or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 6

post #151 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by phtnhappy View Post

OLED will get both bigger and cheaper, and at some point may be a very worthy competitor for LCD and PDP if they can break through the 40" barrier.

Believe it or not, it IS "...that much a problem to have a TV that is 10" deep...", particularly in markets outside North America where RPTV has never really taken off. Yes, people in Europe dealt with deep CRT, but never adopted RPTV due to overall size of the cabinet, among other things. As flat panel displays come down in price as they go up in size, RPTV is eventually an endagerred species outside of specialty products and markets.


All of the true flat panel technologies have burn-in problems. LCD flat panels are not in the same true flat category as plasma, OLED, and SED, because the panel itself does not provide any light source. LCD is a form of rear projection. The true flat technologies will burn-in and there is no hope to fix that problem on the horizon. I think RPTV will be around for a long time, because they keep getting cheaper, lighter, better looking, and longer lasting, and at a lower price point. You get the added bonus of no burn-in, thus you can hook them up to your computer with no worries.

IB
post #152 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by inky blacks View Post

All of the true flat panel technologies have burn-in problems. LCD flat panels are not in the same true flat category as plasma, OLED, and SED, because the panel itself does not provide any light source. LCD is a form of rear projection. The true flat technologies will burn-in and there is no hope to fix that problem on the horizon. I think RPTV will be around for a long time, because they keep getting cheaper, lighter, better looking, and longer lasting, and at a lower price point. You get the added bonus of no burn-in, thus you can hook them up to your computer with no worries.

IB

The horrible off-angle viewing from RPTV & LCD is deal breaker for me, and will never own one unless something dramatically changes. Also, I much prefer a self-illuminating direct view display as opposed to a "reflected-view". Presently, top-tier plasma displays offer the very best PQ, and the latest Pioneer 8G's that are soon to be released will make a big leap in black levels & contrast. The "burn-in" issue for the newer Plasmas is a red herring, and w/pixel shift and other advancements makes burn-in a pretty much non-issue. I don't leave my TV's on 24/7 and take pretty good care of my electronics so I would not be concerned. OLED's are poised to be the next big video tech to breakout as a real competitor in the marketplace. Competition is good for us consumers, and all will benefit from increased PQ & decreased pricing.
post #153 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by inky blacks View Post

OLED was touted as being a cheaper and thinner alternative to LCD and plasma. If it is more expensive than either, then who needs it? Rear projection is getting better and better and cheaper and cheaper. Is it that much of a problem to have a TV that is 10" deep? That is where RPTVs are headed, with lifespans of 30,000 hours and more. Plasma keeps getting better and cheaper. There is hardly a need for SED or OLED. I would not invest in these new technologies.

IB

RPTV needs to shave its huge ass further though (though Laser TVs are trying to fix that part).

So atm, my choice would be OLED. Why you ask? Simply from the aspect of contrast ratio and motion speed, OLED wins hands down. Where can you even find any display tech that can reach speeds of ONE MICROSECOND OR LESS. (CRT =1-2 ms; plasma & RPTV = 2-3 ms; LCD 4-8 ms avg.).

Also, OLED wins on the aspects of power consumption, weight and display thickness (being just 1 cm or less in depth)

And the lifespan of OLED materials are increasing rapidly. Latest report indicates that Red and Green OLED bulbs/materials have gone past the 60,000 hour lifespan stage @ 1000 cd/m2 brightness (as of March 2007 from CDT). Blue though still is only at 20k @ 1000 cd/m2 brightness......although work is constantly being done in order for that target to be reached before year-end.

So that sums it up as to why OLED is gonna come out strong even before this decade ends

post #154 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackraven View Post

So that sums it up as to why OLED is gonna come out strong even before this decade ends

Unfortunately, you won't see a 30" OLED by then. And what will be produced will cost more than double a similiar sized LCD. HT sized OLED is still more than 5 years away and will still cost more than double LCD at that time.
post #155 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoodlum View Post

Unfortunately, you won't see a 30" OLED by then. And what will be produced will cost more than double a similiar sized LCD. HT sized OLED is still more than 5 years away and will still cost more than double LCD at that time.

An even then, you must be a willing "early adopter" and all that it entails...not me, my friends. Only tried, true & blue video tech for my hard earned bucks. We're talking around 2015 time frame.
post #156 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by inky blacks View Post

All of the true flat panel technologies have burn-in problems. LCD flat panels are not in the same true flat category as plasma, OLED, and SED, because the panel itself does not provide any light source.

Sorry, not true. You are describing the difference between emissive panels (e.g. PDP and OLED) and tansmissive panels (LCD). Both, however, are generally considered to be "FPD" or Flat Panel Displays in the jargon of the display industry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by inky blacks View Post

LCD is a form of rear projection.

It is when the LCD panels are "microdisplays" of the type used in both front and rear projectors as well as other display applications. NOT true when the panel is used in, say, your computer or laptop monitor, an "HT" sized display, an industrial process monitor, a front panel display or literally thousands of other display applications.

Quote:
Originally Posted by inky blacks View Post

The true flat technologies will burn-in and there is no hope to fix that problem on the horizon.

