LG 55EA9800 55" OLED Owner's thread - Page 49 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1441 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 09:29 AM
Member
 
bustmethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by pg_ice View Post

i think thats because images should look sharper
you get that effect with smaller pixels and bigger gap between them
another smart ass trick here that wasnt so smart?

i wonder how bad the motion resolution on these really is when you must build the pixel layout so the images appears sharp?
who are they fooling?

or is it that simple that these OLED pixels must have greater space between them to not be damgaged/overheated?

I don't imagine they're trying to trick or fool anyone...I assume it's something about the nature of OLED pixels. I haven't been able to compare LG to Samsung, so I don't know if it's the same across all current models. I was hoping someone out there who has seen multiple OLED sets in person may have noticed this as well and can comment on it?
bustmethat is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1442 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 10:04 AM
Member
 
Desk.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by bustmethat View Post

Just got the Gallery OLED a few days ago and am on the fence about whether I regret it. Blacks, whites, colors, contrast, all outstanding. The problem is that I'm really seeing the pixel gaps. Even from 12 feet away, I can see the pixel grid in lots of images, especially in uniform areas of the image. Text is also rather aliased. It's really distracting to me and makes it a little hard to enjoy the strong points of the TV. At least I don't see any dead pixels though...

In saying this, you rather make the case for 4K OLED screens, with greater pixel density.

Desk
Desk. is online now  
post #1443 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 10:29 AM
Senior Member
 
ChadThunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 280
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by pg_ice View Post

i think thats because images should look sharper
you get that effect with smaller pixels and bigger gap between them
another smart ass trick here that wasnt so smart?

i wonder how bad the motion resolution on these really is when you must build the pixel layout so the images appears sharp?
who are they fooling?

or is it that simple that these OLED pixels must have greater space between them to not be damgaged/overheated?

That is what I love about my panny, NO GAPS, the pixel structure is virtually invisible as light fills all the way to the boundaries. Always get a laugh when lcd lovers proclaim lcd is sharper because they are spotting each pixel rolleyes.gif



What does OLED look like at such a distance?
ChadThunder is online now  
post #1444 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 10:38 AM
Member
 
bustmethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desk. View Post

In saying this, you rather make the case for 4K OLED screens, with greater pixel density.

Desk

Could be! I've tended to think 4K was silly until there's content to fully utilize it, but you may have a point there. But in my setup, a flat screen is a must, and the 55EA8800 is the only game in town for flat OLED. And I've heard from store owners that won't change for at least two years. If OLED TV even survives...

Anyone else have observations or thoughts on OLED pixel gap?
bustmethat is offline  
post #1445 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 10:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,066
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Liked: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theplague13 View Post

Nope. My phone is 1080p, along with many many tablets. They all contain the exact same amount of pixels; whether they're 5 inch or 100 inch, 1080p is 1920x1080 which comes to 2,073,600 pixels regardles of size shape or anything else you can think of. Sorry Charlie.

You are not serious are you? Where did I mention pixels? I said it is easier to make a 5" OLED screen than a entire 55" OLED defect free screen.
rogo likes this.
sytech is offline  
post #1446 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 10:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,082
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by bustmethat View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Ok, you brave EA's.  Be honest.  Any regretters out there?

Just got the Gallery OLED a few days ago and am on the fence about whether I regret it. Blacks, whites, colors, contrast, all outstanding. The problem is that I'm really seeing the pixel gaps. Even from 12 feet away, I can see the pixel grid in lots of images, especially in uniform areas of the image. Text is also rather aliased. It's really distracting to me and makes it a little hard to enjoy the strong points of the TV. At least I don't see any dead pixels though...

Anyone else noticing this, or aware of the issue?

