OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 454 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 1150Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #13591 of 13925 Old 12-28-2016, 03:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Quote:Originally Posted by tgm1024 

No, I could be wrong, but I don't believe that's what sony is saying. There is an efficiency issue by discarding waves that subtract other ones. I'll have to ask my color scientist friend about this---he's on the bleeding edge of this degree of optics.

From the quote below, it looks like (I am guessing, mind you) Sony is trying to effectively "tune" the anode/cathode distances so that the only light that really wants to escape are the waves that peak at the same time. Basically the ones that are not only the same precise frequency, but also likely the ones in phase. I believe the reason for this might be because when you have subtle out of phase (and varying wavelength) added together, you end up with them subtracting each other.

It sort of reminds me of tuned exhaust on a car. Trying to line it up with the pulse precisely.

There's an entire field related to electrical resonance that I don't fully understand......it's part of how transmitters work.


TGM, I'm going to just accept that everything you wrote is mostly true as pertains to what I'm writing next:

It still doesn't prove Samsung is doing bottom emission and I don't believe they are. And Sony is claiming bottom emission = bad like "everyone else" is doing it when it seems like that idea has already been discredited.

Now it's possible that some of Sony's voodoo is why they don't need a polarizer and it's possible that Samsung still needs one. Other than ambient rejection, however, I can't see why that would be true. You don't need to polarize the light coming out; the only reason LCDs do that at all is because LC material can't block non-polarized light.
Found this old post of Rogo's from 2014.

Is the only reason LG WOLED uses a polarizer for ambient rejection? (As well as 'free' passive 3D )?

If LG were to adopt motheye, could they skip the polarizer (at the cost of losing 3D)?

I'm a pretty big fan of LG's passive 3D on OLED now but I would probably give it up in exchange for.25-30% increase in brightness coupled with a purer RGB color gamut exceeding 90% Rec.2020...
fafrd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #13592 of 13925 Old 12-29-2016, 10:41 AM
Senior Member
 
ynotgoal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 219
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Liked: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
I found this on LGs current WOLED manufacturing: http://www.lg.com/global/business/do...es/id/OLED.pdf

LED/LCD requires an inner and an outer polarizing layer to make the LCD lightvalves function properly, and so from that point of view, passive 3D capability comes 'for free' (no additional manufacturing cost).

This presentation indicates that LG OLED also uses an outermost polarizing filter but I don't believe it is required for the technology to function (as it is in the case of LCD).

Is a polarizing filter effectively required to reduce reflections/glare?

Is it only being used so that LG can offer 3D?
The polarizing film on OLED is only to reduce reflections, not for 3D or any other reasons. The reason this is currently required is OLEDs are "bottom emission" where the light is emitted through the bottom and there is a reflective film to redirect the light back out through the display. See link.
https://technology.ihs.com/509943/wh...-use-polarizer
There are reports that LG is switching to "top emission" which means no reflective film and no need for a polarizer. It would, as you suggest, increase brightness as well. We'll have to see if that is done in this years model.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
The LED/LCD-based use of QDCF will use blue LEDs in the backlight, so that Red and Green QDCF are all that is needed to produce a color display.

For WOLED, it seems as though there would be three options:

1/ mix Red and Green QDCF with standard blue color filter and leave the OLED stack as is (idea originated by video_analysis)

2/ switch OLED layer to Blue-only (BOLED ) and shadow the R+G QDCF approach being introduced by Samsung and Nanosys.

3/ wait for a viable blue QDCF ink.

If the BOLED+R&G QDCF approach is as feasible as it looks (assuming piggy-backing on industrialization.for LED/LCD), it seems as though it would offer a 'free' 25-50% boost in lumens output while at the same time delivering a purer R, G, B output akin to what the now-dead Samsung OLED TVs were delivering.

Am I missing something here? Would a blue-only OLED have much shorter lifetime than LGs current WOLED Blue+Yellow stack?

Nanosys is making it sound as though they have photoresistive red and greed QD-based color filter inks in the bag: http://www.displaydaily.com/article/...mo-at-ces-2017

If so, it seems as though this could offer a significant benefit to LGs single-sheet OLED approach.

