OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 421 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!



Forum Jump: 
 897Likes
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-31-2015, 02:51 AM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Blue lasts the least, but from photos it suggests that the S9C at least (Samsung's original OLED) had the subs sized proportionately to their longevity. This (maybe?) allows them to wear-balance each sub better by driving the blue less hard, etc.
And how would that exactly work? Given that if you were to apply 0.1 amperes of electric current to a gram of blue OLED production-ready material it would yield 40 candelas per square meter and if you were to apply the same net amount of current as in the previous example to two grams of the same emissive material it would still yield about 40 candelas. You cannot just somehow transform 0.1 amperes into more than 40 candelas no matter the amount of material you have.

It's just that it has more material to "burn" through...

....
stas3098 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-31-2015, 06:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,006
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 369 Post(s)
Liked: 357
Amazon's sales rank certainly isnt definitive but here are some numbers giving a sales comparison between LG's 4K OLED's and Samsung's high-end sets.

Sales Rank
65EF9500 4K OLED $5000 #5374
65EG9600 4K OLED $5000 #14973

65JS9500 SUHD $4500 #10536
65JS9000 SUHD $3500 #8037
65JS8500 SUHD $3000 #4090


55EF9500 4K OLED $3000 #5331
55EG9600 4K OLED $3000 #19419

55JS9000 SUHD $2500 #10850
55JS8500 SUHD $1800 #2774

I'm not saying that Amazon is reflective of broader sales as there are all kinds of variables at play once somebody walks into a store (distribution, TV placement, sales incentives, brightness in a store, etc). However, I think it is impressive that the OLED's are significantly outselling the JS9000 series despite a 20% to 40% price premium.

LG's 55" and 65" 4K OLED's should be down to $2000 and $3500 next fall. There just isnt much room for Samsung to price their high-end sets if they want to maintain even a semblance of their current high-end share.
dsinger likes this.
slacker711 is offline  
Old 10-31-2015, 07:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked: 1677
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
How would that exactly work? Given that if you were to apply 0.1 amperes of electric current to a gram of blue OLED production-ready material it would yield 40 candelas per square meter and if you were to apply the same net amount of current as in the previous example to two grams of the same emissive material it would still yield about 40 candelas. You cannot just somehow transform 0.1 amperes into more than 40 candelas no matter the amount of material you have.
Going by that, since it is per square meter if you double the percent of the screen covered by blue (made the blue sub-pixel bigger) the total light reaching viewers doubles, so for the same blue light level to viewers you could reduce the current for blue.

For example, let's say every red sub-pixel was changed to blue. The tv would of course no longer be able to do red, but for the same average cd/m2 for blue over the whole screen the individual blue sub-pixels wouldn't be as bright.

--Darin
darinp2 is offline  
Old 10-31-2015, 08:47 AM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
Going by that, since it is per square meter if you double the percent of the screen covered by blue (made the blue sub-pixel bigger) the total light reaching viewers doubles, so for the same blue light level to viewers you could reduce the current for blue.

For example, let's say every red sub-pixel was changed to blue. The tv would of course no longer be able to do red, but for the same average cd/m2 for blue over the whole screen the individual blue sub-pixels wouldn't be as bright.

--Darin

the total light reaching viewers doubles
, but the luminous intensity doesn't and the radiant intensity per unit solid angle decreases, but at such small scales drops in the radiant intensity are imperceptible to the human eye...

....
stas3098 is offline  
Old 10-31-2015, 09:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wizziwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 1,947
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 774 Post(s)
Liked: 558
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post
However, I think it is impressive that the OLED's are significantly outselling the JS9000 series despite a 20% to 40% price premium.

We've got some members here going through multiple Amazon replacements. Hopefully they're not counting replacement sets shipped out as an additional sale.


At least this shows most people shopping the premium segment prefer flat over curved. Shocker!
Wizziwig is offline  
Old 10-31-2015, 10:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,672
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2214 Post(s)
Liked: 2073
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
And how would that exactly work? Given that if you were to apply 0.1 amperes of electric current to a gram of blue OLED production-ready material it would yield 40 candelas per square meter and if you were to apply the same net amount of current as in the previous example to two grams of the same emissive material it would still yield about 40 candelas. You cannot just somehow transform 0.1 amperes into more than 40 candelas no matter the amount of material you have.