 

You're possibly seeing the effect of smaller subpixels.  There are 4 across in this set as opposed to 3 in a normal set.  (I know the white is using some degree of the gray component----no one pounce on me here).  The increase in aliasing effects might well be because they've by default employed "sharpening".  Try knocking down the sharpness setting (note, not contrast, at least not yet), by the barest "smidgeon".  I discussed elsewhere that gaps increase the perceived number of jump-discontinuities in the signal.  That thread is actually only 20 posts long: unlike most threads here it's a quick read.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #1447 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 10:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,066
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Liked: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by bustmethat View Post

Could be! I've tended to think 4K was silly until there's content to fully utilize it, but you may have a point there. But in my setup, a flat screen is a must, and the 55EA8800 is the only game in town for flat OLED. And I've heard from store owners that won't change for at least two years. If OLED TV even survives...

Anyone else have observations or thoughts on OLED pixel gap?

I know on the Samsung the blue pixels were larger than the rest because of the decay rate and that caused gaps, so maybe LG's stacked method is causing gaps as well. OLED will have to go 4K just to keep up with the UHD marketing train. Plus when you spend all that money you generally want it to be future proof. I said it from day one 2K OLED was DOA and is going to be a fairly rare.
rogo likes this.
sytech is offline  
post #1448 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 11:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by bustmethat View Post

Could be! I've tended to think 4K was silly until there's content to fully utilize it, but you may have a point there. But in my setup, a flat screen is a must, and the 55EA8800 is the only game in town for flat OLED. And I've heard from store owners that won't change for at least two years. If OLED TV even survives...

Anyone else have observations or thoughts on OLED pixel gap?

I know on the Samsung the blue pixels were larger than the rest because of the decay rate and that caused gaps, so maybe LG's stacked method is causing gaps as well. OLED will have to go 4K just to keep up with the UHD marketing train. Plus when you spend all that money you generally want it to be future proof. I said it from day one 2K OLED was DOA and is going to be a fairly rare.

This is a picture of the LG WOLED someone posted before:



The green pixel appears to be virtually off in this image, while white, red, and blue all appear to be lit fairly equally.

On an all-blue or all-green or all-red background, the screen door between pixels is going to be more than 75% of the total pixel width. Possible on an all-white background as well, though white can also be composed of having R,G and B equally lit as well, so it can be just the W subpixel, just the RGB subpixels (unlikely) or all 4 subpixels (possibly for the brightest white).

The advantage of 4K, even if just displaying a 1080p image, is that the inter-pixel gaps (and the worst-case screen-door effect) will be cut in half (at least in the vertical dimension).

In the horizontal direction, there appears to be about a 25% inter-pixel gap (about equal to the height of a single subpixel) - if this dimension cannot be reduced for a 4K panel, light output is going to be cut by 33% going from 1080p to 4K, so hopefully LG has found a way to reduce this horizontal interpixel gap...
fafrd is offline  
post #1449 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 11:22 AM
Advanced Member
 
vaktmestern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 987
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 91
This is a new issue i havent read abt... Well im waiting to 4k oled then lol if that dont get to much issues tongue.gif
vaktmestern is offline  
post #1450 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 11:47 AM
 
vinnie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nunya
Posts: 11,657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 1010
Pixel gap is not a detraction in my case (but I'll be sure to go looking for it, thanks guys). I just want 100% working pixels.

TGM, the only regret so far is the price paid (even if it was well below the SRP from less than a year ago). I am otherwise in a holding pattern regarding further impressions until LG sends along a replacement.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #1451 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 11:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,082
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post

This is a picture of the LG WOLED someone posted before:

 

Is this true?  Did they switch orientations?  Here's how it looks (I believe back on their EM9700) according oled-info:

 

 

And here is the 55EA980V on digitalversus.com

 

LG Oled incurve sous pix 


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #1452 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 11:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,082
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Pixel gap is not a detraction in my case (but I'll be sure to go looking for it, thanks guys). I just want 100% working pixels.

TGM, the only regret so far is the price paid (even if it was well below the SRP from less than a year ago). I am otherwise in a holding pattern regarding further impressions until LG sends along a replacement.

 

Do you have any refund options (just in case)?


