Official SED, Info, Discussion, Etc Thread!!! - Page 89  

SED should be similar to plasma in this aspect. There have been reports of reflection problems.

We've received reports from several people who have seen SED and have confirmed that most of the promises seem to be fulfilled in the prototypes. Of course the question is now whether real life production works at reasonable costs. The jury is still out on that.

noting is going to be reasonable price when ever its new , but i will buy one when it hits costco regardless of whatever fact , as for the reflection god stop complaing lol look @ crt rear projection that has glare almost everywhere

Qualia was the first comercially available lcd with LED backlight and, from what I read, their technology simply wasn't ready for prime time (especially considering that price).

They used 400 LEDs for a uniform, "always-on" backlight so the only benefit you should have seen was perhaps the increased color gamut and not much else. These sets weren't optimized for better contrast at all. On the other hand, Brightside's LCD prototype has 1400 LEDs at the back with each LED's brightness being individually modulated to produce an "infinite" contrast, not to mention huge brightness.

Unfortunately, LED-LCDs are too power hungry right now to take over the market, but the advancements in improving LED efficiency have come a long way since Qualia 005 and Brightside prototype so power consumption shouldn't be a prohibitive factor for long.

Even Sony will go back to making LCDs with (improved) LED backlights soon while all the other companies that make LCDs will have to make the transition to LEDs if they hope to stay on the market. Samsung and JVC showed their first-gen LED-LCDs recently and the rest will follow soon. I expect a lot of these new displays to show up at 2007 CES in few months.

In a year or two, when the power consumption problems will be solved, IMLED-LCDs will be a huge deal. The only thing that will come close is probably SED. Finally, instead of 5-6 different HDTV technologies, the consumers will be choosing between 2 (and maybe plasma at the low end) which will be a lot less confusing while the PQs will finally reach good enough levels to justify investment.

And no shadow detail. What good are incky blacks if they're crushed?

http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/10/05...t-ceatec-2006/

Unless they have some way to get past the viewing angle and speed issues, LCD's are a dead end.

I had an LCD and it was still a neat display, but I'm hoping for something dramatically better, overall, with next gen displays based on SED, OLED, or what have you...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...13#post8604113

Another well respected person is impressed by SED PQ. He's responsible e.g. for Broadcom's VC-1/H.264 decoding chips, so he should really be able to judge when a display PQ is awesome or not.

IMLED-LCDs will be dramatically better. I don't know about viewing angle, but to improve motion detail, the plan is to use pulsing technique which will be handling this kind of problem in a way that's similar to what happens in CRTs, I think.

These displays will still be called LCDs but that's all they will have in common with the poor quality LCDs we have now. Completely different backlight implementation does make a huge difference to PQ.

Obviously, at the end of the day we'll just have to evaluate SED and IMLED-LCD with our own eyes to tell which produces better PQ since it will be hard to tell the difference from looking at their similar specs.

Madshi, SED may just well be the cats pajamas in a few years, but to give an opinion based on a hand-built prototype display from a unproduced brand spanking new video tech designed to wow the CE show crowd just don't cut the mustard w/me. Let Toshiba/Canon actually mfg. something significant and put on the store shelves first before everyone decides to totally disregard current existing video tech displays.

I don't disagree with you. As I said before, jury is still out on whether Toshiba/Canon can mass produce SED displays. I just wanted to stress that we have more than enough voices from well respected people who have seen SED live and are very enthusiastic about SED PQ. There are some people in this thread trying to downplay SED PQ. That's what I'm arguing against.

Here's some additional info I managed to dig up from a very nice gentleman :D

This sure looks promising...

Thanks for the link, Aud.....

This guy has only five posts to his name. All are on the SED thread, and all are about singing the praises of LCD technology. Perhaps he does not realize that there are lots of threads devoted to LCD, or perhaps he is just so blinded by his love for LCD that he did not notice that he is in the SED forum.

Well hell, if the only things it is inferior to SED in is response time, and power consumption, at the bargin price of $49K. we can all rush out and buy one now. Ok folks at Toshiba/Canon, pay attention to this, no need to go ahead with that SED plant. :rolleyes:

200 k to 1 , thats crap sed is soposed ot be @ 1 mil to 1 plus its going to be more affortable then this Brightside EDR LCD so Brightside EDR LCD is out it wont make it

That's the most laughable thing I've read in this thread. If anything, the longer term future suggests the opposite.