It's just that it has more material to "burn" through...
(?) The wear of any OLED depends upon how much you're driving it. If you were to produce a TV where the (say) red subpixel is 100th the size of the others, in order for it to compete you'd have to overdrive it considerably (using nominal math) 100x. This would burn that thing out in no time.

Thought #AUO: The IOC seems to have made the same obnoxious mistake that FIFA did. They honestly believe that they are more powerful than governments. Oh are they ever going to regret that soon.
tgm1024 is offline  
Old 10-31-2015, 10:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,672
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2214 Post(s)
Liked: 2073
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post

the total light reaching viewers doubles
, but the luminous intensity doesn't
Per area, yes it does. Take a subpixel of a certain size. Now keep it at the same "luminos intensity" (to use your phrasing), but make it 1/4th the size. There is now effectively a dimmer sub, 1/4th of what it was.

While it's true that a very dim subpixel can't be made the size of a wall and convince you that any one area of it is "bright", within the dimensions of a single sub, if you use all of it for illumination it'll appear brighter than if you use only part of it for illumination.

Thought #AUO: The IOC seems to have made the same obnoxious mistake that FIFA did. They honestly believe that they are more powerful than governments. Oh are they ever going to regret that soon.

Last edited by tgm1024; 10-31-2015 at 10:51 AM.
tgm1024 is offline  
Old 10-31-2015, 12:47 PM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Per area, yes it does. Take a subpixel of a certain size. Now keep it at the same "luminos intensity" (to use your phrasing), but make it 1/4th the size. There is now effectively a dimmer sub, 1/4th of what it was.

While it's true that a very dim subpixel can't be made the size of a wall and convince you that any one area of it is "bright", within the dimensions of a single sub,if you use all of it for illumination it'll appear brighter than if you use only part of it for illumination.
And what method are you using to calculate the luminous intensity?

....
stas3098 is offline  
Old 10-31-2015, 03:55 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked: 1677
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
And what method are you using to calculate the luminous intensity?
I would like to understand your position and an answer to this question might help:

If somebody put up a full 100% blue image with one of the 4K OLEDs, then put black paint over 90% of the area of each blue sub-pixel, how would that change the perception of blue to a viewer far enough away to not be able to make up any pixel structure?

You can ignore that painting over those would take a long time as it is s theoretical question.

--Darin
tgm1024 likes this.
darinp2 is offline  
Old 11-01-2015, 12:11 AM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
I would like to understand your position and an answer to this question might help:

If somebody put up a full 100% blue image with one of the 4K OLEDs, then put black paint over 90% of the area of each blue sub-pixel, how would that change the perception of blue to a viewer far enough away to not be able to make up any pixel structure?

You can ignore that painting over those would take a long time as it is s theoretical question.

--Darin
Are you talking here about photometry or radiometry? 'Cause it's hard to tell.

But, anyway if you are talking photometry, then the luminous flux will decrease by 90 percent...

My position on the luminous intensity is best described in the following article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_intensity

....
stas3098 is offline  
Old 11-01-2015, 06:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,672
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2214 Post(s)
Liked: 2073
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
Are you talking here about photometry or radiometry? 'Cause it's hard to tell.

But, anyway if you are talking photometry, then the luminous flux will decrease by 90 percent...

My position on the luminous intensity is best described in the following article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_intensity
Did you write that page? The entire first part of it (until the discussion of units) is completely unattributed.

And it doesn't matter anyway: you're getting lost in the terms. Take Darin's example of covering up all the subs to a large degree. What do you see?

And if what you see is the effect of a dimmer sub, then having it UNcovered results in a brighter sub. And if so, then how come using a larger sub doesn't make it brighter than a smaller one?

Thought #AUO: The IOC seems to have made the same obnoxious mistake that FIFA did. They honestly believe that they are more powerful than governments. Oh are they ever going to regret that soon.