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #1453 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 11:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post

This is a picture of the LG WOLED someone posted before:



Is this true?  Did they switch orientations?  Here's how it looks (I believe back on their EM9700) according oled-info:

lg-WOLED-TV-subpixel-structure-img_assist-551x197.jpg

And here is the 55EA980V on digitalversus.com

LG Oled incurve sous pix
 

Not my picture, so I don't know - I copied the picture from earlier in this thread, so you could go back to the poster of that post and ask him how he took that photo.

What matter more to me is the large inter-pixel space in the 'across the color stripes' direction. Al 3 of these photos show that. If that inter pixel space cannot be reduced, it is going to have a significant impact on brightness output of a 4K WOLED.

Does anyone know the reason that there is such a large pixel separation in that dimension? Is it to reduce light bleed?
fafrd is offline  
post #1454 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 11:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Theplague13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Jersey
Posts: 1,046
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 326
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

You are not serious are you? Where did I mention pixels? I said it is easier to make a 5" OLED screen than a entire 55" OLED defect free screen.

Duh. Because what the hels the difference if the screen is 5 inches or 500 inches if they both contain the same amount if pixels. The object is to create that amount if wiejibg pixels, their size doesn't matter

Vinnie97, one of the kindest, most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before we all get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified. Date the ban will be lifted: Never
Pick up the signature.
Theplague13 is offline  
post #1455 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 11:56 AM
 
vinnie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nunya
Posts: 11,657
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 1010
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Do you have any refund options (just in case)?
I don't think so...it's pretty much all on the manuf. Haven't checked with Chris if he has any fallback options.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #1456 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 12:09 PM
Member
 
bustmethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Is this true?  Did they switch orientations?  Here's how it looks (I believe back on their EM9700) according oled-info:
 

Yes these photos you just re-posted are correct - the sub-pixels are side by side. As for why the gap is so large, I have no idea. Perhaps those with engineering backgrounds can chime in on that. But in terms of viewer experience, it is annoying to me. I guess different people are sensitive to different things, but I'm surprised I've read nothing about this in all of the OLED talk out there. If I end up reverting to my KRP-500M, look for a barely used 55EA8800 on ebay!
bustmethat is offline  
post #1457 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 12:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,082
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theplague13 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

You are not serious are you? Where did I mention pixels? I said it is easier to make a 5" OLED screen than a entire 55" OLED defect free screen.

Duh. Because what the hels the difference if the screen is 5 inches or 500 inches if they both contain the same amount if pixels. The object is to create that amount if wiejibg pixels, their size doesn't matter

 

There is a pixel density issue in manufacturing.  It requires that the tolerances become much much tighter.  But there is also a very tough nut to crack when making something larger and I believe it's likely due to a number of things, uniformity issues being among them.  Also, I'd be guessing, but I believe that the material cost squashes the margins significantly which makes yields more important, e.g. my $800 5.5" Galaxy Note 2 has roughly 1/100th the surface area of an $8000 55" OLED screen.  Rogo is the one to ask about which of size vs. density outweigh the other.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #1458 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 12:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theplague13 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

You are not serious are you? Where did I mention pixels? I said it is easier to make a 5" OLED screen than a entire 55" OLED defect free screen.

Duh. Because what the hels the difference if the screen is 5 inches or 500 inches if they both contain the same amount if pixels. The object is to create that amount if wiejibg pixels, their size doesn't matter

Unfortunately incorrect, Plague.

Think of it this way: I'm going to clean as much dust out of the air in my manufacturing facility to minimize the number of particles landing on my OLED panels and causing defects. But getting defect-free air is impossible - no matter how good and how expensive the air filtration system, there are always some particles floating around in air. And those particles are going to land somewhere and often they are going to land on an OLED panel being manufactured. It's a question of how clean the air is and how large the panel is, so let say for the sake of argument that the probability that one particle lands on an OLED panel the size of your 55" TV is 5%.

That would mean that 5% of those panels would be defective and the resulting manufacturing yield would be 95%.

