OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 256 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 44Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #7651 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 09:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,050
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 131
The power of advertising is undeniable when you look at Samsung's stunning new LED Technology offerings from a few years ago. People ate that crap up like baby's to milk. A huge percentage of the population still think LED is an actual technology. That's with virtually zero TV advertising. "Organic Light Omitting Diodes"!!!! OMG how awesomely cool does that sound to the wanna be tech savey males of the 21st century?
andy sullivan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7652 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 09:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CruelInventions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 4,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post


4K is easy to advertise but the benefits are not easy to demonstrate.

I wonder how much customers will pay for the 4K sticker.

- Rich

The smart way to sell it is to place a 4K panel next to a 1080p one, in a tight aisle only a few feet wide. Then people are forced to compare the two from very close range. They see the difference and gotta have the 4K model.

Of course, back at home, at their typical 10 - 18ft regular viewing range, the resolution difference won't mean squat. But they'll still be feeling good about their purchase because they now have "the best". biggrin.gif

Mourning the disappearance of the -ly suffix. Words being cut-off before they've had a chance to fully form, left incomplete, with their shoelaces untied and their zippers undone. If I quote your post (or post in your thread) without comment, please check your zipper.
CruelInventions is offline  
post #7653 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 10:06 AM
Advanced Member
 
ALMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
In store, I'll bet the vast majority mistook the eye searing LED/LCD brightness as an indicator of brightness.

Every LCD looked like a washed out picture against OLED-TV in stores. Yes LCD is bright in stores, but OLED too and there is a point you can easily indicate an OLED-TV from a LCD-TV; Richer Colors! Don´t believe it? I saw it for my self, when the flat LG EA9809 hanging between the 4K-LCD-TV´s (Sony X9, Samsung F9 and the new Philips 4K-TV) and also to reports of reviewers and owners (even past owners from premium LCD-TV´s with glossy screens) you can clearly see the impressive color fascination of OLED which no LCD can match even in bright rooms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCW7FvZbupQ
Quote:
It's a tech that offers viewing angles and contrast, two things the market rejected for years as important, selecting LCD over plasma (which clearly bested LCD on both).

Plasma is not bright enough to show the benefits of better contrast and viewing angle in bright stores. Compared to LCD, in stores Plasma has the washed out picture, but now OLED can compete with LCD in brightness. Also the viewing angle is now a deal breaker for LCD because directly compared to an OLED-TV it´s obviously. Also many LCD-TV´s are not well placed and often hanging too high or standing too low.
ALMA is offline  
post #7654 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 04:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMA View Post

Every LCD looked like a washed out picture against OLED-TV in stores. Yes LCD is bright in stores, but OLED too and there is a point you can easily indicate an OLED-TV from a LCD-TV; Richer Colors! Don´t believe it? I saw it for my self, when the flat LG EA9809 hanging between the 4K-LCD-TV´s (Sony X9, Samsung F9 and the new Philips 4K-TV) and also to reports of reviewers and owners (even past owners from premium LCD-TV´s with glossy screens) you can clearly see the impressive color fascination of OLED which no LCD can match even in bright rooms.
LCDs are pushing 300-600 nits brightness depending on the model. OLEDs are lucky to hit around 200 nits brightness.
It's true that when they are uncalibrated, OLEDs should be putting out much more vibrant colors - even when compared to the Sony X9 in its wide gamut mode (which was probably disabled - most LCDs are fairly accurate out of the box now) but when they are calibrated, both should have the same level of saturation/vibrancy. If not, one of them is not displaying the right image.

While plasma owners are quick to say that LCDs have "eye-searing brightness" there are still times where I have the backlight up at full brightness and the gamma control turned up just to have a clear image during the day at the weekends. I would not complain if my display had the ability to go even brighter than it does, and this is not even in a particularly bright room.
Just because it can go extremely bright does not mean it has to. When I'm watching late at night, my display is dimmer than most plasma owners probably have their TVs set to. I do wish that displays had a "brightness" control on the remotes similar to their volume control though. (backlight for LCD, contrast/cell light for plasma/oled)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMA View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCW7FvZbupQ
Well of course you're going to see a huge difference between an iPhone 3GS (terrible LCD) a cheap netbook display and OLEDs set to their wide gamut modes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMA View Post

Plasma is not bright enough to show the benefits of better contrast and viewing angle in bright stores. Compared to LCD, in stores Plasma has the washed out picture, but now OLED can compete with LCD in brightness. Also the viewing angle is now a deal breaker for LCD because directly compared to an OLED-TV it´s obviously. Also many LCD-TV´s are not well placed and often hanging too high or standing too low.
It's not an issue of brightness with plasma. Due to the cell structure used, when light hits the front of the panel it dramatically reduces the contrast of the display. Even with a plasma switched off in a bright room, you can clearly see that the screen turns gray.

