Originally Posted by borf
Could OLED be driven bright enough to support the short hold times needed to eliminate blur. Would blue lifetime suffer. If not, LCD could be the only possible option for CRT-like motion for the next 10-20 years despite OLED's ultra-fast respose.
I hope not. The dream display would be a strobe-driven Crystal LED display, but the cost of over 6 million separate LED chips is mind blowing. LCD panels has fundamental limitations, such as imperfect black levels (although various workarounds exists with pros and cons, such as local dimming).
But like you say, scanning should be used instead of strobing with slower panels (IPS). Do you think reduced effectiveness and more complicated implemention still makes it feasable. Can't download those videos right now at work.
Scanning backlights still benefits LCD quite a lot. But it doesn't seem to make LCD have less motion blur than plasma. Presently, only strobe backlights (e.g. LightBoost) successfully make LCD be better than plasma in motion blur, but you lose color quality because those are TN LCD's. So full-strobe backlight LCD's are not that suitable for home theater, yet. It is, however, of great interest to competitive online gamers due to the reaction time advantage of eliminating motion blur. Although effective, it is a trick/workaround (some say "gimmick"; but it's far less "gimmick" now on better LCD's) adapted to LCD. Good motion blur reduction can occur, but not full order(s) of magnitude that a full-strobe backlight can do.
If you skip plasma displays for any reason -- then the closest thing in a full HDTV set, that comes to a full-panel strobe in a home theater LCD, is Sony's "Motionflow Impulse" mode (in sets with the Motionflow XR 960 feature). The "Motionflow Impulse" setting does not use interpolation. It dims the backlight dramatically, and it flickers annoyingly for many (60 Hz). But if you want the 'purest' non-interpolated CRT-style motion in a home theater LCD display, it's the closest thing in a non-plasma flat panel. If you despise plasma for some reason (??) and if you despise interplation, then it's one option to try. But not many people like its CRT-style 60 Hz flicker of the "Motionflow Impulse" mode. Strobe backlights is far more attractive and effective at 120 Hz, due to lack of flicker (to most eyes). But the world is not standardized on 120fps source. We'd have to wait for 120 Hz to be widespread in two decades; e.g. NHK 8K 120Hz
Wish there was a simple answer / simple solution to the motion blur problem. It's a flicker-versus-refresh tradeoff. It will be something we will need to keep fighting for, for decades to come, probably. Flicker free is a strong advantage for eyestrain for many. However, that automatically means motion blur (even for instant-pixel-response displays) unless you shorten the frame refresh sample lengths without adding flicker (black periods between samples). 1ms samples would require an insane real-time 1000fps@1000Hz if you wanted to avoid interpolation *and* flicker, and get CRT-motion clarity on a sample-and-hold display.
- Some people hate flicker. (Most at 60 Hz, other can tell at 85 Hz, a few can see 120 Hz)
- Some people hate motion blur.
- Some people hate both.
- There can be stroboscopic effects in fast motion even at 120fps (e.g. wagon wheel effect, phantom array effect)
- Some people hate interpolation artifacts.
- There's input lag with interpolation.
- Some people even get headaches with 360 Hz PWM dimming (so 360fps@360Hz impulse-driven isn't yet the final frontier)
- It's confirmed that motion blur of 120Hz sample-and-hold (LCD) is far worse than 60 Hz impulse-driven (CRT)
- It's confirmed that diminishing points of returns go for quite a long time beyond 1/120sec samples, and even beyond 1/1000sec samples (1ms).
- It's confirmed motion blur is still visible even at 240fps@240Hz on sample-and-hold displays, when testing common motion test patterns.
The only way to solve ALL above problems simultaneously (at least to essentially five-nines percentages -- 99.999% of population), is insanely high framerates on a sample-and-hold display. Real-life does not flicker. So why should displays? So that means real-time 1000fps@1000Hz; and that will never happen in the mainstream within our lifetimes (Perhaps in the distant future, of course). Can you imagine 8K@1000fps, displayed on 1000Hz displays in real-time? That's probably not going to happen within our lifetimes! This fact essentially guarantee that motion blur will remain a topic of discussion for decades to come. It is going to be a field of study for decades to come because you can't satisfy every single criteria.
I think that a compromise will probably happen within a lifetime, however -- eventual (within 2 decades) standardization to 120Hz source material for 'video' material, the shortening of frame sample lengths will continue to be done via existing means such as impulse driving (adding black period between samples) and/or interpolation (adding more samples). These are the only two practical ways to shorten frame sample lengths, since frame sample length is unavoidably linearly proportional to display motion blur. (this is above and beyond eye tracking inaccuracies and source-based motion blur). This is regardless of technology (OLED, plasma, LCD, Crystal LED, CRT, etc).
OLED is the correct direction to go into for image quality. It solves the black level and color problem, and they CAN be impulse-driven for the CRT-quality zero motion blur. Traditional LED's have become brighter and brighter since the 1960's, to the point where you can use LED's as a light source for projectors, streetlamps, and even 100% LED stadium lighting
! OLED should follow a similar brightness improvement trajectory over the years, so impulse-driving is increasingly more and more feasible. 1ms impulse-driving timescales for OLED is possible, this only requires OLED to be ~8x times brighter relative to 120 Hz sample-and-hold (1ms vs 8.33ms), and ~16x times brighter than 60 Hz sample-and-hold. (1ms vs 16.7ms). In the interim, interpolation can be accomplished for OLED too (240fps@240Hz, 480fps@480Hz, etc) to avoid the need for them to flicker (but interpolation does disqualify them from computer/games due to the input lag issue of interpolation).
At the same time, LCD's will be a viable technology for a very long time, and there's still lots of incremental improvements left in LCD left, before _cheap_ large-screen super-bright OLED exist (with ability to optionally impulse-drive at 1ms strobes in a computer/game-friendly manner, without interpolation and without becoming dim) -- which would not easily be until the 2020's.
P.S. To complicate things.... For movies, I still prefer 24fps over 48fps, and non-interpolated. Edited by Mark Rejhon - 2/7/13 at 12:43pm