No let's use that same panel to manufacture 100 smartphone screens. 95% of those panels will have 100% yield (no defects) and 5% of those panels will have 99% yield (one bad cell phone screen out of 100). So the resulting yield manufacturing 100 small cellphone screens will be 99.95% versus the 95% yield manufacturing 55" TVs.
fafrd is offline  
post #1459 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 12:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theplague13 View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

You are not serious are you? Where did I mention pixels? I said it is easier to make a 5" OLED screen than a entire 55" OLED defect free screen.


Duh. Because what the hels the difference if the screen is 5 inches or 500 inches if they both contain the same amount if pixels. The object is to create that amount if wiejibg pixels, their size doesn't matter

There is a pixel density issue in manufacturing.  It requires that the tolerances become much much tighter.  But there is also a very tough nut to crack when making something larger and I believe it's likely due to a number of things, uniformity issues being among them.  Also, I'd be guessing, but I believe that the material cost squashes the margins significantly which makes yields more important, e.g. my $800 5.5" Galaxy Note 2 has roughly 1/100th the surface area of an $8000 55" OLED screen.  Rogo is the one to ask about which of size vs. density outweigh the other.

Higher pixel density means that the individual pixels are smaller. Which also often means things like using finer line traces, etc... Using smaller geometries for anything from individual pixels to transistors to signal lines means that the effect of a particle defect on functionality will be greater. The particles that cause defects do not shrink, so when everything else in the design does, the impact of a specific size defect particle will more often result in a visible degradation of performance (ie: bad pixels, or entire bad lines of pixels, or lazy pixels, etc...).
fafrd is offline  
post #1460 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 12:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,082
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 236 Post(s)
Liked: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theplague13 View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

You are not serious are you? Where did I mention pixels? I said it is easier to make a 5" OLED screen than a entire 55" OLED defect free screen.


Duh. Because what the hels the difference if the screen is 5 inches or 500 inches if they both contain the same amount if pixels. The object is to create that amount if wiejibg pixels, their size doesn't matter

There is a pixel density issue in manufacturing.  It requires that the tolerances become much much tighter.  But there is also a very tough nut to crack when making something larger and I believe it's likely due to a number of things, uniformity issues being among them.  Also, I'd be guessing, but I believe that the material cost squashes the margins significantly which makes yields more important, e.g. my $800 5.5" Galaxy Note 2 has roughly 1/100th the surface area of an $8000 55" OLED screen.  Rogo is the one to ask about which of size vs. density outweigh the other.

Higher pixel density means that the individual pixels are smaller. Which also often means things like using finer line traces, etc... Using smaller geometries for anything from individual pixels to transistors to signal lines means that the effect of a particle defect on functionality will be greater. The particles that cause defects do not shrink, so when everything else in the design does, the impact of a specific size defect particle will more often result in a visible degradation of performance (ie: bad pixels, or entire bad lines of pixels, or lazy pixels, etc...).

 

Particles are only part of the equation.  Things need to be actually laid out using tighter tolerances.


WARNING: You have now entered a no @#$%tard zone. Please gather your anti-vaccine propaganda nonsense and slowly back out the way you came in.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #1461 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 12:54 PM
 
pg_ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,211
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post

What matter more to me is the large inter-pixel space in the 'across the color stripes' direction.

lots of dead space there that you pay for that you cant use.
i wonder if you squeeze all pixels closer to each other
how much dead space will it be?

i guess 70-80% of the screen will be active pixels
the rest of the surface 20-30% black dead space

its like buying a beer for full price
open it up and its only filled up to 70% wink.gif
pg_ice is offline  
post #1462 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 01:07 PM
Member
 
bustmethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by pg_ice View Post

lots of dead space there that you pay for that you cant use.
i wonder if you squeeze all pixels closer to each other
how much dead space will it be?

i guess 70-80% of the screen will be active pixels
the rest of the surface 20-30% black dead space

its like buying a beer for full price
open it up and its only filled up to 70% wink.gif

