or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › LG's Curved OLED HDTV Arrives, Samsung OLED Coming This Week
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LG's Curved OLED HDTV Arrives, Samsung OLED Coming This Week - Page 3

post #61 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post

i'm not sure if this would be the case. i'm thinking of the market that would be buying these TV's, and I imagine it being a status thing. meaning all else being equal, buying the one that costs more, and is more 'new' would be the way to go.

unless they were going to sell these under 10k, I just don't see it being cheap enough to break into the market of ppl that would want a 'normal' OLED tv.

I could be wrong, but I think back to the early days of plasma, where it was primarily ppl with a lot of money, and very little knowledge of a/v gear buying them. not all of course, but a lot of early adapters are buying a status, not a product.

This is part of what I was told by LG directly. While it may not be the real reason, it is at least one that they gave.
post #62 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Yeah but it doesn't have the wide sweet spot of a flat panel and your going to know it's curved when you sit off to the side. I'm just saying I don't think this is a good idea for HT use, at least not at this size.

have you seen this? I haven't seen them, I don't know how curved they really are, but the guy who looked at one in the store didn't seem to think the curve was that pronounced.

the way I see it, if we're talking theory and not real world, with a flat screen there is no sweet spot. you need a curved display in order to have an image that is the same distance from your eye from corner to corner, edge to edge. the obvious argument is that in the real world this difference is so tiny with 'normal' sized screens it's pretty irrelevant. and my comment back is that if it's that small of a difference, why get upset about it the other way? we aren't talking about a screen with such an aggressive curve that you're going to notice sitting off centre any more than do with a flat panel.
post #63 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speakerphile View Post


70"? Maybe 2016...

 

So I guess my hope of flex 4K OLED to replace my 120x51 projector screen at this rate will require that I find the fountain of youth and the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow so that I can live long enough and have enough to afford it.eek.gif

post #64 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by fierce_gt View Post

have you seen this? I haven't seen them, I don't know how curved they really are, but the guy who looked at one in the store didn't seem to think the curve was that pronounced.

the way I see it, if we're talking theory and not real world, with a flat screen there is no sweet spot. you need a curved display in order to have an image that is the same distance from your eye from corner to corner, edge to edge. the obvious argument is that in the real world this difference is so tiny with 'normal' sized screens it's pretty irrelevant. and my comment back is that if it's that small of a difference, why get upset about it the other way? we aren't talking about a screen with such an aggressive curve that you're going to notice sitting off centre any more than do with a flat panel.



No I didn't do a demo yet. At distances of 9' to 12' or so I doubt with a screen this size it's going to be a big revelation, I think it's going to have to be much bigger to benefit. But you could go buy it for 15 G's and let me know biggrin.gif
Edited by comfynumb - 7/25/13 at 11:49am
post #65 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speakerphile View Post

4K is a little more than a marketing gimmick. It's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Could not agree more!!!!

Paul
post #66 of 105
If you remember when HD first came out, it wasn't going anywhere either. There was no HDTV, no HD satelite, no HD movie sites, no
HD discs, no HD pretty much period. I remember saying what the he!! is the big deal with HD? Now look at things, everything is in HD. 50 and 60 year old movies are in HD and on blu ray. This is going to take off quicker than people think. Yes UHD is expensive right now but so was 720 and 1080 when they first came out. Give it time the prices will come down.
Edited by comfynumb - 7/25/13 at 11:39am
post #67 of 105
Well for me I don't want a curve tv,plus its too expensive,there nothing on tv from February to August till Football season gets here and im sticking with Plasma TV's anyway, I get what I can afford and yes Oled TV's is going look better,i know that for fact
post #68 of 105
Here are some pictures I took of the set on Monday.

The curve is very slight and you only notice it if you are looking at the set from the side. The off angle viewing is the best i have ever seen on a tv, there is no drop off in picture quality even when viewing at a 90 degree angle. The blacks are the deepest I have seen and the colors just popped. The tv blew away the ZT60 that were sitting on the wall by it (the ZT60 is the one in the background of the side view picture).

The pictures were taking with an iPhone 5 but they don't do the set justice on just how good it is.


post #69 of 105
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PWM View Post

Here are some pictures I took of the set on Monday.

The curve is very slight and you only notice it if you are looking at the set from the side. The off angle viewing is the best i have ever seen on a tv, there is no drop off in picture quality even when viewing at a 90 degree angle. The blacks are the deepest I have seen and the colors just popped. The tv blew away the ZT60 that were sitting on the wall by it (the ZT60 is the one in the background of the side view picture).

