Quantum-Dot 55-in. UHDTV TV to sell for one third the price of OLEDs - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 06:16 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Rich Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: St Paul, MN
Posts: 2,822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quantum-Dot 55-in. UHDTV TV to sell for one third the price of OLEDs

Source: http://www.computerworld.com/article...-of-oleds.html


Quote:
TCL today announced what it's calling the first 55-in 4K UHDTV with a fullcolor spectrum comparable to OLED TVs but that will sell for one-third the price.


TCL said its new LCD flat-screen achieves the full possible range (known as "full gamut") of color by using "quantum dot" technology that also allows the company to produce the TVs at a reduced cost compared with OLEDs.
Rich Peterson is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 09:01 AM
Member
 
Matthias Hutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 30
It still has all the issues of a transmissive display, and is full of ******** marketing terms like "full color display".
Morning5 and NintendoManiac64 like this.
Matthias Hutter is offline  
post #3 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 09:01 AM
Advanced Member
 
5x10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 791
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 498 Post(s)
Liked: 247
nice, if im reading it right, OLED pq at 1/3 the cost?
if so, bring on the 77' monster for $2-$3k!!!
5x10 is online now  
post #4 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 09:08 AM
Member
 
Bruce2019's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Compared with LED and LCD, OLED displays have a superior contrast ratio; a wider range of 'real life colors,' and its self-emitting pixels allow for deeper blacks, Gonzalez-Thayer said.


I don't understand the technology. I thought there is a backlight like LCD/LED Tvs?
tazz3 likes this.
Bruce2019 is offline  
post #5 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 09:10 AM
Advanced Member
 
5x10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 791
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 498 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce2019 View Post
Compared with LED and LCD, OLED displays have a superior contrast ratio; a wider range of 'real life colors,' and its self-emitting pixels allow for deeper blacks, Gonzalez-Thayer said.


I don't understand the technology. I thought there is a backlight like LCD/LED Tvs?
apparently, the dots sit in front of the backlight and can be turned off

"Like OLEDs, QD Vision's quantum dot technology supplies light on demand, which enables more efficient displays than more common light emitting diode (LED) or liquid crystal diode (LCD) displays. "

im not sure if that eliminates alot of the exisiting lcd problems like blooming, off angle viewing, etc
5x10 is online now  
post #6 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 09:10 AM
Member
 
Bruce2019's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Ok I geht it, its about Oled.


;-)
Bruce2019 is offline  
post #7 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 09:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,030
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1038 Post(s)
Liked: 1148
I'm not sure what 'supplies light on demand' means. Every display supplies light on demand. Somehow I don't think we've been blessed with 2,000,000 local dimmers in an HD QD display, that's 1/3 the cost of OLED.
rlindo, Morning5 and wicklow like this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #8 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 09:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Foxbat121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: VA
Posts: 9,946
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 231
It is still an transmissive technology. You can't really turn off individual pixels. From some history stuff I read, Sony engineers originally want to make QD as emissive TV like OLED but can't make it work in large size. So, they switched to use it as backlite for LCD. I don't know the detail but it probably works like super FALD with more zones than traditional LED based FALD. It still has all the problems LCD have today.


It's not OLED quality. So, I'm not sure 1/3 of the price is really that surprising.
Morning5, ONDr and 5x10 like this.
Foxbat121 is offline  
post #9 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 09:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxbat121 View Post
It is still an transmissive technology. You can't really turn off individual pixels. From some history stuff I read, Sony engineers originally want to make QD as emissive TV like OLED but can't make it work in large size. So, they switched to use it as backlite for LCD. I don't know the detail but it probably works like super FALD with more zones than traditional LED based FALD. It still has all the problems LCD have today.


It's not OLED quality. So, I'm not sure 1/3 of the price is really that surprising.

Now here is something that will really twist your noodle - the QD film could be placed on the exit side of the LCD just under the RGB color filters. This might result is something with the viewing angle more akin to WOLED than LED/LCD.

White light (from the LEDs on the backlight)
VA-type LCD lightvalve (limited to native contrast ratio of ~5000:1)
Quantum dot film (to purify the chromatic composition of the light and scatter its angle)
RGB color filters (one for each subpixel)

Contrast and the possibility of bloom/halo would be the same as any other VA FALD LED/LCD, but viewing angle would probably be more similar to WOLED and so would color saturation.