When an LCD is in a bright room, the panel stays completely black. Bright light actually helps LCD's black level performance, because once you have a moderate amount of light hitting the panel, it completely masks any amount of light the panel itself generates when displaying black. So in effect, LCDs have "perfect" black levels in a moderate-to-bright room.

Plasmas only have good black levels in the dark, but they are never off. The best plasmas approach 30,000:1 which can give you a nice image, but it's clearly not black.
Local dimming LCDs are better than plasmas in most areas, in my opinion. The best Kuros were around 30,000:1 contrast, and 15,000:1 ANSI contrast. The Sharp Elite local dimming LCD was 80,000:1 contrast and just under 15,000:1 ANSI.
People made a big fuss about blooming, but the areas which did show blooming (and in person, when viewed on-axis this was minimal at best) are actually still generally higher contrast than the plasma is displaying. My Sony LCD actually turns the zones off rather than just dimming to a low level like the Elites.


There's no doubt that OLED is better - especially when you consider off-axis viewing, but the question is not "is it better" the question is "is it so much better to demand a premium over LCD"?
Honestly, I'm happy enough with my Sony HX900. I don't ever sit off to the side when watching it, and while the black levels are not perfect, they're good enough that they are not distracting - and I found the black level of the Kuros distracting.
I would certainly like to upgrade to an OLED display at some point, but only once the manufacturing problems are sorted out, the prices are considerably lower, and we know how susceptible they are to things like image retention/burn-in.
They'll have to match LCD specs too - I won't buy anything that's not 4K or using a standard RGB subpixel layout.

If someone were to release an OLED display next year that was flat and had either a 4:3 or 21:9 aspect ratio, at $6000 or less, I would probably jump on it right away though, because anything that's not 16:9 is unlikely to stay on the market for long, unfortunately.
As time goes on, I've really come to hate 16:9. It's a poor compromise which means that you rarely ever have content which fills the screen.

With 4:3, content has a fixed width and simply changes in height. This is unlikely to return though, and will probably disappear forever if Apple ever changes the iPad aspect ratio. Considering that they changed the iPhone from 3:2 to 16:9 (a massive step backwards in my opinion) that's certainly possible.
With 21:9, content has a fixed height and changes in width. There's a possibility of this as there have been 21:9 flat panels in the past, and OLED is still a high-end product right now, as those displays were. 21:9 gives you the largest possible image with films, for the smallest TV "footprint".
With 16:9, content rarely fills the screen, so you effectively have a much smaller display than you're paying for. You either lose 1/4 of the display at the sides with 4:3 content, or 1/4 of the height with films.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #7655 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 04:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
navychop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 2,211
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

In store, I'll bet the vast majority mistook the eye searing LED/LCD brightness as an indicator of brightness.
4K is easy to advertise but the benefits are not easy to demonstrate.

I wonder how much customers will pay for the 4K sticker.

- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by CruelInventions View Post

The smart way to sell it is to place a 4K panel next to a 1080p one, in a tight aisle only a few feet wide. Then people are forced to compare the two from very close range. They see the difference and gotta have the 4K model.

Of course, back at home, at their typical 10 - 18ft regular viewing range, the resolution difference won't mean squat. But they'll still be feeling good about their purchase because they now have "the best". biggrin.gif

Let us not forget, the ONE thing UHD (aka "4K") offers over 1080, at least for non-huge TV sizes, is improved 3D performance. This can be demonstrated. Now, will it be enough to boost 3D title sales, and they both benefit?


The power of Marketing:

A few years ago, I remember reading of a Marketing experiment. They took an item you usually only buy 1 or 2 of in a Supermarket, put it on an end cap with a sign "Limit 10." Sales increased.

But you can't do it too often.

Reunite Pangea!
navychop is offline  
post #7656 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 05:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,056
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

In store, I'll bet the vast majority mistook the eye searing LED/LCD brightness as an indicator of brightness.
4K is easy to advertise but the benefits are not easy to demonstrate.

I wonder how much customers will pay for the 4K sticker.

