD set? Or do I have it backwards? I haven't seen either in person yet, but I don't understand how the higher pixel count 4K would look worse than the lesser UHD.
tbris84 is offline  
post #13 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 01:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,923
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 257 Post(s)
Liked: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbris84 
You mean a 4K set looks like SD compred to a UHD set? Or do I have it backwards? I haven't seen either in person yet, but I don't understand how the higher pixel count 4K would look worse than the lesser UHD.
HD set looks like SD set compared to UHD set (native content). So a UHD LED set will look better than HD OLED set in that regard. On the other hand there are the OLED motion/colors and blacks.
8mile13 is offline  
post #14 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 03:24 PM
Member
 
tbris84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sarasota FL
Posts: 164
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post


HD set looks like SD set compared to UHD set (native content). So a UHD LED set will look better than HD OLED set in that regard. On the other hand there are the OLED motion/colors and blacks.

OK gotcha. I didn't think there would be much of a difference between the 4K and UHD sets.

I'm honestly more excited over the OLED even if it's a 1080p, than I am the 4K. 4K seems impressive enough, but my concern is media storage for 4K content. I remember reading somewhere that the 4K movie trailer for the Amazing Spiderman movie took up 500GB, albeit it was uncompressed but 500GB for a trailer. I don't have the kind of money to buy a Terabyte harddrive for each movie I want to store. Storage devices will be a major bottleneck for 4K content if that still holds true. Not to mention how long it takes broadcasters to stream 4K or cable providers to add 4K content to OnDemand services. We're still not even getting 1080p.
tbris84 is offline  
post #15 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 04:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,847
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 728 Post(s)
Liked: 417
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbris84 View Post

OK gotcha. I didn't think there would be much of a difference between the 4K and UHD sets.

I'm honestly more excited over the OLED even if it's a 1080p, than I am the 4K. 4K seems impressive enough, but my concern is media storage for 4K content. I remember reading somewhere that the 4K movie trailer for the Amazing Spiderman movie took up 500GB, albeit it was uncompressed but 500GB for a trailer. I don't have the kind of money to buy a Terabyte harddrive for each movie I want to store. Storage devices will be a major bottleneck for 4K content if that still holds true. Not to mention how long it takes broadcasters to stream 4K or cable providers to add 4K content to OnDemand services. We're still not even getting 1080p.

I think he means the difference between 1080p HDTV's and UHD with native content was that dramatic.

Ahh, but they are now touting the MPEG H.265 codec with more efficiency than H.264. I'd say, if they shot for 10 bit, 4:2:2 UHD content (and didn't cram the hell out the video since the PQ needs to hold up on larger screens) and Dolby Atmos like audio, then you'd need the newest multi-layer Blu-ray discs. Would the studios and the BDA go for that? It's a head scratcher right now.

You'd need new players anyway with more powerful chips to handle H.265 decoding, so why not upgrade the BD disc while they're at it? Add backwards compatibility with regular Blu-ray, of course.

In reality, the U.S. internet infrastructure just isn't ready for UHD. It can't even do quality 1080p yet. There needs to be a disc medium.
nathantw likes this.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #16 of 36 Old 01-24-2013, 07:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
saprano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bronx NY
Posts: 3,396
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 99 Post(s)
Liked: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post


HD set looks like SD set compared to UHD set (native content). So a UHD LED set will look better than HD OLED set in that regard. On the other hand there are the OLED motion/colors and blacks.

Not from my view of sony's 4K TV. It looked great, but in no way does HD look like SD after seeing it. Twice.

4K is not going to magically make everything look better. What about color, gamma, blacks and other things? The sony TV had weak blacks which is why when i went home and sat in front of my kuro and watched the same Skyfall trailer, it had way more depth and weight to the picture.

OLED at 1080p will look better than a 4K set with average PQ attributes.

home theater addict
saprano is offline  
post #17 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 01:02 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,955
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 163 Post(s)
Liked: 130
VinnyS- I'm not sure where we disagree. We say the same thing but with different sentences. smile.gif

Sony OLED has been on the market for several years in smaller screen size and available through Sony Broadcast division. But it is not a type of monitor a consumer would be interested in. We both agree that the consumer version of the OLED is not yet available and that promises to make them available are made all the time but nothing kept.