Last edited by tgm1024; 11-01-2015 at 06:23 AM.
tgm1024 is offline  
Old 11-01-2015, 10:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked: 1677
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
Are you talking here about photometry or radiometry? 'Cause it's hard to tell.
The way I meant it is if you took a group of people off the street and showed them this (maybe with mechanical shutters to block parts of the pixels quickly) what would they tell you as far as how their perception changed? And to add another step, if you kept 90% of the pixel area blocked, is there anything you could do to get their perceptions of the images back to about where they were before as far as perception?

Might be easier to think of 2 displays side by side, both showing a blue screen, but with 1 having shutters that block 90% of each blue pixel.

--Darin
darinp2 is offline  
Old 11-01-2015, 11:40 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked: 1677
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
My position on the luminous intensity is best described in the following article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_intensity
Okay, same question as before except now instead of people off the street use a light meter placed at a normal viewing distance from the screen and set it to read in cd/m2. How would the readings on the meter change as you opened and closed shutters that either let all of the light through for each pixel or less than all the light?

It seems like you are focusing on the cd/m2 at the very small level (even smaller than pixels) and ignoring how viewers and meters from a distance integrate those over more image area.

--Darin

Last edited by darinp2; 11-01-2015 at 11:48 AM.
darinp2 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 02:02 AM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
to
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
Okay, same question as before except now instead of people off the street use a light meter placed at a normal viewing distance from the screen and set it to read in cd/m2. How would the readings on the meter change as you opened and closed shutters that either let all of the light through for each pixel or less than all the light?

It seems like you are focusing on the cd/m2 at the very small level (even smaller than pixels) and ignoring how viewers and meters from a distance integrate those over more image area.

--Darin
Swa Ic gesægde, seo gesene beorhtnis wolde bi 90% gewanian. Ac hit is cuþ feor and neor, þæt seo beorhtnis þone flewsan currentan electrican onhangaþ (Wie gesagt, die wahrnehmbare Helligkeit um 90 Prozent fallen würde. Aber es bekannt ist, dass die Helligkeit hängt von der elektrischen Stromstärke ab.). Swa gif ane pixel helende bi 90% is, þonne þara beorhtnisse his wanaþ swa sama met, ac gif man geiceaþ þone flewsan currentan electrican to him bi 90%, þonne hit biþ swa breorht swa to-fore,


Like I said, the perceivable brightness would decrease by 90 percent. But it is well known that the brightness is dependent upon the flow of electric current (in OLEDs). And so if 90 percent of a pixel were to be blocked out then the brightness of it would decrease by the same amount, but if you were to increase the flow of electric current to it by 90 percent then it would be as bright as before.

....

Last edited by stas3098; 11-02-2015 at 02:29 AM.
stas3098 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 04:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked: 1677
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
Like I said, the perceivable brightness would decrease by 90 percent. But it is well known that the brightness is dependent upon the flow of electric current (in OLEDs). And so if 90 percent of a pixel were to be blocked out then the brightness of it would decrease by the same amount, but if you were to increase the flow of electric current to it by 90 percent then it would be as bright as before.
It seems like you agree that giving more area to the blue sub-pixel allows it to be driven with less current for the same average cd/m2 off the screen from a normal viewing distance.

Do you still disagree with:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Blue lasts the least, but from photos it suggests that the S9C at least (Samsung's original OLED) had the subs sized proportionately to their longevity. This (maybe?) allows them to wear-balance each sub better by driving the blue less hard, etc.
BTW: If the light is proportional to the current then in my example the current would need to be raised 900% when 90% of the sub-pixel is blocked. Or raised 100% (doubled) if 50% of the sub-pixel was blocked.

--Darin
UltraBlack likes this.
darinp2 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 04:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,006
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 369 Post(s)
Liked: 357
Lots of interesting info about LGD's OLED plans.

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/focus.ph...&id=1446462482


Quote:
Exclusive: LG talks future of OLED & first details on 2016 OLED TVs
rogo and madtapper like this.
slacker711 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 06:17 AM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
It seems like you agree that giving more area to the blue sub-pixel allows it to be driven with less current for the same average cd/m2 off the screen from a normal viewing distance.

Do you still disagree with:


BTW: If the light is proportional to the current then in my example the current would need to be raised 900% when 90% of the sub-pixel is blocked. Or raised 100% (doubled) if 50% of the sub-pixel was blocked.