I don't really care what percentage of screen area is active and what is empty space, as long as you don't see the empty space from a reasonable viewing distance. But you do. At least, I do. But if I take my glasses off, it looks fantastic. rolleyes.gif
bustmethat is offline  
post #1463 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 03:49 PM
Senior Member
 
Xavier1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Fill Rate is the key here. There is no display out there with a 100% fill rate, there is always be some wasted space. I think LCD and Plasma are below 70% just going by the ones I have in my house. 4K will really help here, and it should be a non issue with the upcoming LG OLEDs,

For example, my Ipad with retina display has the typical fillrate of an LCD, but because it is such a high resolution display, you cannot make out the ugly grid even from up close. The "lanes" between will shrink as the pixels do.

I have to very high fillrate displays at home, One is a DLP projector, the other a Sony SXRD TV, Both are above 88% in this spec. It does give the picture a very organic look, as if the pixels blend into one another.


The suggestion for the new Gallery OLED owner is a sound one. Lower any setting that is adding ringing around pixels, such as the sharpness and detail settings.
Xavier1 is offline  
post #1464 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 03:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Theplague13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Jersey
Posts: 1,046
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 326
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post

Defectivity depends on two things, surface area and design dimension.

Defect density is a function of surface area: defects per meter squared (or whatever). The larger the surface are being manufactured, the more defects it will contain.

Defects in the form of particles (the most common type of defectivity) will either impact system function or will not depending on design dimension. The impact of a very small particle defect on a very large pixel may be immaterial, while the impact of that same small particle defect on a small pixel may be a non-functional pixel.

So if pixel count remains the same, the increased number of defects associated with manufacturing that same number of pixels on a larger panel may be partially offset by the greater small-particle-defect-immunity of the larger pixel designs.

But this second factor is pretty much never enough to completely compensate, so sytech is more right on this one - it is harder to get defect free panels for larger panel sizes (OLED or plasma or LCD or whatever).

For a new manufacturing process such as OLED, there are other factors that come into play other than particle-based defectivity that impact yield loss, including mis-processing, process variation, material variation, etc... With the maturity of LCD manufacturing, it would not surprise me to if the primary cause of LCD yield loss is associated with particle-level defectivity. LCD has a 5-10 year headstart on OLED in terms of stabilizing and monitoring manufacturing process parameters, so it will take some time before the manufacturing of OLEDs can be expected to reach the same maturity and yield levels.

Ultimately, there is no fundamental reason to expect that WOLED manufacturing cannot attain yield levels similar to LCD, since many of the manufacturing steps are identical (especially on the backplane, which is where most of defects associated with failed pixels occur in a WOLED design). And since the is no cost associated with an LED-based backlight with a WOLED design, those panels ultimately should be less expensive to manufacture once volumes and maturity (ie: manufacturing yields) are similar.

How long it will take, how much it will cost, whether other technical problems including possible BI/IR etc... may limit OLEDs market success, whether LG or anyone else will ever get to that level of maturity, is another question entirely...

Fair enough, sir. Point taken on taking surface area into account.

.....but I still think they should give me a damn panel without any duds

Vinnie97, one of the kindest, most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before we all get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified. Date the ban will be lifted: Never
Pick up the signature.
Theplague13 is offline  
post #1465 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 04:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Theplague13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Jersey
Posts: 1,046
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 326
Yeah, pixel separation isnt a problem here either.

Vinnie97, one of the kindest, most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before we all get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified. Date the ban will be lifted: Never
Pick up the signature.
Theplague13 is offline  
post #1466 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 05:03 PM
Member
 
bustmethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 65
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier1 View Post

The suggestion for the new Gallery OLED owner is a sound one. Lower any setting that is adding ringing around pixels, such as the sharpness and detail settings.

First thing I did was set sharpness to zero and make sure edge enhancement was off. I guess I'm just a guy who needs a high fill rate as well. Now I know!
bustmethat is offline  
post #1467 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 05:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theplague13 View Post

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

You are not serious are you? Where did I mention pixels? I said it is easier to make a 5" OLED screen than a entire 55" OLED defect free screen.