Last edited by fafrd; 09-04-2014 at 09:49 AM.
fafrd is online now  
post #10 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 02:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,286
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I'm not sure what 'supplies light on demand' means. Every display supplies light on demand. Somehow I don't think we've been blessed with 2,000,000 local dimmers in an HD QD display, that's 1/3 the cost of OLED.
Correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
Now here is something that will really twist your noodle - the QD film could be placed on the exit side of the LCD just under the RGB color .
Maybe that could be done, but it isn't actually being done.

It's just a film to create purer color. The effect is nice, but hardly revolutionary.

The TV is an LCD with a small boost in color fidelity and a big boost in marketing speak.
Morning5 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. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #11 of 97 Old 09-04-2014, 06:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Correct.



Maybe that could be done, but it isn't actually being done.

It's just a film to create purer color. The effect is nice, but hardly revolutionary.

The TV is an LCD with a small boost in color fidelity and a big boost in marketing speak.

Was aware of all that (the operative word in my sentence was 'could' :-).

QDot film used in the conventional way will do nothing more but improve color saturation, as you say.

If the film is capable of being sandwiched between the LCD lightvalve layer and the RGB color filter layer, it might be able to deliver a modest improvement in viewing angle as well.

I don't have much hope of Samsung being a leader in this area, however - the strength of their marketing muscles seems to have resulted in significant decline of whatever innovation muscles they once had...
fafrd is online now  
post #12 of 97 Old 09-05-2014, 02:04 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,286
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 562
They are innovating in OLED displays on mobile, actually. There is no reason to innovate in TVs right now, unless you are LG and can manufacture OLEDs.

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. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #13 of 97 Old 09-05-2014, 06:21 AM
Senior Member
 
Masterbrew2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 312
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
Liked: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5x10 View Post
apparently, the dots sit in front of the backlight and can be turned off
So... exactly like the LCD layer? The problem is that while it may be turned off, light still gets through.
Masterbrew2 is offline  
post #14 of 97 Old 09-05-2014, 06:51 AM
Advanced Member
 
tom669's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 955
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 123
It's literally a different diffuser film for a backlight. It has NO influence on contrast ratio, at all. No influence on black level or peak white. It will more accurately direct the light through the LCD panel, improving efficiency. It may also improve the colour gamut by blocking less wavelengths (its transmissivity will be closer to ideal.) The actual effect is likely to be negligible.

It's amazing what marketing has done to the TV industry. All buzzwords now, with no meat.
tom669 is offline  
post #15 of 97 Old 09-05-2014, 02:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,286
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Right, Tom.

The post that quotes 5x10 claiming it's a light valve is quoting a post that is 100% wrong.

There is no light valve function here at all.

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. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)
rogo is offline  
post #16 of 97 Old 09-08-2014, 04:18 PM
Advanced Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 643
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Yeah, it is amazing what marketing-speak can do. Heck, I read some of the literature on Nanosys and while it becomes clear that it's not a backlight itself, I could see how a layman could be misled.

Examples of, IMO, misleading information:

From http://www.nanosysinc.com/what-we-do/display-backlighting/qdef/:

"They enable deep color and high efficiency by providing displays with an ideal light source." Oh really, sounds like maybe it provides the light source itself. It doesn't!

Or, how about from here http://www.nanosysinc.com/what-we-do/quantum-dots/:

"Quantum dots are actually very powerful devices." Devices? Really? I think device is a stretch....

Or, "Each quantum dot is actually a tiny semiconductor -- which means it can convert incoming energy. The electronic characteristics of quantum dots are determined by their size and shape." Electronic characteristics? It all sounds like I can supply it with power and change its properties on demand, you know, like an "electronic" device. Of course, that's not true...they do hint at that themselves, on the first page, by saying "The dots we produce are tuned to create better color by changing their size during fabrication to emit light at just the right wavelengths." So, OK, once fabricated the color "emitted" by the "device" is fixed. But, there's that word "create" again.... They don't really "create" anything......of course, I guess matter is never created, so, lol....

And here's the best, in big bold letters, "World’s best light emitter" from, http://www.nanosysinc.com/s/Nanosys-QDEF.pdf. COME ON, it emits light? It lets it pass through.... Define emit, "produce and discharge"! Oh yeah, it produces jack $hit!