But all this just makes the question of choice academic because the UHD LED is available and OLED, not. It took a few years before Panasionic and others claim they resolved the burn-in problem with Plasma so it is reasonable to assume if the industry works on the problems of making large screen OLED they will eventually resolve the problems. But are they working on all the problems I mentioned? When I asked the people at Sony about these they only acknowledged one of the problems and denied they saw any reflections in the Blacks. But in my videos, you can plainly see all sorts of annoying reflections. I'm sorry, but to all who worship the infinite black level of OLED, which is fine, but if I have to also look at the room reflections, then you can keep the infinite black level. I find it annoying.

Based on what I saw and what I will accept here- The OLED is still a product in development and to want that, you have to be willing to wait, same as for glasses free technology. Were getting closer than ever before but for the near future, there is no choice. It's UHD LED or wait with your 1080p TV. I'd bet the price of UHD TV's in LED will be down to competitive long before the problems of OLED are resolved.

OLED Problems-
1. Manufacture % good product
2. Retail sales price is reasonable
3. Colors aging at different rates causing color calibration problems with age.
4. Room reflections in the blacks. There is no such thing on OLED as flat black, only glossy black.
5. Competitive panel sizes
6. 4K as the defacto standard- we should not settle for OLED in 1080p when 2160p is the new direction. Only Sony is heading in this direction.

#3- We have a similar issue with UHP lamp projectors but the fix is a simple lamp change and the projector looks like new again.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Don Landis
Don Landis is offline  
post #18 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 01:24 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,955
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 163 Post(s)
Liked: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinnyS View Post

I hear ya.
I haven't seen it for myself, but supposedly 8K resolution image gives you a sense of depth, almost like a three dimensional image. Apperently, so does a good 2K OLED display though. rolleyes.gif


I have seen it.
Color intensity of OLED 2D does not give you depth unless you use the word "depth" defined as color saturation and luminosity. OLED emits the light as a color so all color off the screen glows! LCD/LED is a white light behind a color filter which is less intense. But neither adds 3 dimensionality or the look of 3D space.

8K offers the ability to zoom in or get up close and see more detail in the picture. 8K has more detail than 4k has more detail than 2K has more detail than 1k, etc. I see no "sense of depth" here either. 8K is fascinating but I don't see it as practical since it exceeds the ability of the human eye to resolve which tops out at 4k. Its best demonstration is when you have a wide shot of a highly detailed picture, like a wide shot of a city. Then you walk up to the screen and look at a portion of it and you can see people through the windows of the buildings walking around inside. This is part of the 8K image but is beyond what you would normally see with your naked eyes. Do we need this level of detail in movie and TV production? Are we willing to pay for this level of detail? I don't need to view my movies with a microscope to be entertained. I don't want or need to view my movies at 2ft from a 110" screen with pan and scan to see the detail, My neck would get tired. biggrin.gif


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Don Landis
Don Landis is offline  
post #19 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 06:30 AM
Member
 
nathantw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I absolutely, positively think OLED is the way to go. I've been wanting an OLED set since I saw the technology emerge to the public (before OLED televisions were even made). I've been waiting for so long that my son, who grew up hearing me talk about the tech, jokes about how I'll never get an OLED set. He might be right. At the rate that they're coming out, if they come out this year (yeah, right, we heard that before), it'll be at least 10 years before they're cheap enough for the average person to afford. By then who knows what new technology would be out?
nathantw is offline  
post #20 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 08:47 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Paul H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Elk Grove, California,USA
Posts: 998
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 16
OLED is perfect for future 4Ks/UHDs. Been using an $800.00 720P OLED 3D display daily since November/2011 (Sony HMZ-T1). The quality of the picture is significantly superior to my 1080P VT25 Plasma.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Paul H is online now  
post #21 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 09:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DanLW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,331
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 29
If I had to choose between a 100" 1080p OLED screen or a 100" 4K/8K/WhateverK screen using LCD/Plasma/Front Projection, I'd select the 1080p OLED. Anybody who is serious about digital photography knows that the quality of the picture is much more important than the megapixels.