Am I wrong to be getting excited about this?
For your 3 cases.
1. Red/Green QDCF applied to current OLED
I suppose this is possible though I'm not sure it's necessary and have no idea if LG is looking at it. The polarizer issue wouldn't be a factor here. I'm not sure it's accurate to say red and green QDCF are "in the bag" just yet. Maybe soon but not this year whereas OLED materials (particularly red and probably green) are becoming available now that support Rec 2020 on their own. There is really not much difference in blue between the various color spaces including DCI and Rec 2020.
2. Using a blue only OLED layer
This would be using the least efficient and shortest lifetime material. This isn't practical unless there's a really long life phosphorescent blue material which doesn't yet exist. Yes, the current blue fluorescent OLED material on it's own would have a shorter lifetime than LG's current WRGB blue+yellow stack.
3. Wait for a viable blue QDCF
The wait for a viable blue QDCF is probably a longer wait than for a viable blue phosphorescent OLED.
rogo, ALMA, tgm1024 and 1 others like this.
ynotgoal is offline  
post #13593 of 13925 Old 12-29-2016, 11:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Sorry, chances are excellent that you're an idiot.
Posts: 9,806
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2465 Post(s)
Liked: 2241
Quote:
Originally Posted by ynotgoal View Post
The polarizing film on OLED is only to reduce reflections, not for 3D or any other reasons. The reason this is currently required is OLEDs are "bottom emission" where the light is emitted through the bottom and there is a reflective film to redirect the light back out through the display. See link.
https://technology.ihs.com/509943/wh...-use-polarizer
There are reports that LG is switching to "top emission" which means no reflective film and no need for a polarizer. It would, as you suggest, increase brightness as well. We'll have to see if that is done in this years model.

Thank you for that fascinating link. I'm confused though.

According to the use of circular polarization:

Does this:
1. Complicate the use of or placement of the FPR? (Does the reflection polarizer need to match the every-other scanline of the FPR so that they don't accidentally get cancelled out?)
2. Can this be accomplished entirely by a redesigned FPR managing dual duty of everything you mentioned plus 3D every-other circular polarization?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	OLED using polarizer.png
Views:	1557
Size:	145.4 KB
ID:	1860921  

Thought #EAA: I wonder how many people know that no one ever says "What we've got here is a failure to communicate." in the movie "Cool Hand Luke" (1967).

Last edited by tgm1024; 12-29-2016 at 12:25 PM.
tgm1024 is offline  
 
post #13594 of 13925 Old 12-29-2016, 12:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Quote:
Originally Posted by ynotgoal View Post
The polarizing film on OLED is only to reduce reflections, not for 3D or any other reasons. The reason this is currently required is OLEDs are "bottom emission" where the light is emitted through the bottom and there is a reflective film to redirect the light back out through the display. See link.
https://technology.ihs.com/509943/wh...-use-polarizer
There are reports that LG is switching to "top emission" which means no reflective film and no need for a polarizer. It would, as you suggest, increase brightness as well. We'll have to see if that is done in this years model.
Very helpful post - thanks.

So a polarizer is needed with OLED to reduce reflections of incoming unwanted light - clear. I suspect the polarizer LG is using may also be allowing them to deliver passive 3D 'for free' but it really doesn't matter whether this is supported by a single polarizer or an additional polarizer. The key point for this discussion is that WOLED does require a polarizer but it can be located on the outermost surface even in the case of QDCF (versus LED/LCD QDCF where it must be moved to the interior of the QDCF).

Quote:
For your 3 cases.
1. Red/Green QDCF applied to current OLED
I suppose this is possible though I'm not sure it's necessary and have no idea if LG is looking at it. The polarizer issue wouldn't be a factor here. I'm not sure it's accurate to say red and green QDCF are "in the bag" just yet.
The LED/LCD fanboys are certainly considering it is 'in the bag' but even if it takes another 2-3 years to industrialize, the point is LG WOLED can make use of the same technology relatively easily and so this is not much of a medium-term threat...

Quote:
Maybe soon but not this year whereas OLED materials (particularly red and probably green) are becoming available now that support Rec 2020 on their own. There is really not much difference in blue between the various color spaces including DCI and Rec 2020.
If the new OLED materials support the same narrow spectra R, G, and B that can be supported by blue LEDs with Red & Green QDs, this would obviously be preferable to adopting new technologies and materials.

But the current yellow used in the 2 or 3 layer stack does not deliver narrow-spectrum red and blue, correct?

So if LG wants to approach R&G QD+Blue LED-like RGB spectra, they will need to change to a narrow-spectra R+G+B stack, correct?

Quote:
2. Using a blue only OLED layer
This would be using the least efficient and shortest lifetime material. This isn't practical unless there's a really long life phosphorescent blue material which doesn't yet exist. Yes, the current blue fluorescent OLED material on it's own would have a shorter lifetime than LG's current WRGB blue+yellow stack.
OK, so a BOLED would offer too short of a lifetime to be worthwhile and this means LG's unpatterned architecture will continue to waste ~2/3s of the light produced in the red, green and blue sub pixels (even after yellow is replaced with narrow-spectra red+green).

Quote:
3. Wait for a viable blue QDCF
The wait for a viable blue QDCF is probably a longer wait than for a viable blue phosphorescent OLED.
Got it, thanks. And so that is the reason 'true' QLED is far off in the future.