Consumers won't have to pay much. The premium is already down to about $1000. Today. When barely anyone even knows it exists. What do you think the premium will be next year? My guess is $500.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtbdudex View Post

Yes it truly is incredible, technology, and communication with you and others via handheld devices, 100% agree.
So buying in 2015, which is really 14-15 months away, IF, a big if, there is compelling reason to wait for a 50-55" OLED that will be $1.2k or less, then sure I'll wait.

There is a 0.00% chance of a 2015 OLED being priced like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

The power of advertising is undeniable when you look at Samsung's stunning new LED Technology offerings from a few years ago. People ate that crap up like baby's to milk. A huge percentage of the population still think LED is an actual technology. That's with virtually zero TV advertising. "Organic Light Omitting Diodes"!!!! OMG how awesomely cool does that sound to the wanna be tech savey males of the 21st century?

Sorry, but tech savvy (and even pseudo tech savvy) people buy pseudo technology when the pricing is reasonable. Not when the pricing is unreasonable. OLED at $4000 barely begins to qualify as reasonable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CruelInventions View Post

The smart way to sell it is to place a 4K panel next to a 1080p one, in a tight aisle only a few feet wide. Then people are forced to compare the two from very close range. They see the difference and gotta have the 4K model.

Of course, back at home, at their typical 10 - 18ft regular viewing range, the resolution difference won't mean squat. But they'll still be feeling good about their purchase because they now have "the best". biggrin.gif

I think people will buy pixels on the placebo effect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMA View Post

Every LCD looked like a washed out picture against OLED-TV in stores. Yes LCD is bright in stores, but OLED too and there is a point you can easily indicate an OLED-TV from a LCD-TV; Richer Colors! Don´t believe it? I saw it for my self, when the flat LG EA9809 hanging between the 4K-LCD-TV´s (Sony X9, Samsung F9 and the new Philips 4K-TV) and also to reports of reviewers and owners (even past owners from premium LCD-TV´s with glossy screens) you can clearly see the impressive color fascination of OLED which no LCD can match even in bright rooms.

I'm confused by the universe you live in. I see LCDs in stores that look flat out amazing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

When an LCD is in a bright room, the panel stays completely black. Bright light actually helps LCD's black level performance, because once you have a moderate amount of light hitting the panel, it completely masks any amount of light the panel itself generates when displaying black. So in effect, LCDs have "perfect" black levels in a moderate-to-bright room.

That's what makes LCD so great. At this point, I don't much hesitate to recommend them to friends unless they tell me about off-axis issues in their setup or that they really spend most of their time movie watching in dim light or darkness.
Quote:
Local dimming LCDs are better than plasmas in most areas, in my opinion.

They mostly don't exist as a product however.
Quote:
As time goes on, I've really come to hate 16:9. It's a poor compromise which means that you rarely ever have content which fills the screen.

In the U.S., nearly all HDTV fills the screen perfectly on 16:9. This is a problem for you that most of us don't experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by navychop View Post


Let us not forget, the ONE thing UHD (aka "4K") offers over 1080, at least for non-huge TV sizes, is improved 3D performance. This can be demonstrated. Now, will it be enough to boost 3D title sales, and they both benefit?

Rejection of 3-D in the home isn't because the performance is bad. So improving the performance isn't a game changer. It is nice for 3-D fans and pretty much irrelevant otherwise.
agkss 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 #7657 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 06:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

In the U.S., nearly all HDTV fills the screen perfectly on 16:9. This is a problem for you that most of us don't experience.
Who is buying these high end displays to watch broadcast content that's highly compressed and cropped to 16:9 rather than using high quality sources? You may as well be streaming Netflix on it.
If you're building a high end display, build it for high quality sources. (21:9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Rejection of 3-D in the home isn't because the performance is bad. So improving the performance isn't a game changer. It is nice for 3-D fans and pretty much irrelevant otherwise.
3D gaming when it's done right is really impressive. I think it would convert most non-believers.
The problem is that almost nothing does 3D gaming right. You need to be using a PC as your source, and you need a high-end PC at that. You also need to avoid HDMI, as it's limited in framerate or resolution. (1080p24 or 720p60)

3D as a format for films or live TV has never impressed me in the slightest. Give me a high quality 2D image any day.

But 3D is still using active shutters on OLED so while crosstalk on the panel is no longer an issue, you still have the problem of flicker, and the LCDs used in the glasses are still likely to permit some amount of crosstalk.
And I don't think there are any 4K displays which take advantage of the extra resolution with passive 3D. I think they're still all displaying 540 lines.