--Darin
Now tell me this, if you were to cover 90 percent of your monitor with a cloth cut out of a material that can block out 100 percent of light, the perceived brightness of the remaining 10 percent would stay the same, would it not? Yes, it would and the reason why lies in the following passsage:

Luminous intensity should not be confused with another photometric unit, luminous flux, which is the total perceived power emitted in all directions. Luminous intensity is the perceived power per unit solid angle. If a lamp has a 1 lumen bulb and the optics of the lamp are set up to focus the light evenly into a 1 steradian beam, then the beam would have a luminous intensity of 1 candela. If the optics were changed to concentrate the beam into 1/2 steradian then the source would have a luminous intensity of 2 candela. The resulting beam is narrower and brighter, though its luminous flux remains unchanged.

And tell me this, if you had a 1nm pixel that was driven at 0.1 microamperes and a 2nm pixel driven at the same amperage, which one do you think would appear brighter, the small one or the big one? The small one would appear twice as bright... and in order for the 2nm pixel to appear as bright it would have to be driven twice as hard.

....
stas3098 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 07:11 AM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Blue lasts the least, but from photos it suggests that the S9C at least (Samsung's original OLED) had the subs sized proportionately to their longevity. This (maybe?) allows them to wear-balance each sub better by driving the blue less hard, etc.
Just for the record:

In a PenTile display, there are only two subpixels per pixel, with twice as many green pixels than red and blue ones (see the image above). This enables larger sub-pixels, and a higher aperture ratio (or fill factor - the ratio of active area to nonactive area). This reduces the current density required to achieve a given luminance - which improves lifetime.

http://www.oled-info.com/nouvoyance-...ds-last-longer

And let's end this discussion at this very note.

....

Last edited by stas3098; 11-02-2015 at 07:15 AM.
stas3098 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 07:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,672
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2214 Post(s)
Liked: 2073
Now I'm really confused. Are you agreeing now?

Also, while you didn't say this specifically, to be clear to others reading this: the S9C is not a Pentile display.

Thought #AUO: The IOC seems to have made the same obnoxious mistake that FIFA did. They honestly believe that they are more powerful than governments. Oh are they ever going to regret that soon.
tgm1024 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 07:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,672
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2214 Post(s)
Liked: 2073
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
And tell me this, if you had a 1nm pixel that was driven at 0.1 microamperes and a 2nm pixel driven at the same amperage, which one do you think would appear brighter, the small one or the big one? The small one would appear twice as bright... and in order for the 2nm pixel to appear as bright it would have to be driven twice as hard.
You're still getting lost in this. Of course if you spread out the current draw over a larger emitter you'll get a dimmer output. The issue is what happens given the fixed area a subpixel has (along with the region between it and its neighbors).

Thought #AUO: The IOC seems to have made the same obnoxious mistake that FIFA did. They honestly believe that they are more powerful than governments. Oh are they ever going to regret that soon.
tgm1024 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 07:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked: 1677
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
Now tell me this, if you were to cover 90 percent of your monitor with a cloth cut out of a material that can block out 100 percent of light, the perceived brightness of the remaining 10 percent would stay the same, would it not? Yes ...
It would, but that is different than blocking 90% of each pixel and viewing from a distance, or you shouldn't have said that case makes the images look dimmer.
Quote:
And tell me this, if you had a 1nm pixel that was driven at 0.1 microamperes and a 2nm pixel driven at the same amperage, which one do you think would appear brighter, the small one or the big one? The small one would appear twice as bright... and in order for the 2nm pixel to appear as bright it would have to be driven twice as hard.
You lost me on that one. This wouldn't be a case where you have to double the voltage to maintain the same current and then have double the power and light output? Wouldn't the bigger pixel have twice the resistance and so twice the power for the same current from power equals current squared times the resistance?

What if we thought of it as two 1nm pixels each drawing 0.1 microampspheres? They could be in series with twice the voltage across them or in parallel with the same voltage.

I'm also unclear as to whether we disagree at this point. If I am just missing something I would prefer to find out what that is.

--Darin

Last edited by darinp2; 11-02-2015 at 08:30 AM.
darinp2 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 08:59 AM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
Now I'm really confused. Are you agreeing now?