Still confused? Read "
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
" thread!
-Dan

DanLW is offline  
post #22 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
steve1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,843
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Liked: 246
Give me OLED anyday. I would buy an OLED Tv before 4K.
steve1971 is offline  
post #23 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 11:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,923
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 257 Post(s)
Liked: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano 

Not from my view of sony's 4K TV. It looked great, but in no way does HD look like SD after seeing it. Twice.
Well, other AVS posters felt different.

Some Engadget quotes:
''looking at HD now feels like looking at SD. It is one of those things where the improvement doesn't appear dramatic at first, but it's hard to go back''

''The bottom line, though, is that we believe an UHD TV will always look better than a Full HD TV, all other things being equal (content, device quality, etc...).''
http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/11/ultra-hd-tvs-stole-the-show-at-ces-2013/
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano 
The sony TV had weak blacks which is why when i went home and sat in front of my kuro and watched the same Skyfall trailer, it had way more depth and weight to the picture.
The demo TV was a Sony 4k edge lit LED, those are the worst performing flatscreens... Samsung announced a 4K full array local dimming LED at CES2013, the UN85S9, which would be a better choice as demo 4K TV imo. In your case it would be best if there was a 4K Plasma demo.
8mile13 is offline  
post #24 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 12:26 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 10,955
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 163 Post(s)
Liked: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanLW View Post

If I had to choose between a 100" 1080p OLED screen or a 100" 4K/8K/WhateverK screen using LCD/Plasma/Front Projection, I'd select the 1080p OLED. Anybody who is serious about digital photography knows that the quality of the picture is much more important than the megapixels.

I don't select by words. I select by what the image looks like. First of all a 100" OLED doesn't exist, not available to even look at. You might as well say you would choose the Star Trek Holodeck over a 4K LED 84" TV. Anyone who is serious about digital photography knows that its the total package that makes up image quality. We don't want to sacrifice resolution for brighter color. It's an unnecessary tradeoff. We can have both with a 4K OLED.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Don Landis
Don Landis is offline  
post #25 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 12:49 PM
Member
 
Chardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Landis View Post

I don't select by words. I select by what the image looks like. First of all a 100" OLED doesn't exist, not available to even look at. You might as well say you would choose the Star Trek Holodeck over a 4K LED 84" TV. Anyone who is serious about digital photography knows that its the total package that makes up image quality. We don't want to sacrifice resolution for brighter color. It's an unnecessary tradeoff. We can have both with a 4K OLED.
I do a bit of photography, and that would be my main reason to get a 4KTV.... nevermind the content, I've got my own. If 4K LCD's produce as good Q as my plasma in terms of color and contrast, then I'm fine with that, I'll take resolution. On my current 60" plasma, the videos are great, but the photo slideshows could use a lot of sharpness to them.
Chardog is offline  
post #26 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 02:48 PM
Senior Member
 
binici's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California
Posts: 436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
When this becomes mainstream, I hope it will be less confusing than it already is. tongue.gif


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
binici is offline  
post #27 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 08:49 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 19,881
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 416 Post(s)
Liked: 466
A rhetorical question not to be taken seriously.

Why not ask what would you choose, 4K OLED or 2K Holographic? Obviously OLED potentially is a great display technology, better than anything present day, but it still has problems as to long life and it is very expensive at present. 4K is not a technology. At present it is an increased display resolution, that could lead to sources of the same resolution but with a much wider color space than the present as well as longer bit lengths. Obviously, OLED can be made to display such resolutions as well but the costs would be enormous and considerable time would be needed to get 4K OLED and then to make it affordable to the majority posting here.

And then we could in the spirit of furumitus responding to the author of the article who must be an expert to be taken seriously, I just would not buy anything now unless it was a 8k holographic as if anyone so answering could afford it if it were to be sold tomorrow.