First of all, TI simply refuses to give up the dream on DLP (and why should they). There is new talk of 4-inch-depth cabinets -- comparable to today's flat panels.

Second of all, you acknowledge plasma makes "three" and yet you ignore that like LCD it is moving forward technologically.

Third of all, OLED advancements, while horribly slow, continue to occur all the time. The people that make OLEDs want them to be used for televisions. They are not going to be giving up when SED hits mainstream (if it does).

Fourth of all, other variants of xED displays are in labs all over the world. Should SED prove viable, those other displays are going to get long, hard second looks with regard to manufacturing viability. If anything, success by Canon/Toshiba will embolden other technology developers, not cow them.

Fifth of all, today there are 4 RPTV technologies, 2 flat-panel technologies, and gigantic numbers of HDTVs being sold despite the "confusion" of some people. The profound irrelevance of simplifying the technology "menu" can't be overstated.

I'm waiting for SED too. The reason I mentioned LCDs is to counter the popular view on this thread that SED is going to be "the only" technology with such amazing specs, that's all.

Most of us aren't looking for nice specs. It's not like I'd print the specs out and pin them next to my display so I can boast with them when people visit me. What we're looking for is as good as possible PQ. Specs can be an indicator for some aspects - but specs can often be misleading. Personally, I don't care whether SED has a contrast ratio of 10000:1 or 10000000000:1. What I care about is virtually perfect black levels with very good shadow detail, combined with all the other good things SED is promising. There is no spec for fill rate given by any manufacturer. There is no spec about shadow detail. There is no spec for digital artifacts (or the lack thereof). The reason I'm so enthusiastic about SED is that all the voices from people I trust and who have seen SED personally have been extremely positive. That means more to me than any specs.

In the short term, you'll still have DLPs and RPTVs because their quality is not "significantly worse" then that of other current technologies. However, in the long term, once SEDs (and IMLED-LCDs) come down in price, why would you bother paying for far inferior technologies?

Does plasma really have a lot of room to improve at this point? To compete with SED, plasmas will have to reach SED quality and soon. I've seen no indication that this will happen.

I'll grant you that other FED technologies and OLED have at least the potential to compete, but you'll have to wait a long, long time before they materialize and the difference in quality (if any) won't necessarilly warrant making another purchase, especially when you'll have 2nd or 3rd generation SED display at home.

Right, but specs are a good indicator of quality. People sing praises of SED PQ and are similarly blown away by IMLED-LCD PQ, so there you go. I'm waiting for both.

Found a new pic.
http://mediablog.mail2web.com/gadget...5&width=100000

wow its just getting better and better , this is a good sign :D

This is very unfair criticism. Higher post count = better argument?
How can you not talk about SED without a comparison to competing technologies-- especially LED LCD since it's the newest LCD technology?

Like vtms, I'm very excited about the newest LED LCDs coming out. They'll have better color accuracy and a wider color gamut than SED, because phosphor technology can't touch the spectral purity of the latest generation of LEDs. The initial price will be much lower than the newest SEDs coming out...whenever. And it goes without saying that there won't be any problem with burn in.

I've given up waiting for SED. I'm thinking that new Samsung LED LCD will be my first HDTV.

sure this quality is out soon which is great , but no way in hell this quality is goint be superior to sed tv , sed is better then lcd even tho led touched it , crt tube was the best quality and allways will be its just being pushed even better WITHOUT sacrfising quality infact its soposed to surpass crt ,.... so give up but dont say that led lcd is better as sed is best

Are you familiar with LED backlight technology and what it will do to the PQ? I suggest you do some research before making such bold and confident claims.

its soposed to be better quality and since the new tech on it its soposed to eleminate the wheel and bulb repplacemnt but how does it really being better the sed? i havnt seen live pictures as well and whats price point compare vs sed and finaly when will it be avabile?

Good points. Check out my LED-LCD thread where I posted links for the newly announced displays from Samsung and JVC. Even though they are 1st gen panels, they already come with >= 10K:1 contrast ratio, 146% color gamut and better brightness (still short of true potential of this technology). More importanly, they should be available next year (and for the first time) at competitive prices.