And to recap your overall view of where we are today and where we are likely to be tomorrow, a narrow-spectra R+G+B OLED stack is likely to materialize as quickly or more quickly than a R+B QDCF w/ Blue LED LCD (and way before there is any chance of a true QLED TV being industrialized), right?

Thanks again for taking the time to explain .

Last edited by fafrd; 12-29-2016 at 12:05 PM.
fafrd is offline  
post #13595 of 13925 Old 12-29-2016, 01:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
RoadLizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Upstate, NY
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 679 Post(s)
Liked: 552
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
Found this old post of Rogo's from 2014.

Is the only reason LG WOLED uses a polarizer for ambient rejection? (As well as 'free' passive 3D )?

If LG were to adopt motheye, could they skip the polarizer (at the cost of losing 3D)?

I'm a pretty big fan of LG's passive 3D on OLED now but I would probably give it up in exchange for.25-30% increase in brightness coupled with a purer RGB color gamut exceeding 90% Rec.2020...
Hmmm. Tough call there. I didnt think Id enjoy the 3D as much as I have but its so damned good on this set that its hard to think about giving it up. Id rather keep the 3D since I feel the PQ is extremely good as is. Sure, extra brightness for certain use cases would also be great but Id hate to lose 3D!
tgm1024 and j.p.s like this.

LG OLED65E6P, Samsung PN64H5000
Samsung UBD-8500K, LG BD 570
Polk RTi Towers, STi surrounds
Polk Subwoofer
Sony DH550 AVR
RoadLizard is offline  
post #13596 of 13925 Old 12-29-2016, 02:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
In case these hasn't been posted on the thread yet: http://www.oled-info.com/cynora%E2%8...ithin-one-year

And: http://www.oled-info.com/cynora-late...y-and-lifetime

"CYNORA’s TADF emitters ready for industrial test within one year

In 2016, TADF (Thermally Activated Delayed Fluorescence) emitters have received much attention in the OLED industry as the most promising method to improve OLED displays."

"Cynora latest TADF blue emitters feature higher efficiency and lifetime

Germany-based blue-TADF OLED emitter developer Cynora announced that it developed a new blue-emitting material that combines high efficiency with long lifetime. Cynora's new material offers an external quantum efficiency (EQE) of 14% and a lifetime of 420 hours (LT80, at 500 cd/m2).

In May 2016 Cynora announced two blue emitter systems - with one featuring a high efficiency and the other a long lifetime. This time Cynora managed to create a single system with both efficiency and lifetime. The company says that they are optimistic that they will reach a commercial TADF blue emitter by the end of 2017."

Last edited by fafrd; 12-29-2016 at 02:39 PM.
fafrd is offline  
post #13597 of 13925 Old 12-29-2016, 03:32 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 28
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
"CYNORA’s TADF emitters ready for industrial test within one year

In 2016, TADF (Thermally Activated Delayed Fluorescence) emitters have received much attention in the OLED industry as the most promising method to improve OLED displays."

"Cynora latest TADF blue emitters feature higher efficiency and lifetime

Germany-based blue-TADF OLED emitter developer Cynora announced that it developed a new blue-emitting material that combines high efficiency with long lifetime. Cynora's new material offers an external quantum efficiency (EQE) of 14% and a lifetime of 420 hours (LT80, at 500 cd/m2).

In May 2016 Cynora announced two blue emitter systems - with one featuring a high efficiency and the other a long lifetime. This time Cynora managed to create a single system with both efficiency and lifetime. The company says that they are optimistic that they will reach a commercial TADF blue emitter by the end of 2017."
420 hours is less than a year of viewing for most TV purchasers, I think.

Also, what would be the expected elapsed time between "start of industrial testing" and on the shelf at Best Buy?
j.p.s is offline  
post #13598 of 13925 Old 12-29-2016, 03:40 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Quote:
Originally Posted by j.p.s View Post
420 hours is less than a year of viewing for most TV purchasers, I think.
I think that's correct, but apparently that result represented an increase of more than 5000x over a 12- month span: http://www.businesswire.com/news/hom...ghly-Efficient

"the company is using sky blue material to improve the device lifetime. A significant increase in the lifetime to more than 400 h (LT50, 500 cd/m2) has recently been achieved from a level of a few minutes in last October."

420 hours / 5 minutes = 5040...


Quote:
Also, what would be the expected elapsed time between "start of industrial testing" and on the shelf at Best Buy?
Others on the thread can comment with more authority, but my guess would be 2-3 years...

Last edited by fafrd; 12-29-2016 at 04:43 PM.
fafrd is offline  
post #13599 of 13925 Old 12-30-2016, 01:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Ratings.com is taking an note resting and appropriate approach to characterizing peak brightness: http://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/pictu...eak-brightness

Their measurements show that the B6 is capable of 745 cd/m2 on a 2% window.