The one of the bad things about the internet is that almost anyone regardless of their lack of expetrise can be published and will be taken seriously. Posting in a forum gives one no such delusions. Just harmless dribble. Please do not take anything in my post seriously despite the probability that some things I said are accurate.


Obviously OLED is potentially more desirable that merely a resolution increase. Duh. But 4K for large displays and if content is delivered from 4K or higher source material, with a much wide color space (the standard is now double the area on the diagram, and at a longer bit length, 4k could be very important. Right now, for the vast majority of the market it would have little interest while OLED is like a magician producing the most beautiful women out of a hat, nude, and she saying for the right proce you can take me home.

Mark Haflich

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is online now  
post #28 of 36 Old 01-25-2013, 09:43 PM
Member
 
Callsign_Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 80
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 13
This thread makes no sense whatsoever. OLED and 4K aren't mutually exclusive and are two total different display aspects.
Don Landis likes this.
Callsign_Vega is offline  
post #29 of 36 Old 01-26-2013, 05:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DanLW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,331
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 29
The way I see it, the issue is this.

OLED = expensive
4K = expensive

OLED + 4K = incredibly expensive

So which would you rather have if you can only have one expensive thing? Sure some people can easily afford 4K OLED. But for somebody like me, if I was given the chance of something 1080p with an incredible picture, or something 4K with a picture that was OK, I'd choose the 1080p with incredible picture.

The frustration I, and I think a lot of people have, is prices are high because manufacturers are pouring R&D money into something that doesn't matter to us right now. For example, I have a front projection system with a 100" screen. I'd much rather a company put out a $3000 1080p projector with an image several orders of magnitude better than what I have now (in terms of black level, contrast, brightness) rather than a 4K projector which puts out a picture several orders of magnitude better (in terms of black level, contrast, brightness), and costs $10,000. Same goes with a direct view TV. I don't sit near close enough for 4K to be a benefit to me. So I'd prefer a 1080p picture which looks awesome, rather than have to pay a very hefty premium to have an awesome picture, and a whole bunch of pixels I'll only be able to enjoy if I sit 4 feet or closer to the screen.

Still confused? Read "
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
" thread!
-Dan

DanLW is offline  
post #30 of 36 Old 01-26-2013, 06:03 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
VinnyS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Thanks DanLW, well said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanLW View Post

The way I see it, the issue is this.

OLED = expensive
4K = expensive

OLED + 4K = incredibly expensive

So which would you rather have if you can only have one expensive thing? Sure some people can easily afford 4K OLED. But for somebody like me, if I was given the chance of something 1080p with an incredible picture, or something 4K with a picture that was OK, I'd choose the 1080p with incredible picture.

The frustration I, and I think a lot of people have, is prices are high because manufacturers are pouring R&D money into something that doesn't matter to us right now. For example, I have a front projection system with a 100" screen. I'd much rather a company put out a $3000 1080p projector with an image several orders of magnitude better than what I have now (in terms of black level, contrast, brightness) rather than a 4K projector which puts out a picture several orders of magnitude better (in terms of black level, contrast, brightness), and costs $10,000. Same goes with a direct view TV. I don't sit near close enough for 4K to be a benefit to me. So I'd prefer a 1080p picture which looks awesome, rather than have to pay a very hefty premium to have an awesome picture, and a whole bunch of pixels I'll only be able to enjoy if I sit 4 feet or closer to the screen.



Anyone following the AV industry news these days can see that there seems to be a race to the finish line in terms of technology. Not everyone is spending R&D on OLED or some on WOLED and 4K. DanLW clearly pointed out the situation above and I believe I did so as well in an earlier post. It was a reasonable question to ask AVS'ers, and I repeat my main question: "which one is more meaningful to you? OLED or a UHD (4K) TV?"

Get all your A/V News at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Like AVS Forum on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Follow AVS Forums on
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

AVSForum
Bringing the AV Community Together
********************************************************
VinnyS is offline  
Reply Latest Industry News

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off