With 3D losing support, I fear that we may not have high quality 3D at home on flat panel displays. It's probably going to be up to devices like the Oculus Rift to cater for high quality 3D gaming.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #7658 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 09:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
andy sullivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sun city west AZ
Posts: 3,050
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 131
When I said that "tech Savey" men would go for OLED I also mentioned that the new technology would have to be reasonably priced. I even mentioned a "up to 20%" higher than the competition, which would make a LCD going for $2500 compete with an OLED for $3,000.
andy sullivan is offline  
post #7659 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 10:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Sequoia, CA
Posts: 30,056
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Who is buying these high end displays to watch broadcast content that's highly compressed and cropped to 16:9 rather than using high quality sources? You may as well be streaming Netflix on it.

You stream Netflix, I'll stick with broadcast HDTV, which is quite excellent, thanks. (Incidentally, Netflix is at least experimenting with much better quality formats.)

The idea that I (or anyone) should only watch BluRay is absurd. My TV is clearly on more than yours. Oh, and it's very often filled corner to corner with content. How you see yourself as "winning" because of better quality and black bars is completely lost on me.
Quote:
3D gaming when it's done right is really impressive. I think it would convert most non-believers.

So long as they're gamers to begin with. And, again, I've spoken highly of the prospects for 3-D gaming.
Quote:
The problem is that almost nothing does 3D gaming right. You need to be using a PC as your source, and you need a high-end PC at that. You also need to avoid HDMI, as it's limited in framerate or resolution. (1080p24 or 720p60)

So in other words, virtually no one has this kind of setup.
Quote:
But 3D is still using active shutters on OLED so while crosstalk on the panel is no longer an issue, you still have the problem of flicker, and the LCDs used in the glasses are still likely to permit some amount of crosstalk.
And I don't think there are any 4K displays which take advantage of the extra resolution with passive 3D. I think they're still all displaying 540 lines.

Well, someone should "fix" that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

When I said that "tech Savey" men would go for OLED I also mentioned that the new technology would have to be reasonably priced. I even mentioned a "up to 20%" higher than the competition, which would make a LCD going for $2500 compete with an OLED for $3,000.

So I get your points on pricing and agree. Do me the courtesy of spelling it "savvy" from here on so I can continue to credit your most excellent and erudite analysis!

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 #7660 of 10452 Old 12-15-2013, 11:44 PM
Advanced Member
 
ALMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
I'm confused by the universe you live in. I see LCDs in stores that look flat out amazing.

But not against OLED. If you can´t compare it directly then of course LCD can look amazing. But the differences directly compared even in well lit store demos is obviously. We have a owner of the Samsung OLED-TV in the German Hifi Forum and he also told about the same effect against his old Samsung 55F8090 LED-LCD-TV. The colors looked washed out and even to try more saturated colors on his LCD, it doens´t reach these vibrant OLED colors. More saturation on LCD looking only synthetically, more like fake colors. Also in the video I linked, you can see the same OLED color effect. Black also looks deeper. That´s a well lit room, like in a typically store demo and no dim lightning. If you don´t see it you must be blind. The Sony 65X9005 is a Triluminos-4K-LCD-TV and even this stands not a chance hanging side by side to the LG EA8809. It´s not only about a wider color gammut.
Quote:
LCDs are pushing 300-600 nits brightness depending on the model. OLEDs are lucky to hit around 200 nits brightness.

What are you talking? The LG and Samsung OLED-TV´s reaches 350cd/m²!

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/55ea980w-201312083487.htm
Quote:
Strange as it may sound, black level also affects a TV’s colour reproduction, simply because the baseline black luminance is inevitably added to every single colour that needs to be displayed on screen. Here’s how we like to explain it: greyish blacks will have more “white” than pure blacks, which will be mixed with the colours, decreasing their saturations (e.g. red may look pink… an extreme example, but you get the idea) and washing out the image. Only the deepest blacks can allow colours to flourish with unadulterated richness and vibrancy.

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/ke55s9c-201310273395.htm

Im not talking about well calibrated displays. I´m talking about typically store demos (uncalibrated, dynamic mode), where even you can see that OLED looks vibrianter with better blacks. At home with better controlled lightning it´s of course more obviously.

In the German Forum we all to puzzle over it, why OLED looks even better in well lit roomes. Better contrast, better viewing angle? Even the press told the same. OLED is not only about black level, the color reproduction is much more fascinating.
Quote:
Local dimming LCDs are better than plasmas in most areas, in my opinion. The best Kuros were around 30,000:1 contrast, and 15,000:1 ANSI contrast. The Sharp Elite local dimming LCD was 80,000:1 contrast and just under 15,000:1 ANSI.