Since HDR content is apparently being mastered to an APL of 80 or 120 cd/m2, it would seem as though power-supply-related concerns are misplaced. Even with the most extreme HDR highlights imaginable, power consumption should be easily manageable (and existing ABL protection should suffice if not ).

So this raises the question of what maximum peak light output is possible from a single/few WOLED subpixels before eccessive image retention, burn-in, or other forms of irreparable damage become a concern.

2% is actually a very large window and not necessarily appropriate for small bright highlights. 2% corresponds to an area of over 30"-squared on a 65" screen, and highlights down to 1"-squared are probably going to be more frequent (less than 0.05%).

So would anyone have a guess as to the maximum output LG WOLED could generate over an 0.05% / 1"-squared area before causing pixel damage?
fafrd is offline  
post #13600 of 13925 Old 12-31-2016, 02:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JazzGuyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Oro Valley AZ
Posts: 3,192
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 310
But what happens when there are multiple very bright specular highlights on the screen?

JazzGuyy is online now  
post #13601 of 13925 Old 01-01-2017, 02:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Quote:
Originally Posted by ynotgoal View Post
For your 3 cases.
1. Red/Green QDCF applied to current OLED
I suppose this is possible though I'm not sure it's necessary and have no idea if LG is looking at it. The polarizer issue wouldn't be a factor here. I'm not sure it's accurate to say red and green QDCF are "in the bag" just yet. Maybe soon but not this year whereas OLED materials (particularly red and probably green) are becoming available now that support Rec 2020 on their own. There is really not much difference in blue between the various color spaces including DCI and Rec 2020.
I just ran into this: https://www.osapublishing.org/jdt/ab...i=jdt-12-6-526

"Abstract
Quantum dot (QD) nanocrystals dispersed in photoresist (PR) film was developed and applied to white organic light-emitting diode (OLED) to improve optical power of red color through down-converting of blue and green light. To integrate to white OLED display panel, the QD dispersed photoresist film was prepared in a thickness of 2 $\mu{m}$ with high concentration of QDs up to 30 wt%. QDs were dispersed successfully in PR with a matching of nonpolar characteristic for the ligands of QDs and PR as well as a careful mixing process of PR and QD dispersed solutions. We also realized the patterning of QD dispersed PR film with a stripe pattern of 60-$\mu{m}$ width without a residual layer. The experimental measurement after passing through a 30 wt% QD dispersed PR film and a red color filter in white OLED shows the enhancement of 40.2% in the optical power of red color compared to that from a conventional white OLED without QD dispersed PR film

The article is dated 2016 and the authors are Korean, so there is a good chance that LG sponsored this research and/or is involved in it.

A photo-resist-based QD red color filter means deposition/patterning of this color filter would probably be a cookie-cutter replacement for current conventional photoresist-based red color filter.

While your earlier comment makes clear that OLED-material-based approaches are also in development that can also deliver increased color gamut approaching Rec.2020, I think that is overlooking the other attractive benefit of QDCF for WOLED: increased efficiency.

As this article points out, red output can be increased to 140% by using red QDCF. Ignoring green for the moment, this means overall WRGB light output increase ~107%. For example, the red subpixels could be reduced by 29% and the white subpixels could be increased by 29% to increase peak white output by ~10%.

Not earth-shattering, but relatively 'free' (change of materials only, compatible with current manufacturing flow).

140% increased red efficiency falls far short of the 100-200% increase in efficiency being touted by QDCF proponents. If red and green photoresist-based QDCF delivering 200% efficiency increase were on existence (meaning 3X the output), this would mean that red and green subpixels would essentially match unfiltered white subpixel output and overall light output would increase to ~167%.

Red and blue subpixel area could be cut in half, blue and white subpixels could both be increased to 150%, and peak white output would increase to 150% of current output.

Any OLED-material-based approach to increased color gamut that does not involve patterning of those OLED materials is going to continue to waste ~2/3 of the light generated in the colored subpixels.

Heck, with 3X red and green photoresist-based QDCF, red and blue subpixels could be reduced by 1/3, blue subpixels could be doubled, and with the white subpixel reduced by a third as well, and light output would increase by 1/3 while delivering more saturated colors at higher intensities.

Sacrifice the remaining white subpixels entirely giving 3/5ths to blue and 2/15ths each to red and green and you would have a true unpatterned RGB WOLED with more than 125% of current output (red=300%x12/15; green=300%x12/15; blue=100%x36/15; white=0)

And if/when blue QDCF emerges (or a long-lifetime Blue-only BOLED), that would represent a further output efficiency increase to 200% of current levels...