The pictures were taking with an iPhone 5 but they don't do the set justice on just how good it is.



That's what I expected to hear. Awesome!
post #70 of 105
Id disagree about 4k being a gimmick. People said "retina resolution" tablets were a gimmick but a better looking picture is not a gimmick. I don't care how far people say you have to be from it or how big they say your screen will have to be. It will eventually have widespread adoption and have much more impact than 3d which to me, is truly a gimmick and always has been, in whatever form they have rehashed it in... Passive glasses, active glasses, red blue lenses, bla, they all look weird, not natural and after once the gimmick wears off and either my eyes hurt my head hurts, or my nose and ears hurt where the glasses rest.


So let me see if I got this right.

All those years with curved tube tvs, but they got flatter, and flatter, and flat screens were all the rave.
Still got my 200 pound 32" Panasonic "flat" crt, which has a slight convex curve. It's one heavy beast.

We finally got "true flat" with plasma and lcd

I guess that whole 3d thing didn't quite go how they wanted, so now to convince people to part with their money, we call the next great thing "curved tv".

But now its concave. Must be more better!

1080 p's
.. check

3d Vortex Tachyon pixels
... check

500 mega-hurts for precision interstitial space/time dimension enhancement technology
..check

1,000,000,000,000 : 1 Pulsar to black hole contrast ratio for blacks so deep you cant see the pixels. No light can escape
check

Curved screen! 10% more curvier than the competition.
...check!

I just don't understand the reason other than marketing to people who just understand feature checklists, and to justify the price. You paid "how much" for that? but the screen is curved! It's expensive to curve a screen.
Not that I'm going to afford one soon, but give me a flat one. There is no way a concave curved 55" OLED tv is going to give better off axis viewing than a flat OLED, and in my living room anything bigger than about 60 is too big and I'm sure there are a lot of folks like me out there. ( of course people with small living rooms don't usually by 5 digit price tag tvs, but hey the tech will filter down )

Is this about right? smile.gif Just my 2 cents, maybe I'm missing the point
Edited by choppedliver - 7/25/13 at 9:40pm
post #71 of 105
Was it that the blacks are actually deeper, or was the screen just less reflective? I know on OLED black is supposed to be zero light, but that hasn't been the case on any OLED I've actually seen. I imagine the curve would also cut down the reflections a bit as well.
post #72 of 105
Now I really can't wait to see one. I would have expected the off angle viewing to be not so great, but I see it's not curved much. The picture looks amazing.
post #73 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speakerphile View Post

4K is a little more than a marketing gimmick. It's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hidefpaul View Post

Could not agree more!!!!

Paul

Quote:
Originally Posted by choppedliver View Post

Id disagree about 4k being a gimmick.

Not sure if everyone read my post correctly. I said that 4K is a little more than just a gimmick. Not that it is little more than a gimmick. People seem to be misinterpreting this.


4K is here to stay, and does provide a measurable improvement in PQ. IMO, of course.
post #74 of 105
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speakerphile View Post



Not sure if everyone read my post correctly. I said that 4K is a little more than just a gimmick. Not that it is little more than a gimmick. People seem to be misinterpreting this.


4K is here to stay, and does provide a measurable improvement in PQ. IMO, of course.

Right on. 100% true. It does seem that some misread your post eek.gif
post #75 of 105
Ho do Laser TV's compare at this point? I remember when the first Laservue came out at least one prominent reviewer said it was the best TV available. Do you think OLED is going to be better, or has it already been bested?
post #76 of 105
Sorry but to me 4K IS just a gimmick and will be forgotton as soon as OLED gets a foothold. LG and Samsung is the first to come out with OLED. Now I am waiting for Sony to respond. Question is when will Sony respond with their own OLED display?
post #77 of 105
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve1971 View Post

Sorry but to me 4K IS just a gimmick and will be forgotton as soon as OLED gets a foothold. LG and Samsung is the first to come out with OLED. Now I am waiting for Sony to respond. Question is when will Sony respond with their own OLED display?

I think you misunderstand the difference between 4K/UHD and OLED, because ultimately OLED TVs are all going to be 4K/UHD. It's not one or the other, LED-lit LCD TVs just happen to be ahead of OLED in the resolution race—it's really an unfortunate thing that the first OLED sets are only 1080p and cost as much as they do. 4K is just what one calls the "Standard" resolution for filming and production, at least for the next few years. Then there will be 8K, and probably someday 16K as well.