Show me a local dimmed LCD with a skyline at night. At this situation the fascination of LD effect is gone and the display is reduced to it´s native contrast ratio.
ALMA is offline  
post #7661 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 04:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 109
Quote:
In the German Forum we all to puzzle over it, why OLED looks even better in well lit roomes. Better contrast, better viewing angle?

Nokia did a study years ago that indicated that OLED's are perceived to be brighter than LCD's even when the two are calibrated to the same brightness level. Something about the increased contrast is perceived by our eyes as an increase in brightness. If your tests have calibrated the output level to similar levels, this might be one explanation.
slacker711 is online now  
post #7662 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 06:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

You stream Netflix, I'll stick with broadcast HDTV, which is quite excellent, thanks. (Incidentally, Netflix is at least experimenting with much better quality formats.)
I wouldn't watch either. (and don't)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

The idea that I (or anyone) should only watch BluRay is absurd. My TV is clearly on more than yours. Oh, and it's very often filled corner to corner with content. How you see yourself as "winning" because of better quality and black bars is completely lost on me.
I very much doubt that actually. But it's the idea that someone is paying $10,000 for a display only to use it for broadcast content which I have difficulty with. If you can afford a $10,000 display, you should be able to afford high quality sources to go along with it. (of course that doesn't count the people that have been putting aside money for years waiting for OLED) If you're going to build a $10,000 display, build it for the highest quality content, not the lowest quality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMA View Post

But not against OLED. If you can´t compare it directly then of course LCD can look amazing. But the differences directly compared even in well lit store demos is obviously. We have a owner of the Samsung OLED-TV in the German Hifi Forum and he also told about the same effect against his old Samsung 55F8090 LED-LCD-TV. The colors looked washed out and even to try more saturated colors on his LCD, it doens´t reach these vibrant OLED colors. More saturation on LCD looking only synthetically, more like fake colors. Also in the video I linked, you can see the same OLED color effect. Black also looks deeper. That´s a well lit room, like in a typically store demo and no dim lightning. If you don´t see it you must be blind. The Sony 65X9005 is a Triluminos-4K-LCD-TV and even this stands not a chance hanging side by side to the LG EA8809. It´s not only about a wider color gammut.
I see the differences in your video, but it is comparing some of the worst LCDs to OLED displays. The OLEDs are clearly operating in their wide gamut modes as well, which makes the color differences very obvious.
Once you are viewing calibrated displays, the OLEDs should not be any more vibrant than the LCDs when viewing them in bright conditions.
There is nothing any more "natural" about the oversaturated colors OLED is displaying - it's still out of spec and displaying the wrong colors.

Off-axis, yes OLED has much richer colors and deeper black levels - even in bright conditions that should be obvious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMA View Post

What are you talking? The LG and Samsung OLED-TV´s reaches 350cd/m²!
You're talking about peak brightness, measured when only a small area of the screen is illuminated. I'm talking about their maximum brightness with a white screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMA View Post

Im not talking about well calibrated displays. I´m talking about typically store demos (uncalibrated, dynamic mode), where even you can see that OLED looks vibrianter with better blacks. At home with better controlled lightning it´s of course more obviously.
Most LCDs now - Sony's in particular are effectively calibrated out of the box. The OLEDs are not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALMA View Post

Show me a local dimmed LCD with a skyline at night. At this situation the fascination of LD effect is gone and the display is reduced to it´s native contrast ratio.
Find me a good example and I'll get you a photo. I've gone through a few discs now and couldn't really find anything that would be a good demonstration. Cities are too well illuminated these days...
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #7663 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 07:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

When an LCD is in a bright room, the panel stays completely black. Bright light actually helps LCD's black level performance, because once you have a moderate amount of light hitting the panel, it completely masks any amount of light the panel itself generates when displaying black. So in effect, LCDs have "perfect" black levels in a moderate-to-bright room.

 

But whether it's the light hitting the panel or the light leaking through the LCD array it's still an effective dark level of gray isn't it?  I think the displaying of blackness in a lit room is more a function of what happens to your iris when there is even a moderate amount of ambient light or nearly any content on the screen.  Even in a pitch black room, all it takes is the super bright Sony logo to come on for my eyes to react strongly and push the rest of the screen closer to ink.


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #7664 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 07:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
xrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
It has been a while but IIRC the presence of color filters and polarizing films in LCD is the source of the dark blacks in ambient light. This is something that PDP and CRT did not have and resulted in severe reflection of ambient light off the cell materials.