Even in their quasi-white-paper, http://www.nanosysinc.com/s/QDEF-Inf...splay-8z4n.pdf they say things like, "Quantum dots comprise a new class of material that can be tuned to emit light very efficiently at precise red, green, and blue wavelengths, thus creating an ideal light spectrum for LCDs." Yep, emit and create again....

All-in-all, I think the literature is misleading if taken out-of-context by non-technical folks. And there is a lot of marketeering and bull$hit in most of it for what seems like ultimately another form of light filter. Plus, I felt like someone told them, "better stick OLED in your documents so people find this crap when they are searching for OLED" because there are some very pointless references to it throughout the material. Like, "Similar to OLED materials, quantum dots are sensitive to oxygen and moisture." Oh, who gives a crap?! But, they make sure to have this gem, "by adding QDEF, the display maker can immediately begin producing LCD panels with color and efficiency performance beyond OLEDs, without making changes to established processes." Yay, how about contrast and black-level performance? Yep, not even a contest.

Ugh...but, hey, someone bought into their crap and I suppose they'll make some money. Good for them!

edit: I suppose to be fair, the AT&T documentation here, http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs...lCode=physchem, does say "excited electronic states", but that reads better to me than "electronic characteristics".... Either way, it's a lot of marketing crud for something that's been around since 1990 and really is unlikely to do much to improve LED...though it will make some people at Nanosys rich, so....

Last edited by DreamWarrior; 09-08-2014 at 04:29 PM.
DreamWarrior is offline  
post #17 of 97 Old 09-08-2014, 05:29 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom669 View Post
It's literally a different diffuser film for a backlight. It has NO influence on contrast ratio, at all. No influence on black level or peak white. It will more accurately direct the light through the LCD panel, improving efficiency. It may also improve the colour gamut by blocking less wavelengths (its transmissivity will be closer to ideal.) The actual effect is likely to be negligible.

It's amazing what marketing has done to the TV industry. All buzzwords now, with no meat.
Some one should tell this guy, because he seems very impressed.

http://televisions.reviewed.com/feat...nique-uled-tvs

The thing I want to know is if this ULED has just changed since CES 2014. Imagic and most people that saw the comparison back in January were not as impressed as this guy. Hard to tell from 1080p youtube videos, but to me it was not quite as good in blacks, but had better whites and colors. Not as good as OLED, but close enough for a $2500 4K FLAT 65" WCG 144 zone FALD.

Last edited by sytech; 09-08-2014 at 05:33 PM.
sytech is online now  
post #18 of 97 Old 09-08-2014, 07:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,030
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1038 Post(s)
Liked: 1148
How could they have made any positive assessment of black levels when they said the viewing environment was quite bright?
ONDr and UltraBlack like this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #19 of 97 Old 09-08-2014, 07:36 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 30,286
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
How could they have made any positive assessment of black levels when they said the viewing environment was quite bright?
If you were paid for the review, couldn't you come up with positive things to say, irrespective of conditions?

I'm leaving this up with a line through it, but I want to make clear that I have no reason to question the integrity of the review and regret doing so.

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. (Oh, and plasma didn't die because of logistics problems, nor does OLED ship in big boxes because it comes from Korea.)

Last edited by rogo; 09-10-2014 at 11:21 AM.
rogo is offline  
post #20 of 97 Old 09-08-2014, 07:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
5x10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 791
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 498 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Right, Tom.

The post that quotes 5x10 claiming it's a light valve is quoting a post that is 100% wrong.

There is no light valve function here at all.
I stand corrected, thanks
Sounded too good to be true
5x10 is online now  
post #21 of 97 Old 09-08-2014, 08:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
If you were paid for the review, couldn't you come up with positive things to say, irrespective of conditions?
Is reviewed.com paid? Anyway, I dug up the Hisense PR release from CES Jan 2014 and there was no mention of Quantum Dots, so this does look like an improved model from them at IFA 2014. It did say in the press realease from CES that "in 2014, Hisense plans to further enhance and comprehensively promote the "scene engine" technology, and enrich the U-LED product line to meet market demand worldwide. "
QDs do make some of the Sonys look awfully nice, but they should not effect black levels. The Hisense guys just nodded and said there are now 13 patent pending technologies vs 2 for the CES model.
In the demo at IFA 2014 they had them both side by side in "150 lux convention center booth" and seem to feel the black levels were close. I have no doubt in a darkened room the OLED would be superior, but how much so remains to be seen. All this will probably be just be marketing bluster that will not amount to much, but it should be followed.