Not necessarily 'in the bag', but if Samsung succeeds to push forward with QDCF for LED/LCD-based displays, I believe this will offer a meaning improvement for unpatterned WOLEDs as well .
fafrd is offline  
post #13602 of 13925 Old 01-01-2017, 03:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Probably old news from when I was on hiatus, but just ran into these:

http://www.displaydaily.com/display-...-oled-lifetime

http://www.oled-info.com/new-startup...-tadf-emitters

Between TADF/Kyulux and PCOLED is seems as though we're likely to see significant progress on blue OLED lifetime before the end of the decade...
Vader1 likes this.
fafrd is offline  
post #13603 of 13925 Old 01-01-2017, 03:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
http://www.oled-info.com/dscc-sees-r...ents-2016-2012

"OLED TV production capacity is also expected to rise quickly - at a 52% CAGR (similar to the total OLED capacity growth), and by 2021 production capacity will be enough for 8.4 million 55" panels. Korea-based producers will have market share of 63% in 2021, down from 92% in 2016. The market share of Chinese-based vendors will reach 32% in 2012."

63% of 8.4M equals 5.3M, so that is the production capacity DSCC is forecasting for LG by 2012.

5.3M 55" WOLEDs per year equates to 73.6K unyielded Gen-8 substrates per month or about 90K Gen-8 sheets per month accounting fr yield in the low 80%s...

How does 90K Gen-8 sheets per month line up with the OLED capacity plans LG has already announced?

On another note, this forecast would mean OLED taking over 4% of the overall TV market by 2021 (from the 'somewhere-under-1%' share OLED has today ).
fafrd is offline  
post #13604 of 13925 Old 01-01-2017, 04:33 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,157
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 504 Post(s)
Liked: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
[url]

How does 90K Gen-8 sheets per month line up with the OLED capacity plans LG has already announced?
From a capacity standpoint, there should be significantly more capacity by 2021. LGD will have 60,000 Gen 8 substrates a month by the end of the first half of 2017 and that is before their P10 fab comes on-line in 2018.

Also, BOE has a pilot Gen 8 fab and I would be surprised if they dont end up building a fab for mass production by 2021.

Of course, we have never squared the production numbers with the capacity numbers. I hope/assume the disconnect will go away as LGD continues their capacity ramp.
slacker711 is offline  
post #13605 of 13925 Old 01-01-2017, 04:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post
From a capacity standpoint, there should be significantly more capacity by 2021. LGD will have 60,000 Gen 8 substrates a month by the end of the first half of 2017 and that is before their P10 fab comes on-line in 2018.
Is that including the first Gen-8 phase of P10 or not? I've lost track of all of the OLED panel fabs in production and announced - would you mind listing them with sheet capacity?

Quote:
Also, BOE has a pilot Gen 8 fab and I would be surprised if they dont end up building a fab for mass production by 2021.
That DSCC forcast I linked to was forecasting 27% or 2.3M 55" OLEDs coming from China by 2021, so no doubt a production plant at BOE and possibly others as well was part of their assumption...

Quote:
Of course, we have never squared the production numbers with the capacity numbers. I hope/assume the disconnect will go away as LGD continues their capacity ramp.
Yeah, between ramp yields and announcing maximum capacity in a new facility but then ramping it a line or two at a time, it's purposefully difficult to get the numbers to square...

All indications are that LG shipped over 1M OLED panels in 2016, though, which is a significant milestone .
fafrd is offline  
post #13606 of 13925 Old 01-01-2017, 05:55 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,157
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 504 Post(s)
Liked: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
Is that including the first Gen-8 phase of P10 or not? I've lost track of all of the OLED panel fabs in production and announced - would you mind listing them with sheet capacity?

M1 (E3) Pilot Gen 8 fab 8,000 panels
M2 (E4) Gen 8 26,000 panels

P9 Gen 8 26,000 panels ramping in the 1st half of next year.

P10 Gen ~10 ramping in 2018. I dont believe that there are any official announcements of the capacity.

Quote:
All indications are that LG shipped over 1M OLED panels in 2016, though, which is a significant milestone .
I dont think that they were on track to hit that target but Q4 sales look like they were great. It will be interesting to hear what LGD has to say during their Q4 call.
slacker711 is offline  
post #13607 of 13925 Old 01-01-2017, 07:33 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post
M1 (E3) Pilot Gen 8 fab 8,000 panels
M2 (E4) Gen 8 26,000 panels

P9 Gen 8 26,000 panels ramping in the 1st half of next year.

P10 Gen ~10 ramping in 2018. I dont believe that there are any official announcements of the capacity.