Also, while you didn't say this specifically, to be clear to others reading this: the S9C is not a Pentile display.
I don't know, I am myself really confused... and it would appear as though ours is not to reason why.

....
stas3098 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 09:47 AM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
fo
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
It would, but that is different than blocking 90% of each pixel and viewing from a distance, or you shouldn't have said that case makes the images look dimmer.You lost me on that one. This wouldn't be a case where you have to double the voltage to maintain the same current and then have double the power and light output? Wouldn't the bigger pixel have twice the resistance and so twice the power for the same current from power equals current squared times the resistance?

What if we thought of it as two 1nm pixels each drawing 0.1 microampspheres? They could be in series with twice the voltage across them or in parallel with the same voltage.

I'm also unclear as to whether we disagree at this point. If I am just missing something I would prefer to find out what that is.

--Darin
I don't know... okay.

....
stas3098 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 10:00 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked: 1677
Quote:
Originally Posted by stas3098 View Post
I don't know, I am myself really confused... and it would appear as though ours is not to reason why.
I think part of the issue might be that we need to consider how the human visual system takes area into account. If you are at a normal viewing ratio and put up a one inch square piece of blue paper you can't make it seem twice as bright just by putting another one inch square next to it. The human visual system is sensing the amount of light per area.

However, if you put up an extremely small blue emitter so that we sense no area you can put an equal emitter right next to it and we will perceive the point source we see as brighter.

For example, consider 2 optical fibers right next to each other putting out blue at the same intensity each and viewing from a distance where a human couldn't tell that there were 2 light sources. Now blink one of them on and off. Would a human be able to tell that the 1 light it sees is getting brighter and dimmer? I would say that they would even if they couldn't tell you which of the 2 fibers was staying on.

The same kind of thing would work with lights on poles at a far enough distance that a human only perceived one light.

We can also consider what would happen to the peak blue cd/m2 for an OLED display if every sub-pixel got a blue filter instead of giving some of them green and red filters.

BTW: I view discussions like this where we don't start out agreeing, but stay civil, as a good part of AVS. Makes me think.

--Darin

Last edited by darinp2; 11-02-2015 at 10:03 AM.
darinp2 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 10:48 AM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
And just to try and clarify a tiny bit, say, you had a blue sub-pixel that was twice as large than the other two sub-pixels and in that case it would have to be driven at the approximately same current level as if it were a "normal" sized sub (say 0.15 amp) to render the color white... or in other words, it has to be driven less hard in terms of current density, or twice as less hard to be exact, when it is used to "display" the pure white at 100 candelas in combination with two other subs (for if you were to drive it at, say, 0.2 amp the white would be heavily skewed towards the blue), but to display the pure blue at 100 candelas it has to be driven at 0.3 amp becasue it is twice as large, or yet in another words, the current density for the blue sub when it displays the pure blue at 100 candelas would have to roughly be equivalent to the current density for the red and green sub-pixels when they display the pure green and red, respectively, at 100 candelas ... this is what I was trying to get across.

....

Last edited by stas3098; 11-02-2015 at 11:07 AM.
stas3098 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 11:20 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,421
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked: 1677
You lost me on that last one (I would have to look closer), but for clarity, are you talking about cd/m2 for just the pixel area or cd/m2 for a large screen area? In my example of blocking 90% of a pixels area the part still showing has the same cd/m2 as before, but for a larger screen area the cd/m2 went down.

I'm also not convinced about having to double the current for double the pixel size to have double the average light level over the whole screen. The voltage I agree, but I think the current would be the same for twice as bright per square foot of display area with the same total resolution, just like 2 sub-pixels in series. Not sure if this helps the discussion:

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...5142553AANqlJ6

Also, pure blue at 100% video level for white shouldn't change whether the image is supposed to be blue or white. Either way the blue portion should be about 7 cd/m2 if white is 100 cd/m2 and using REC.709.

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Last edited by darinp2; 11-02-2015 at 11:24 AM.
darinp2 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 11:23 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Northern NJ, USA
Posts: 416
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 260 Post(s)
Liked: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post
You lost me on that one.
My point was that if the gov't decides "it's for the best" for something to happen...nothing is there to stop them from making it happen. Who cares if it is "fair" to any particular company involved. (After all, companies, espcially large successful ones who are profitable are basically "evil", right?)