http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1286...e-with-oled-tv
sytech is online now  
post #22 of 97 Old 09-09-2014, 03:14 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 1
Colour me skeptical. Quantum Dot sounds like it'll suffer the same fate as FED. OLEd has too many advantages. The super thin profile, the ability to be "printed", and the absolutely perfect picture quality. It's only a matter of time before the equation is solved and OLED trumps all.
babyparrot is offline  
post #23 of 97 Old 09-09-2014, 04:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
tom669's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 955
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reviewed.com
since OLED bottoms out at about 0.001 cd/m2
Told me all I needed to know. Sigh, do they even bother researching stuff like this?

I seem to remember a few years back when LED-LCD was just going into fashion and we had conventional CCFL-LCD that buzz-words had basically become code for "enhances contrast by crushing black and clipping white". Samsung were using DNIe, LG had XD Engine/Picture Master Engine, Panasonic had C.A.T.S... but they really were just contrast/colour enhanchers (which distorted the image more.) People weren't fooled so you saw less and less of it; manufacturers targeted other features like ARC and CEC (which were genuinely useful.)

I thought we got over that, but it seems to be coming back.

Case in point, Samsung's Wide Colour Enhancer Plus (code for Saturation+10%)


Someone looking at that image might naturally assume that it altered the backight in strips behind the panel. But it really is just a plain Jane saturation control, and nothing more.

Samsung's "Micro Dimming" is the worst -- it would seem to imply it does some kind of local backlight control, after all, it "enhances contrast, colour and sharpness in 600 zones across the display." Apparently, unlike ordinary local dimming, which is BAD (don't buy it, naughty consumer!) the Micro Dimming technology goes "deep into the pixels" to control them. Bloody hell, why didn't anyone else think of this before... all this time we'd assumed we had to set the pixels to minimum 1% or they'd burn out, magically Samsung can set them to 0%, making it like OLED!

Things like THIS are the reason the video-phile industry (plasma HDTV) is dying, and might be harmful for OLED when it comes about. If Samsung decides not to support OLED, or tries to use FUD about it, they could kill it. Samsung never liked plasma. It was important for them to stay in the industry (they didn't want to lose market share to Panasonic, or worse, LG) but it wasn't something they wanted to be involved in because the people buying plasmas DID compare beyond the label specifications of 1:1,000,000 contrast ratios and 600Hz drive. Samsung's customers were primarily driven by box specifications and the BB employee regurgitating Micro Dimming taglines.

Keeping LED-LCD as the dominant technology benefits Samsung because it allows them to sell TVs based on loosely defined specifications and software tweaks (like Micro Dimming), rather than any actual performance improvement. In other words, a lot more money to be made than on potentially expensive OLED panels. Samsung is the next Apple.
Turrican4D and XPSTester like this.

Last edited by tom669; 09-09-2014 at 04:49 AM.
tom669 is offline  
post #24 of 97 Old 09-09-2014, 08:33 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 24,030
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1038 Post(s)
Liked: 1148
Quote:
Originally Posted by babyparrot View Post
Colour me skeptical. Quantum Dot sounds like it'll suffer the same fate as FED. OLEd has too many advantages. The super thin profile, the ability to be "printed", and the absolutely perfect picture quality. It's only a matter of time before the equation is solved and OLED trumps all.
And unfortunately, with all that OLED has going for it, it's still no guarantee of survival. Let's hope OLED isn't added to the list of better techs that were killed off by inferior ones.
XPSTester likes this.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #25 of 97 Old 09-09-2014, 12:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom669 View Post
Told me all I needed to know. Sigh, do they even bother researching stuff like this?

I seem to remember a few years back when LED-LCD was just going into fashion and we had conventional CCFL-LCD that buzz-words had basically become code for "enhances contrast by crushing black and clipping white". Samsung were using DNIe, LG had XD Engine/Picture Master Engine, Panasonic had C.A.T.S... but they really were just contrast/colour enhanchers (which distorted the image more.) People weren't fooled so you saw less and less of it; manufacturers targeted other features like ARC and CEC (which were genuinely useful.)