There was some research being done on putting color filters into emmissive displays like SED and PDP for the purpose of improving ambient light reflections.

Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind
xrox is offline  
post #7665 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 08:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 203
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

But whether it's the light hitting the panel or the light leaking through the LCD array it's still an effective dark level of gray isn't it? I think the displaying of blackness in a lit room is more a function of what happens to your iris when there is even a moderate amount of ambient light or nearly any content on the screen. Even in a pitch black room, all it takes is the super bright Sony logo to come on for my eyes to react strongly and push the rest of the screen closer to ink.
Well yes, it's not that it's actually getting darker, but it's darker relative to the rest of the room, and below the threshold where you can see that it's not completely black.

When light hits the front of emissive displays like PDP and SED, it actually makes the screen brighter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xrox View Post

It has been a while but IIRC the presence of color filters and polarizing films in LCD is the source of the dark blacks in ambient light. This is something that PDP and CRT did not have and resulted in severe reflection of ambient light off the cell materials.

There was some research being done on putting color filters into emmissive displays like SED and PDP for the purpose of improving ambient light reflections.
Pioneer were using polarizers on the higher-end Kuros - it's why they had limited vertical viewing angles. I think Panasonic have been doing that as well?

It can help, but I think the issue is simply internal reflections due to the deep cell structure these types of displays have to use.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #7666 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 09:16 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: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Plasmas only have good black levels in the dark,
Yes, we know you hate plasma, but I thought I'd snip this particularly false statement and properly label it as hogwash. In typical fashion, you completely ignored the shootout results from 2013 where this was shown to be demonstrably false. LCDs are never off either. Remember, full-array backlighting has been virtually discarded from the manufacturing process.

You should head over to the Kuro pictures thread and see the recent Sony W9 versus 500M photo comparisons. Basically, it makes your statement about LCD being oh so much better than plasma to be laughably inaccurate.

I saved you the trouble of searching. If this and/or this isn't eye-opening enough to you, nothing ever will be. I don't want my TV to compete with the sun. I want it to excel in a cinematic viewing environment. It's a shame about the continued issue of IR and the power requirements and other engineering challenges that make plasma unfeasible in 4K but unlike you, I am in no way happy with being saddled with LCD as a replacement.
agkss likes this.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #7667 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 10:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
RadTech51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

One challenge about advertising for OLED is that 4K is already "advertise-able". It's a real thing that people sort of understand, however slight the benefit for most. OLED is actually going to be a less tangible benefit for the majority of people. It's a tech that offers viewing angles and contrast, two things the market rejected for years as important, selecting LCD over plasma (which clearly bested LCD on both).

But on paper OLED has the potential to be way more energy-efficient, way thinner and way less expensive than current display technology. And those are things people can find tangible cool.gif

 

Sharp Elite PRO- 70X5FD 
Pioneer Elite VSX- 52 (A/V receiver)
Pioneer Elite BDP3FD (Blu-Ray) Player
Surround sound system: B&W (2) CM8's, (1) CENTER CHANNEL, (2) CM1 BOOKSHELF MONITORS's, (1) ASW10CM ACTIVE SUBWOOFER.
RadTech51 is offline  
post #7668 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 10:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,679
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Plasmas only have good black levels in the dark,
Yes, we know you hate plasma, but I thought I'd snip this particularly false statement and properly label it as hogwash. In typical fashion, you completely ignored the shootout results from 2013 where this was shown to be demonstrably false. LCDs are never off either. Remember, full-array backlighting has been virtually discarded from the manufacturing process.

You should head over to the Kuro pictures thread and see the recent Sony W9 versus 500M photo comparisons. Basically, it makes your statement about LCD being oh so much better than plasma to be laughably inaccurate.

I saved you the trouble of searching. If this and/or this isn't eye-opening enough to you, nothing ever will be. I don't want my TV to compete with the sun. I want it to excel in a cinematic viewing environment. It's a shame about the continued issue of IR and the power requirements and other engineering challenges that make plasma unfeasible in 4K but unlike you, I am in no way happy with being saddled with LCD as a replacement.

FALD is not dead. Only Sony stopped making em..


The W900A is an Edge Lit. What is interesting about this model is its Motion options and the fact that it is one of the first flatscreens that is using quantum dots. Even D-Nice was interested in quantum dots cool.gif
8mile13 is offline  
post #7669 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 11:03 AM
Advanced Member
 
RadTech51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by CruelInventions

The smart way to sell it is to place a 4K panel next to a 1080p one, in a tight aisle only a few feet wide. Then people are forced to compare the two from very close range. They see the difference and gotta have the 4K model.