I dont think that they were on track to hit that target but Q4 sales look like they were great. It will be interesting to hear what LGD has to say during their Q4 call.
Thanks. This article claims a total of 60,000 sheets/month by mid-2017 (agreeing with your numbers precisely ) with P10 coming online in 2018: http://pulsenews.co.kr/view.php?year=2016&no=562058

If all of this is correct, 90,000 sheets in production by 2021 seems conservative...
fafrd is offline  
post #13608 of 13925 Old 01-02-2017, 01:04 AM
Senior Member
 
joys_R_us's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Berlin - Germany
Posts: 314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Liked: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post

140% increased red efficiency falls far short of the 100-200% increase in efficiency being touted by QDCF proponents. If red and green photoresist-based QDCF delivering 200% efficiency increase were on existence (meaning 3X the output), this would mean that red and green subpixels would essentially match unfiltered white subpixel output and overall light output would increase to ~167%.
.
Thx a lot for the information ! I think that the 3x efficiency is not valid for qdcf but for the direct filterless technology so that the loss of 2/3 of light in the filter can be avoided, hence the 3x gain...
joys_R_us is offline  
post #13609 of 13925 Old 01-02-2017, 09:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
This is from August, but I couldn't find any earlier posts about it: http://pulsenews.co.kr/view.php?sc=3...2016&no=562058

"LG Display to produce 1.7 million OLED TV panels in 2017
2016.08.07 15:38:04 | 2016.08.07 15:45:15

South Korea’s LG Display Co. said Friday that it aims to turn out 1.7 million organic light-emitting diode (OLED) TV panels next year.

This is a 200,000 increase from its previous goal of 1.5 million OLED panels early this year.

Currently, LG Display has two production lines at P8 and P9 plants in Paju, Gyeonggi Province with a combined monthly production capacity of 34,000 8th generation (2,200 mm×2,500mm) OLED TV panels. Each 8th generation panel can be cut into six 55-inch OLED TV panels or three sheets of 65-inch TV panels.

The company plans to bump up the monthly output capacity to 60,000 sheets from the first half next year, by adding new production line E4-2 that can produce 26,000 sheets every month at P9 plant.

A company official said that the new facility addition would pick up its annual production volume to reach around 1.7 million OLED TV panels, adding that this is the reason why it upped its production target.

The Korean display maker’s P10 plant that will start running in 2018 would include OLED panel production line. Although it didn’t specify exact use of the plant, the industry observers expect that the P10 plant will produce small and mid-sized OLED panels and large-sized OLED panels for TVs."

So let's see if these numbers add up:

Let's assume 80% yield and 50% 65" and 50% 55" output (do 1/3 of the sheets for 55" production and 2/3 of the sheets for 65" production).

34,000 sheets per month equates to 54,400 55" and 54,400 65" OLED panels per month based on these assumptions, or 1.3M OLED panels annually.

The additional 26,000 sheets per month will deliver a further 41.6K 55" and 41.6K 65" per month once fully running at 80% yield, or 83K per month total, so LG can hit their target of 1.7M OLEDs in 2017 if the the new production from P9 is up and running at target yield by August...

Seems pretty consistent and doable (and represents a doubling of annual production over 2016 levels).

And it's also likely to result in a further significant lowering of OLED TV prices late this year .
Vader1 likes this.
fafrd is offline  
post #13610 of 13925 Old 01-03-2017, 09:58 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Rich Peterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: St Paul, MN
Posts: 2,809
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 142 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Let's not confuse the number of OLED panels sold with the number of OLED TVs sold

The number of OLED panels sold by LG Display is quite a bit different than the number of OLED TVs sold through to customers by LG. That's in part because LG makes panels for several other TV manufacturers around the world. But more importantly, there is a several month time-lag from the time a panel is sold by LG display until it is built into a set and that set finds its way to a retailer and then gets sold through to a customer. So the increase in panel production today won't be seen as an increase in the number of OLED sets sold to customers until several months from now.

So if LG display does indeed produce and sell 1.7 million OLED panels in 2017, LG will be selling far less than that number of OLED TVs in 2017.
rogo likes this.
Rich Peterson is offline  
post #13611 of 13925 Old 01-03-2017, 01:25 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 31,808
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1616 Post(s)
Liked: 1811
Last two posts very good. I see no reason why there can't be another reduction of 20-30% in pricing this year. Look at the future trajectory by the way:

2017, 1H: Everything doable by end of 2016 now full bore
2017, 2H: New marginal capacity, ramping
2018, 1H: Everything doable by end of 2017 now full bore
2018, 2H: New marginal capacity from P10 (!), ramping slow
2019: P10 ramping throughout year
2020: P10 fully ramped

There is no period where pricing reductions need to stop and no period where the new capacity coming online can possibly sell without decreases in pricing. This is true because:

(1) LG cannot reasonably achieve 100% market share in any segment where competition exists
(2) LG is already dominating segments OLED exists in whereby we define segments very arbitrarily as $2500+ 65-inch TVs

So to sell more, you need lower pricing.