Duh. Because what the hels the difference if the screen is 5 inches or 500 inches if they both contain the same amount if pixels. The object is to create that amount if wiejibg pixels, their size doesn't matter

There is a pixel density issue in manufacturing.  It requires that the tolerances become much much tighter.  But there is also a very tough nut to crack when making something larger and I believe it's likely due to a number of things, uniformity issues being among them.  Also, I'd be guessing, but I believe that the material cost squashes the margins significantly which makes yields more important, e.g. my $800 5.5" Galaxy Note 2 has roughly 1/100th the surface area of an $8000 55" OLED screen.  Rogo is the one to ask about which of size vs. density outweigh the other.


Higher pixel density means that the individual pixels are smaller. Which also often means things like using finer line traces, etc... Using smaller geometries for anything from individual pixels to transistors to signal lines means that the effect of a particle defect on functionality will be greater. The particles that cause defects do not shrink, so when everything else in the design does, the impact of a specific size defect particle will more often result in a visible degradation of performance (ie: bad pixels, or entire bad lines of pixels, or lazy pixels, etc...).

Particles are only part of the equation.  Things need to be actually laid out using tighter tolerances.

True, but in the end, once the process is capable of defining traces to those tighter tolerances, it is the increased sensitivity to particle defects that is the primary result. If the air were 100% pure with no particles in it, yield loss would only be the result of misprocessing or material variance (which means there were be pretty much no yield loss for a well-controlled manufacturing process.

Defect density is the one loose cannon in the entire manufacturing / yield equation - it can never be brought all the way down to zero (except perhaps in outer space biggrin.gif))
fafrd is offline  
post #1468 of 5839 Old 04-11-2014, 10:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,093
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 69 Post(s)
Liked: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post


What matter more to me is the large inter-pixel space in the 'across the color stripes' direction. Al 3 of these photos show that. If that inter pixel space cannot be reduced, it is going to have a significant impact on brightness output of a 4K WOLED.

Does anyone know the reason that there is such a large pixel separation in that dimension? Is it to reduce light bleed?

I'm going to guess this is a function of the electrode design at this point, combined with the fact that since there aren't any pixels on the OLED layer, you are seeing nice rigid rectangles thanks to a perfectly patterned color filter only. The pixels would not be remotely rectangular without you seeing them through what amounts to a "rectangular cutout". So that explains why there is interpixel horizontal space (and always will be) and at least some interpixel vertical space (which does seem excessive). Now as to why it's excessive, I imagine the reason is that the entire electrode package is running underneath the pixels to avoid any light loss of running it over them (indium tin oxide is "transparent", but it's not losslessly transparent because, well, it's metal).

It's possible as LG gets better at making these, they will be able to narrow the vertical gaps between pixels some, but the nature of the RGBW design sort of dictates a bit of gap always be present. If they went closer to gapless horizontally, all the subpixels would bleed into their neighbors. This is one of the negatives of LG's "pixel-less" OLED layer. Now, it's possible that with the much smaller pixels of 4K, they might be able to reduce those gaps. But if they can't reduce the width of the electrode package, the vertical is going to be unpleasant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

There is a pixel density issue in manufacturing.  It requires that the tolerances become much much tighter.  But there is also a very tough nut to crack when making something larger and I believe it's likely due to a number of things, uniformity issues being among them.  Also, I'd be guessing, but I believe that the material cost squashes the margins significantly which makes yields more important, e.g. my $800 5.5" Galaxy Note 2 has roughly 1/100th the surface area of an $8000 55" OLED screen.  Rogo is the one to ask about which of size vs. density outweigh the other.

So yeah, materials are a killer with size. No doubt. With LG, I think your bet on uniformity as a yield compromiser is a good one. Vapor deposition is messy and imperfect. Also, LG is using brand new backplane tech (IGZO) and isn't great at that yet. They haven't historically used IGZO on anything else so they were ramping up two entirely new processes. (It's worth noting they are getting more IGZO experience on the iPad Mini displays and possibly some others, which should help the OLED work over time).