The resolution count will not stop going up. I do hope OLED makes it as a display technology; if LCD get much better and cheaper, OLED might not make it—before economy of scale gets a chance to kick in. I hope it does, I'd like there to be at least two competing display technologies on the market, and plasma is not likely to make the leap to 4K, which will ultimately doom it.
Edited by imagic - 7/27/13 at 2:45pm
post #78 of 105
I thought 4K might be a gimmick to, Mark convinced me it wasn't. If you look at the new AV gear that's been coming out over the last year, a lot of it is 4K ready, including blu ray players, AVR's and pre/pro's. The big companies would not be sinking their resources into this if it wasn't here to stay. Many thought 720 and 1080 were a flash in the pan too, now who wants to give up their HD?
post #79 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Mark why the curved screens and not a flat panel?

I wonder if part of the reason may be that even a slight curvature helps making the panel more rigid? I imagine a very thin and completely flat panel would be quite flexible. Maybe not a problem once installed, but perhaps a consideration in transporting / storing, and during installation.
post #80 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

I thought 4K might be a gimmick to, Mark convinced me it wasn't. If you look at the new AV gear that's been coming out over the last year, a lot of it is 4K ready, including blu ray players, AVR's and pre/pro's. The big companies would not be sinking their resources into this if it wasn't here to stay. Many thought 720 and 1080 were a flash in the pan too, now who wants to give up their HD?

It is here to stay. But for sub-100" screens it is basically a gimmick, unless you pull up a chair really close.

And yes, a lot of gear is 4k-ready, because it costs are relatively minor over 1080p, but the marketing advantages are great -- a lot of people will upgrade their perfectly fine 1080p 55" to a 4k 55"s....

Now, OLED IS a real improvement. Unfortunately it costs about as much as my first plasma cost 15 years ago and it's not nearly as clear of a leap as from tube to plasma.

Wake me up when they have a 100" OLED at less than $10k. Oh, and that size, yes, it should be 4k.
post #81 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan1 View Post

It is here to stay. But for sub-100" screens it is basically a gimmick, unless you pull up a chair really close.

And yes, a lot of gear is 4k-ready, because it costs are relatively minor over 1080p, but the marketing advantages are great -- a lot of people will upgrade their perfectly fine 1080p 55" to a 4k 55"s....

Now, OLED IS a real improvement. Unfortunately it costs about as much as my first plasma cost 15 years ago and it's not nearly as clear of a leap as from tube to plasma.

Wake me up when they have a 100" OLED at less than $10k. Oh, and that size, yes, it should be 4k.



Yes I want a OLED 4K panel also. There are others that have seen these 50"-60" panels side by side with the 1080's and concluded the 4K looks better.
post #82 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Yes I want a OLED 4K panel also. There are others that have seen these 50"-60" panels side by side with the 1080's and concluded the 4K looks better.

The only 4K OLED panels in the immediate future is Sony's 30" and 56" Professional studio monitors. Unless LG figures out how to solve their manufacturing problems or a new production method is developed. OLED at home theater sizes will remain an ultra low volume niche product for studios and the professional market. As for 4K, at the 65" size you can clearly see a sharper picture at 8 feet. No where as big as the leap from 480p to 1080p, but definitely noticeable. Unfortunately, most 4K sets so far have been using inferior back lighting causing uniformity issues and still haven't upgraded to HDMI 2.0. Newer set from LG are using full array and the Samsung are going to use faux micro dimming to improve black levels and uniformity. The good news is that in couple of years 4K will be only slightly more than a 1080p set.
post #83 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Yes I want a OLED 4K panel also. There are others that have seen these 50"-60" panels side by side with the 1080's and concluded the 4K looks better.

The only 4K OLED panels in the immediate future is Sony's 30" and 56" Professional studio monitors. Unless LG figures out how to solve their manufacturing problems or a new production method is developed. OLED at home theater sizes will remain an ultra low volume niche product for studios and the professional market. As for 4K, at the 65" size you can clearly see a sharper picture at 8 feet. No where as big as the leap from 480p to 1080p, but definitely noticeable. Unfortunately, most 4K sets so far have been using inferior back lighting causing uniformity issues and still haven't upgraded to HDMI 2.0. Newer set from LG are using full array and the Samsung are going to use faux micro dimming to improve black levels and uniformity. The good news is that in couple of years 4K will be only slightly more than a 1080p set.