This again likely looks like:

65-inch
2017: $2500 (or lower)
2018: $2000 ("")
2019: $1600
2020: $1250
2021: <$1000

That curve may well prove conservative
Wizziwig and fafrd like this.

There's a saying about "everything in moderation". If only it was applied to well, you know...
rogo is offline  
post #13612 of 13925 Old 01-03-2017, 05:38 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Last two posts very good. I see no reason why there can't be another reduction of 20-30% in pricing this year. Look at the future trajectory by the way:

2017, 1H: Everything doable by end of 2016 now full bore
2017, 2H: New marginal capacity, ramping
2018, 1H: Everything doable by end of 2017 now full bore
2018, 2H: New marginal capacity from P10 (!), ramping slow
2019: P10 ramping throughout year
2020: P10 fully ramped

There is no period where pricing reductions need to stop and no period where the new capacity coming online can possibly sell without decreases in pricing. This is true because:

(1) LG cannot reasonably achieve 100% market share in any segment where competition exists
(2) LG is already dominating segments OLED exists in whereby we define segments very arbitrarily as $2500+ 65-inch TVs

So to sell more, you need lower pricing.

This again likely looks like:

65-inch
2017: $2500 (or lower)
2018: $2000 ("")
2019: $1600
2020: $1250
2021: <$1000


That curve may well prove conservative
very credible price roadmap, especially when you consider that P10 will be producing 65" OLED panel 6-per-sheet rather than 3-per-sheet. So 65" OLED panel cost will drop dramatically in 2020 (close to 50% ).

Because of that production cost savings, P10 will probably be devoted to 65" production foremost, with 77" production absorbing any remaining capacity (~33% cost reduction for 77"ers).

Which means that 2020 could be the year LG starts to have some spare capacity, especially on the current Gen-8 fabs, and might be in a position to introduce an additional panel size for gains in the down-market.

The Gen-8 fabs can produce 8-up 49" OLED panels that would cost ~75% of the 55" panel cost, so that is my placeholder for the first sub-$500 OLEDs to hit the market and very possibly as much as a year earlier than you have forecasted the 65"ers to break through the $1000 barrier .

Exciting times - watching new technology ramps unfold is fun .
rogo likes this.
fafrd is offline  
post #13613 of 13925 Old 01-04-2017, 06:16 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Sorry, chances are excellent that you're an idiot.
Posts: 9,806
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2465 Post(s)
Liked: 2241
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
This again likely looks like:

65-inch
2017: $2500 (or lower)
2018: $2000 ("")
2019: $1600
2020: $1250
2021: <$1000

That curve may well prove conservative
MSRP or street? Putting the 65B7-level at $2500 seems like MSRP, but I wanted to clarify.

Thought #EAA: I wonder how many people know that no one ever says "What we've got here is a failure to communicate." in the movie "Cool Hand Luke" (1967).
tgm1024 is offline  
post #13614 of 13925 Old 01-05-2017, 06:03 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Esox50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: IL
Posts: 1,621
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
Last two posts very good. I see no reason why there can't be another reduction of 20-30% in pricing this year. Look at the future trajectory by the way:

2017, 1H: Everything doable by end of 2016 now full bore
2017, 2H: New marginal capacity, ramping
2018, 1H: Everything doable by end of 2017 now full bore
2018, 2H: New marginal capacity from P10 (!), ramping slow
2019: P10 ramping throughout year
2020: P10 fully ramped
Since the article a few posts up says industry observers expect P10 to be used for larger panels, it would seem the 2019 product year might be the one where we see the 77" come out of the stratosphere in terms of price?

I'm so impressed with my 65" OLED that the only thing that would make me trade up right now is size (in OLED). It's amazing. I still can't believe I have an LG TV in my house, never thought the day would come. But they have hit a home run IMHO. Now...just need bigger.

P10 have any implications for possible sizes? 77 is a "weird" number. I'd just assume they go to 80". That would be PERFECT.
Esox50 is offline  
post #13615 of 13925 Old 01-05-2017, 07:35 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,157
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 504 Post(s)
Liked: 477
The one glitch in the price projections is that LGD appears to be undecided on whether to build Gen 8 or Gen 10 substrates in their P10 fab. Recent Korean articles indicate that they are balancing the lower cost per unit for a Gen 10 fab versus the upfront risks and costs.