Of course, back at home, at their typical 10 - 18ft regular viewing range, the resolution difference won't mean squat. But they'll still be feeling good about their purchase because they now have "the best".
Quote:
Rogo : I think people will buy pixels on the placebo effect.

Oh I think the placebo effect may be true in some cases but not in all cases, as I can clearly see the difference myself for example. A similar example would be going from a non-retina to a retina display on an Apple device it's clearly noticeable.

 

Sharp Elite PRO- 70X5FD 
Pioneer Elite VSX- 52 (A/V receiver)
Pioneer Elite BDP3FD (Blu-Ray) Player
Surround sound system: B&W (2) CM8's, (1) CENTER CHANNEL, (2) CM1 BOOKSHELF MONITORS's, (1) ASW10CM ACTIVE SUBWOOFER.
RadTech51 is offline  
post #7670 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 11:04 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: 1000
Well, I'm unimpressed so far. Who is making FALD panels at anywhere near a reasonable cost? Samsung and/or LG? What's the price, $20k?
vinnie97 is offline  
post #7671 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 11:05 AM
Advanced Member
 
ALMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Most LCDs now - Sony's in particular are effectively calibrated out of the box. The OLEDs are not.

According to all well known reviews both OLED TVs have very good out of the box settings. The LG even has a pre calibrated THX mode.
ALMA is offline  
post #7672 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 11:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,679
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 
Well, I'm unimpressed so far. Who is making FALD panels at anywhere near a reasonable cost? Samsung and/or LG? What's the price, $20k?
There will be a cheap Vizio FALD in 2014 smile.gif
http://www.soundandvision.com/content/vizio-add-full-array-led-backlighting-2014-tvs-0
8mile13 is offline  
post #7673 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 12:08 PM
 
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: 1000
Thanks, that's a start. I may have read about that previously but forgotten it. If there's a 70", I might be forced to grab one. The IR susceptibility on this ZT60 is ridiculous.
agkss likes this.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #7674 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 01:38 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: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

While plasma owners are quick to say that LCDs have "eye-searing brightness"

most of them do but not the ones that own both smile.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Plasmas only have good black levels in the dark, but they are never off. The best plasmas approach 30,000:1 which can give you a nice image, but it's clearly not black.
Local dimming LCDs are better than plasmas in most areas, in my opinion. The best Kuros were around 30,000:1 contrast, and 15,000:1 ANSI contrast.

they have bad AG/AR filters thats the problem but they can show great blacks even with bright lights in the room.
it all depends on how the light hits the panel.
all direct lights at the same level as the panel will wash out the blacks.
light from the ceiling and from the sides of the tv will not.

My Kuro has an ANSI contrast of 38000:1
but thats not a standard Kuro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Local dimming LCDs are better than plasmas in most areas in my opinion.

in my opinion its the opposite

i own a Sony W9 that a praised like hell for its picture when i got it.
the colors and the blacks where so good compared to all other LCDs i have owned.
the last LCD i owned (LG 47 LX9500)was also good but it was miles after the W9 in colors.
(Both tvs where reference calibrated btw)
you can clearly see what Quantum Dots do to the colors on the W9.
the usual White/Blue light you get from the LEDs isnt there on the W9.
Quantum dots brings back the good old light from the incandescent lamp

Then i Bought a 5 year old Pioneer LX5090 Kuro.
the only time i use the W9 now is for comparisons.
things changed quickly.

the W9 is now out for sale

i still wonder why the hell i havnt bought a Kuro before?
the answer is that they where to expensive.
all LCD LED tvs i have bought before was completely wasted money.
you pay money for a fake flat overdone picture.

i have now seen the light
the light from AV Heaven!

Halelulia KURO ! smile.gif

if i would do a comparison to the DSLR world.
i would say that the Kuro is what Full Frame DSLRs are for Cameras.
LCD LEDs are the Cell Phone cameras that you just take with you when you want to shoot photos fast and easy to put on Instagram.
vinnie97 likes this.
pg_ice is offline  
post #7675 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 01:57 PM
 
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: 1000
Chrono doesn't believe in those nonstandard Kuro measurements. wink.gif
vinnie97 is offline  
post #7676 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 01:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,815
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 550
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Chrono doesn't believe in those nonstandard Kuro measurements. wink.gif

 

Did you guys go by camel and find a Kuro by following a giant star in the sky or something?