I will say this sytech and that's this. If Sony can drop their 4K sets to a reasonable price in a couple of years then hell count me in. But until then I am staying with what I have.
post #84 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

The only 4K OLED panels in the immediate future is Sony's 30" and 56" Professional studio monitors. Unless LG figures out how to solve their manufacturing problems or a new production method is developed. OLED at home theater sizes will remain an ultra low volume niche product for studios and the professional market. As for 4K, at the 65" size you can clearly see a sharper picture at 8 feet. No where as big as the leap from 480p to 1080p, but definitely noticeable. Unfortunately, most 4K sets so far have been using inferior back lighting causing uniformity issues and still haven't upgraded to HDMI 2.0. Newer set from LG are using full array and the Samsung are going to use faux micro dimming to improve black levels and uniformity. The good news is that in couple of years 4K will be only slightly more than a 1080p set.



I know there's been a lot of problems getting these to market, but I figure they'll straighten them out. I guess time will tell. If not I'll get one of the LED panels when the prices come down and HDMI 2.0 is implemented.
post #85 of 105
The question is will there be burn in issues like I have read?
post #86 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

I think you misunderstand the difference between 4K/UHD and OLED, because ultimately OLED TVs are all going to be 4K/UHD. It's not one or the other, LED-lit LCD TVs just happen to be ahead of OLED in the resolution race—it's really an unfortunate thing that the first OLED sets are only 1080p and cost as much as they do. 4K is just what one calls the "Standard" resolution for filming and production, at least for the next few years. Then there will be 8K, and probably someday 16K as well.

The resolution count will not stop going up. I do hope OLED makes it as a display technology; if LCD get much better and cheaper, OLED might not make it—before economy of scale gets a chance to kick in. I hope it does, I'd like there to be at least two competing display technologies on the market, and plasma is not likely to make the leap to 4K, which will ultimately doom it.
If 4k does not come in Plasma then I guess I will not buy one and OLED is too expensive,will see three years from now because directv said they wont 4k till then.
post #87 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chise View Post

If 4k does not come in Plasma then I guess I will not buy one and OLED is too expensive,will see three years from now because directv said they wont 4k till then.


Hi, where did you hear about directv doing 4K in 3 years?
post #88 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by comfynumb View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chise View Post

If 4k does not come in Plasma then I guess I will not buy one and OLED is too expensive,will see three years from now because directv said they wont 4k till then.


Hi, where did you hear about directv doing 4K in 3 years?


I would like to know that as well because after reading comfy's post I got curious and asked a rep who works for Directv if they had any plans on upgrading to 4K now or in the future? He flat out said the company has no plans for it now or anytime in the future. He said before the company did that they would like to make some of their channels 1080p and that's not going to happen anytime soon either because it would cost too much to upgrade their system. The only Directv 1080p offering right now is their Pay Per View Movie channels otherwise its all 720p or 1080i. But for 4K for Directv in the future or 3 years from now? I highly doubt it.
post #89 of 105
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve1971 View Post

I would like to know that as well because after reading comfy's post I got curious and asked a rep who works for Directv if they had any plans on upgrading to 4K now or in the future? He flat out said the company has no plans for it now or anytime in the future. He said before the company did that they would like to make some of their channels 1080p and that's not going to happen anytime soon either because it would cost too much to upgrade their system. The only Directv 1080p offering right now is their Pay Per View Movie channels otherwise its all 720p or 1080i. But for 4K for Directv in the future or 3 years from now? I highly doubt it.

According to a March 2013 pcmag article, the timeframe for UHD adoption at DirecTV is 2016-2020. The company has laid the groundwork, that is well-documented. It's probably not a good idea to anonymously quote company reps without doing a little fact-checking first.

I don't think there is enough appreciation for how quickly UHD is going to catch on. Consider the TCL-brand UHDTV that was recently announced. Back in March, I don't think anyone anticipated a $999 50" UHD panel would be available by summer 2013.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2401711,00.asp
Edited by imagic - 7/29/13 at 7:33am
post #90 of 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

According to a March 2013 pcmag article, the timeframe for UHD adoption at DirecTV is 2016-2020. The company has laid the groundwork, that is well-documented. It's probably not a good idea to anonymously quote company reps without doing a little fact-checking first.

I don't think there is enough appreciation for how quickly UHD is going to catch on. Consider the TCL-brand UHDTV that was recently announced. Back in March, I don't think anyone anticipated a $999 50" UHD panel would be available by summer 2013.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2401711,00.asp

I believe there is a Dish article out there as well, that mentions a few 4K premium channels on the Dish Network by 2016. I think the sales success of the smaller 55"-65" 4K panels has caught them by surprise. I know LG has mentioned publicly about switching focus from their troubled OLED launch, to concentrate better on the emerging UHD market.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Latest Industry News
AVS › AVS Forum › News Forum › Latest Industry News › LG's Curved OLED HDTV Arrives, Samsung OLED Coming This Week