I am not sure how this is still being decided at this late date. They indicate that they are still on track but if Gen 10 substrates are going to need substantial revisions to the equipment, then how would they start ramping a Gen 10 P10 in 2018?
slacker711 is offline  
post #13616 of 13925 Old 01-05-2017, 10:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Larry Hutchinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Beaverton,OR
Posts: 1,529
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Here is an article that may be of interest:

OLEDs Step In Where Design Matters
https://www.photonics.com/Article.as...ID=135&IID=917
Larry Hutchinson is offline  
post #13617 of 13925 Old 01-05-2017, 01:06 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
rogo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Stop making curved screens
Posts: 31,808
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1616 Post(s)
Liked: 1811
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post
The one glitch in the price projections is that LGD appears to be undecided on whether to build Gen 8 or Gen 10 substrates in their P10 fab. Recent Korean articles indicate that they are balancing the lower cost per unit for a Gen 10 fab versus the upfront risks and costs.

I am not sure how this is still being decided at this late date. They indicate that they are still on track but if Gen 10 substrates are going to need substantial revisions to the equipment, then how would they start ramping a Gen 10 P10 in 2018?
This is weird. That said, it has pretty minimal implications for the projections on the smaller sizes coming down in price. Why? Capacity will still need to be sold and it won't be sold at existing prices -- period.

If they don't increase substrate sizes, they are caught in a weird place where panel economics don't work especially well for both smaller and larger sizes. This might seem confounding because LCD has found a way "around" this despite being almost exclusively produced on 8G fabs. But the magic there isn't magic at all, it's overcapacity combined with lots of already depreciated equipment / fabs. LG won't have that working for them.

There's a reason Sharp built Sakai at 10G. But it's worth noting that trying to sell the world 70-inch LCDs basically ended their TV division. I don't understand how LG can be deciding anything at this late date, but I can understand their fear at picking wrong.

There's a saying about "everything in moderation". If only it was applied to well, you know...
rogo is offline  
post #13618 of 13925 Old 01-05-2017, 01:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2730
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
This is weird. That said, it has pretty minimal implications for the projections on the smaller sizes coming down in price. Why? Capacity will still need to be sold and it won't be sold at existing prices -- period.

If they don't increase substrate sizes, they are caught in a weird place where panel economics don't work especially well for both smaller and larger sizes. This might seem confounding because LCD has found a way "around" this despite being almost exclusively produced on 8G fabs. But the magic there isn't magic at all, it's overcapacity combined with lots of already depreciated equipment / fabs. LG won't have that working for them.

There's a reason Sharp built Sakai at 10G. But it's worth noting that trying to sell the world 70-inch LCDs basically ended their TV division. I don't understand how LG can be deciding anything at this late date, but I can understand their fear at picking wrong.
My suspicion is that the emergence of printed WOLED manufacturing may be playing into the decision-making.

I believe I read rumors somewhere that they will be beginning with an 8G pilot line in P10, delaying the 10G phase to decide on equipment selection (which may mean deciding between deposition or printing if it as matured enough by then).

This doesn't change the big picture - just how much of a drop in 65" OLED pricing we see once P10 is in 10G production...

Also, the world certainly seems for more ready for 65" Flatscreen TVs than it did at the time Sharp built Sakai...
fafrd is offline  
post #13619 of 13925 Old 01-05-2017, 02:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
slacker711's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,157
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 504 Post(s)
Liked: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post
This is weird. That said, it has pretty minimal implications for the projections on the smaller sizes coming down in price. Why? Capacity will still need to be sold and it won't be sold at existing prices -- period.

If they don't increase substrate sizes, they are caught in a weird place where panel economics don't work especially well for both smaller and larger sizes. This might seem confounding because LCD has found a way "around" this despite being almost exclusively produced on 8G fabs. But the magic there isn't magic at all, it's overcapacity combined with lots of already depreciated equipment / fabs. LG won't have that working for them.

There's a reason Sharp built Sakai at 10G. But it's worth noting that trying to sell the world 70-inch LCDs basically ended their TV division. I don't understand how LG can be deciding anything at this late date, but I can understand their fear at picking wrong.
Worst case, it seems that that they will go with Gen 8 substrates with a Gen 10 line in P10 down the line. There are risks that way as well though as the 3 Gen 10/11 Chinese LCD fabs start coming on-line and LCD's go from the current supply constraint to a glut.

Speaking of which, I am amazed that Foxconn/Sharp is now planning on building an $8.8 billion Gen 10.5 LCD fab in China. They are going to need 70" to 80" LCD's to become much more popular over the next few years.
slacker711 is offline  
post #13620 of 13925 Old 01-05-2017, 02:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
wco81's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 6,209
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1295 Post(s)
Liked: 467
$8.8 billion for a new LCD fab?

Why is it so expensive at this point? And is there enough money to be made in TVs to throw that much money into it?
wco81 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

Tags
Lcd Hdtv , Led Hdtv , Lg , Oled Tv , oled wireless speakers , Plasma Hdtv , Samsung

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