I thought we got over that, but it seems to be coming back.

Case in point, Samsung's Wide Colour Enhancer Plus (code for Saturation+10%)


Someone looking at that image might naturally assume that it altered the backight in strips behind the panel. But it really is just a plain Jane saturation control, and nothing more.

Samsung's "Micro Dimming" is the worst -- it would seem to imply it does some kind of local backlight control, after all, it "enhances contrast, colour and sharpness in 600 zones across the display." Apparently, unlike ordinary local dimming, which is BAD (don't buy it, naughty consumer!) the Micro Dimming technology goes "deep into the pixels" to control them. Bloody hell, why didn't anyone else think of this before... all this time we'd assumed we had to set the pixels to minimum 1% or they'd burn out, magically Samsung can set them to 0%, making it like OLED!

Things like THIS are the reason the video-phile industry (plasma HDTV) is dying, and might be harmful for OLED when it comes about. If Samsung decides not to support OLED, or tries to use FUD about it, they could kill it. Samsung never liked plasma. It was important for them to stay in the industry (they didn't want to lose market share to Panasonic, or worse, LG) but it wasn't something they wanted to be involved in because the people buying plasmas DID compare beyond the label specifications of 1:1,000,000 contrast ratios and 600Hz drive. Samsung's customers were primarily driven by box specifications and the BB employee regurgitating Micro Dimming taglines.

Keeping LED-LCD as the dominant technology benefits Samsung because it allows them to sell TVs based on loosely defined specifications and software tweaks (like Micro Dimming), rather than any actual performance improvement. In other words, a lot more money to be made than on potentially expensive OLED panels. Samsung is the next Apple.

Or the next Nokia.
fafrd is online now  
post #26 of 97 Old 09-09-2014, 12:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 195
It seems to me that we are seeing more the advantage of HDR than of the actual WCG of the Quantum Dots. Like I said, I doubt it is as good as OLED, but at a third of the price it may be goon enough for 90% of the buying public. Like Ken said, it would not be the first time a superior tech has gone down to a cheaper tech with better price/performance ratio.

Here is a link to a bigger pic.
http://uhd-tv.info/wp-content/upload...sense-ULED.jpg



sytech is online now  
post #27 of 97 Old 09-09-2014, 01:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
5x10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 791
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 498 Post(s)
Liked: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post
It seems to me that we are seeing more the advantage of HDR than of the actual WCG of the Quantum Dots. Like I said, I doubt it is as good as OLED, but at a third of the price it may be goon enough for 90% of the buying public. Like Ken said, it would not be the first time a superior tech has gone down to a cheaper tech with better price/performance ratio.

Here is a link to a bigger pic.
http://uhd-tv.info/wp-content/upload...sense-ULED.jpg



lol, that pic is like vegas trying to compare the oled sets
you can tell the oled is washed out and too bright
5x10 is online now  
post #28 of 97 Old 09-09-2014, 02:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dsinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 90
^ Perhaps a good example of why trying to form opinions based upon photos posted here is a bad idea. On my monitor which is calibrated reasonably well the ULED looks like the reds are clipped badly and red saturation is too high. The OLED appears to have much more accurate reds but skin tone has too much luminance.
Ken Ross likes this.
dsinger is offline  
post #29 of 97 Old 09-09-2014, 02:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sytech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 205 Post(s)
Liked: 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5x10 View Post
lol, that pic is like vegas trying to compare the oled sets
you can tell the oled is washed out and too bright
No one is basing it on the picture, but on the many first hand accounts of people that were there in person and said the ULED was fairly impressive. No doubt that is probably the worst calibrated OLED at IFA considering it was a Hisense display, but that does not discount the opinions of guys in the business that the ULED black levels were impressive. I posted the pic more to focus on the HDR of the ULED than of an actual comparison. Again, pics don't mean much but the reviewer that posted this pic was very impressed with black levels that were not crushed, either due to the HDR or WCG.

sytech is online now  
post #30 of 97 Old 09-09-2014, 02:38 PM
Senior Member
 
Weboh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 323
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked: 20
I think it is a comparison between colored liquid crystal and quantum dot technologies. Maybe I will laugh at LG when they dump plasma for OLED. If only the plasma makers could say, we will make them again in 5 years.
Weboh is offline  
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General
Gear in this thread - 55-in. 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