Well Vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, got one of these. I wonder how much longer before I get such a message...
You have been banned for the following reason: No reason was specified.
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
tgm1024 is offline  
post #7677 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 02:01 PM
 
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: 1000
I dumped mine actually because I wanted more SIZE. It's a shame that the panel is still relevant today, dont'cha'think? OLED is on the cusp of making it irrelevant.
vinnie97 is offline  
post #7678 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 02:13 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: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Did you guys go by camel and find a Kuro by following a giant star in the sky or something?

you need to pray to the Kuro God.
then one day you will own one wink.gif

Kaaaaalima shahadaaa..
pg_ice is offline  
post #7679 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 02:27 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: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

Chrono doesn't believe in those nonstandard Kuro measurements. wink.gif

im out of here.
i own a Kuro and i dont need to discuss "so called" tvs anymore wink.gif
pg_ice is offline  
post #7680 of 10452 Old 12-16-2013, 02:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tubetwister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Sacramento delta N. Cal. usa
Posts: 1,971
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Liked: 273
Quote:
Merck says that they are already collaborating with Taiwanese panel makers (probably AU Optronics and Innolux) on developing ink-jet printing of OLED TV panels. Merck is providing the local companies with soluble OLED materials. Merck believes that ink-jet printing will greatly reduce OLED panel production costs.
read more:
http://www.oled-info.com/merck-says-lgs-oled-tv-uses-their-materials-working-taiwanese-companies-ink-jet-printed-oled-tvs


There are reports from China that Skyworth is set to release their first OLED TV next week (December 5). The company sent out invitations to reporters for the launch event:

According to one report, Skyworth will use LG Display's WRGB panels. The second report actually says Skyworth are releasing a "Samsung OLED TV", but they still say it is an WRGB panel so this may be just a mistake.

This second report also claims that Haier already released their first OLED TV in China. Perhaps they refer to Haier's 55' OLED TV prototype shown in IFA 2013 earlier this year. There were reports from Korea that say that Haier (and Seiki as well) actually obtained those panels without permission from Korean makers - they simply bought OLED TVs in the open market, took them apart and then reassembled the OLED panels themselves into their own designs.
read more:
http://www.oled-info.com/chinas-skyworth-launch-oled-tv-next-week-panel-supplied-lgd




Haier And Seiki
Did Two Chinese Electronics Companies Pass LG OLED TV Panels Off As Theirs?




At IFA 2013 in Germany in September, the largest consumer electronics fair in Europe, the big question among those engaged in the global electronics industry was, “Where do the OLED TVs displayed by Chinese firms actually come from?”

At that time, people had different theories. Some said that Chinese companies developed the necessary technology, while others argued that they might have obtained the displayed TVs from somewhere, rather than manufacturing those products themselves. People were wondering about the origin of those TVs, but nothing was revealed.

However, it was reported that Chinese firms used products made by a Korean display maker. The TVs were not supplied officially. Instead, Chinese companies bought finished products, took them apart, and reassembled them.

According to sources in the consumer electronics industry, the two Chinese electronics companies Haier and Seiki introduced 55 inch OLED TVs at IFA 2013. An industry source said, “Many suspected those TVs, due to poor quality in assembly. People were interested in the origin of those displays, since there were no local display manufacturers in China that can produce large OLED panels.”

Market research firm DisplaySearch reported that Chinese companies’ OLED TV panels at IFA 2013 are presumed to belong to LG Electronics. Apparently, they purchased finished LG goods, removed the cases, and reassembled them. Currently, LG Display provides their OLED TV panels exclusively to LG Electronics.

Among Chinese firms, BOE is constructing the 8th generation OLED line at factories in Chongqing and Hebei. So far, no local companies in China have successfully mass-produced OLED TVs.

- See more at: http://www.businesskorea.co.kr/article/1723/haier-and-seiki-did-two-chinese-electronics-companies-pass-lg-oled-tv-panels-theirs#sthash.ezvnccln.dpuf



Just some interesting stuff I read. The Printed OLED process hopefully will eventually work well and bring panel costs down.

Safest place for criminals and terrorists is working within our elected dictatorship !.

The Soviet people feared the KGB was watching them through their TV's ........or listening to them through their radios, so they kept them turned off often when they wanted privacy .Now the NSA/ DHS /CIA etc. are watching and listening to us!
Safest place for criminals and terrorists is working within our elected dictatorship !.
tubetwister is offline  
Reply Flat Panels General and OLED Technology

Tags
Led Hdtv , Lcd Hdtv , Plasma Hdtv , Oled Tv , Lg , Samsung

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