If the gov't believes that it is "right" to force Microsoft to "decouple" internet explorer from its OS to make it "better for consumers" ...they will force MS to do it through fines, court orders to stop selling the product, etc.

If the gov't believes that it is "in the best interests for consumers", it will "force" some kind of agreement between LG Display and Samsung Display to share patents.

Again, I'm not saying this is the case here...just responding to an earlier poster who said he didn't see how the gov't could do something like that. They do it all the time.
JoeyBagadonuts is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 11:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 9,672
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2214 Post(s)
Liked: 2073
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
You lost me on that last one (I would have to look closer), but for clarity, are you talking about cd/m2 for just the pixel area or cd/m2 for a large screen area? In my example of blocking 90% of a pixels area the part still showing has the same cd/m2 as before, but for a larger screen area the cd/m2 went down.

I'm also not convinced about having to double the current for double the pixel size to have double the average light level over the whole screen. The voltage I agree, but I think the current would be the same for twice as bright per square foot of display area with the same total resolution, just like 2 sub-pixels in series. Not sure if this helps the discussion:
This was a topic of considerable disagreement a while ago. I wish he would chime in, because I'm going to butcher what he said, but @xrox pointed out that even though the electron-hole recombination is what produces the light (leading to the argument that it's essentially an amp machine), it's still voltage that drives the process. Took a few PMs with him for me to get this one right myself---I don't believe there's an easy series/parallel analogy for this one.

Thought #AUO: The IOC seems to have made the same obnoxious mistake that FIFA did. They honestly believe that they are more powerful than governments. Oh are they ever going to regret that soon.
tgm1024 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 12:54 PM
Senior Member
 
stas3098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 156 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post
You lost me on that last one (I would have to look closer), but for clarity, are you talking about cd/m2 for just the pixel area or cd/m2 for a large screen area? In my example of blocking 90% of a pixels area the part still showing has the same cd/m2 as before, but for a larger screen area the cd/m2 went down.

I'm also not convinced about having to double the current for double the pixel size to have double the average light level over the whole screen. The voltage I agree, but I think the current would be the same for twice as bright per square foot of display area with the same total resolution, just like 2 sub-pixels in series. Not sure if this helps the discussion:

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...5142553AANqlJ6

Also, pure blue at 100% video level for white shouldn't change whether the image is supposed to be blue or white. Either way the blue portion should be about 7 cd/m2 if white is 100 cd/m2 and using REC.709.

--Darin
I meant cd/m2 per pixel.

OLEDs are current-driven, an increase in voltage is not going to make a whole lot of difference there. OLEDs are electroluminescent meaning that light is produced through the process of recombination of holes and electrons. OLED transistors, usually n-type, include a source and a drain (they don't really use any more the old school cathode and anode terminology). The source, as a rule, is a bottom electrode and the drain is the top one, but other arrangements are possible, and so each transistor has two electrodes which feed it electric current.

In the usual arrangement of an OLED device, the source induces the flow of holes and the drain of electrons under the action of electric current, i.e. the source electrode feeds the electric current to the hole transport layer and the drain feeds the electron transport layer, and when the holes and the electrons recombine in the emissive layer photons are released. In most cases, though, those photons are invisible at the moment of emission, but due to phosphorescence/florescence of the organic matter in the emitter the invisible light is converted into the visible light.

Well, it's about the current in OLEDs. The higher the current the more holes and elections can recombine per unit time and the photons can be released, ergo the higher the current, the brighter the output (light).

....
stas3098 is offline  
Old 11-02-2015, 03:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 1912
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post
Lots of interesting info about LGD's OLED plans.

http://www.flatpanelshd.com/focus.ph...&id=1446462482
Nothing really new.

The increased brightness and ~100% DCI-P3 gamut were already disclosed. It's a pity we are not seeing any leaks surrounding improved motion performance (BFI)...

The larger 99" size has also more or less been leaked, but I am more or less expecting for that to be a 'bragging rights' only demonstration at CES 2016 while LG focuses on actually productizing the 77" (meaning a simple, flat version with no bells and whistles and a back-down-to-earth price)...
fafrd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
 

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


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