Quote:
Originally Posted by pg_ice View Post

or is it that simple that these OLED pixels must have greater space between them to not be damgaged/overheated?

I don't believe it has anything to do with heat, no. Again, LG's OLED layer itself is pixel-less. The only reason you see the pixels as discrete is that the electrode fires up an area of the screen and the color filter layer makes that area appear discrete and rectangular. It's really a kind of amorphous blob that is actually illuminated. To make those blobs look like they have sharp edges, some space is definitely needed.
tgm1024 likes this.

There is no difference in HDMI cables. If you can see the picture without visible dropouts or sparklies, the cable is working at 100%. No other cable will display a better version of that picture. You're simply wrong if you think there is a better digital cable than one that is already working.
rogo is offline  
post #1469 of 5839 Old 04-12-2014, 12:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ConnecTEDDD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 2,246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 453
Quote:
Originally Posted by bustmethat View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xavier1 View Post

The suggestion for the new Gallery OLED owner is a sound one. Lower any setting that is adding ringing around pixels, such as the sharpness and detail settings.

First thing I did was set sharpness to zero and make sure edge enhancement was off. I guess I'm just a guy who needs a high fill rate as well. Now I know!



* Scaled Picturea from Actual 1920x1080 pixel sized Patterns.

Hi, you may find intersesting to test your OLED with this Advanced Sharpness Pattern that is avaliable inside the Ted's LightSpace CMS Calibration Blu-Ray Disk among with other 150 Color Reproduction Patterns.

This Sharpness Pattern is not limited to typical Black/Gray/White Background that all current calibration disks are using but at 4-Step (25%, 50%, 75%,100%) of 7-Color Amplitude (Gray, Red, Green, Blue, Cyan, Magenta, Yellow) Background... wink.gif


Better View - Part of the Advanced Sharpness Pattern

This Advanced Sharpness pattern is a real challenge for any display, it's will uncloack problems of you current sharpness control setting or from other enabled enhancements that were not visible before.

You can use it to verify your current sharpness setting value that you have set using a pattern generator or other calibration disk pattern since all other sharpness patterns available are based at grayscale lines/backgrounds only.

These multicolored backgrounds and shapes/lines conbination maybe some times will make you add 1 or reduce by -1 or more of you sharpness slider setting that you have already set based on other classic grayscale based sharpness patterns.

Ted's LightSpace CMS Calibration Disk Free Version for Free Calibration Software: LightSpace DPS + CalMAN ColorChecker
S/W: LightSpace CMS, SpaceMan ICC, SpaceMatch DCM, CalMAN 5, CalMAN RGB, ChromaPure, CalPC, ControlCAL
Meters: JETI Specbos 1211, Klein K-10A, i1PRO2, i1PRO, SpectraCAL C6, i1D3, C5
ConnecTEDDD is online now  
post #1470 of 5839 Old 04-12-2014, 02:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wizziwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 1,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by bustmethat View Post

Yes these photos you just re-posted are correct - the sub-pixels are side by side. As for why the gap is so large, I have no idea. Perhaps those with engineering backgrounds can chime in on that. But in terms of viewer experience, it is annoying to me. I guess different people are sensitive to different things, but I'm surprised I've read nothing about this in all of the OLED talk out there. If I end up reverting to my KRP-500M, look for a barely used 55EA8800 on ebay!

I mentioned it on this thread but I attributed it to poor upscaling/processing. I didn't even think that the low fill factor was causing it. It made 720p content look horrible when placed next to Samsung's 8500 plasma which has very high fill factor.

The vertical black spacing is not unique to this OLED. Here's a pic from one of LG's passive 3D IPS LCD panels:



How is the grayscale uniformity on your set when displaying a 10% gray screen? Any dead pixels?
Wizziwig is offline  
Reply Flat Panels General and OLED Technology

Tags
Lg 55ea9800 Oled Hdtv , Lg
Gear in this thread - 55ea9800 by PriceGrabber.com

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