Yes, if it is an emmisive display with a phosphor-based screen, again like a PDP. LCDs are flat panel display technologies. They may occasionally exhibit "dead" or "stuck" pixel cells, but that is different from phosphor burn. Whether a product may "burn in" or not is something I have never seen as being part of what defines a flat panel'; it is simply an artifact of the display's technology.

Quote:
Originally Posted by inky blacks View Post

I think RPTV will be around for a long time, because they keep getting cheaper, lighter, better looking, and longer lasting, and at a lower price point. You get the added bonus of no burn-in, thus you can hook them up to your computer with no worries.

You ignore the fact that RPTV was once based on CRT and thus prone to burn-in. That's gone now, with LCD, LCoS and DLP/MEMS type light valves used as the heart of the projection engines. And, yes, illumination is moving from UHP bulbs to LED and laser sources, but in the long run it is shaping up to be a flat panel world in anything much below 50"W.

I guess only time will tell.
post #157 of 9450
Flat panels will grow ever larger in market share because people want to hang their TV on the wall. I own, and am quite happy with, an RPTV. But it will be an ever decreasing share of the market as the price difference narrows.

I suspect we WILL see a 30" OLED sooner than anticipated. Too many companies chiming in right now, too many pieces seem to be falling in to place. And it may start off more expensive, but it has the potential to become VERY cheap to make- probably even cheaper than CRTs today. They may one day crank them out with ink jet technology, in a vacuum or inert gas room.
post #158 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by navychop View Post

Flat panels will grow ever larger in market share because people want to hang their TV on the wall. I own, and am quite happy with, an RPTV. But it will be an ever decreasing share of the market as the price difference narrows.

I suspect we WILL see a 30" OLED sooner than anticipated. Too many companies chiming in right now, too many pieces seem to be falling in to place. And it may start off more expensive, but it has the potential to become VERY cheap to make- probably even cheaper than CRTs today. They may one day crank them out with ink jet technology, in a vacuum or inert gas room.

Good point.

With so much R&D, investment and of course even more $$$ going into OLED TV production, I won't be surprised that sets such as the 27-inch 1080p prototype from Sony would appear on the market even before the end of this decade (ie. before year 2010).

Heck, I'm even surprised that CDT and the OLED materials producers are on an R&D blitz to ramp-up lifetimes for blue OLED materials (which have reached an all-time high). With the pace that their going, I think that they will be capable of producing blue OLED bulbs that break the 60k hour limit.

Although it will be a niche/early adopter tech within the current decade, it does seem something that is going to come out strong and become a potential tech.

It's still wishful thinking though but the potential is clearly visible
post #159 of 9450
If half the stuff shown in the display area and talked about in the papers at SID last week come to fruition, we'll be there with big OLEDs soon (before 2009) than later.
post #160 of 9450
CDT is far from the dominant force in the OLED R&D industry, you should focus more on Universal Display Corporation [ticker symbol PANL]. They are the ones who are developing the small molecule PHOLEDS that will be used by Sony, LG, Samsung, etc.

I wouldn't trust CDT's lifetime data either, as they love to hype and misrepresent their findings. Currently the lifetime for blue PHOLEDs with the color coordinates for a consumer display are more like < 5,000 hours. Blue still needs a lot of work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackraven View Post

Good point.

Heck, I'm even surprised that CDT and the OLED materials producers are on an R&D blitz to ramp-up lifetimes for blue OLED materials (which have reached an all-time high). With the pace that their going, I think that they will be capable of producing blue OLED bulbs that break the 60k hour limit.

Although it will be a niche/early adopter tech within the current decade, it does seem something that is going to come out strong and become a potential tech.

It's still wishful thinking though but the potential is clearly visible
post #161 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by navychop View Post

I suspect we WILL see a 30" OLED sooner than anticipated.

I agree. It only takes one advancement to turn everything around

Also, Apple's new laptops and the iPhone will have an OLED display
post #162 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Planet HDTV View Post

Apple's new laptops and the iPhone will have an OLED display

Laptops with OLED, or rather LED-LCD?

If, indeed, the iPhone has OLED display, what is the screen resolution? Active or passive matrix?
post #163 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by moreHD View Post

Laptops with OLED, or rather LED-LCD?

OLED

Quote:


If, indeed, the iPhone has OLED display, what is the screen resolution?

No other information at this time, just that the first series of iPhones wouldn't have it, but then it would sometime early next year.
post #164 of 9450
thats a reasonable guess, Planet HDTV, but you shouldn't just make up rumors like that. earlier in the year there was a silly rumor being circulated that the first generation of iphones would have OLED displays but most of the members of the OLED-related message board i subscribe to thought this was highly unlikely since Samsung SDI is still unable to mass manufacture sizes larger than 2.2" in bulk. However, by early next year they probably will be able to make iphone-display sizes in sufficient quantities.

As for the Apple laptop with an OLED screen, I HIGHLY doubt it. The big OLED manufacturers like LG and Samsung SDI are nowhere near capable of pumping out enough laptop-sized screens yet. And Sony has promised its 11" OLED will be for sale by year end, but this is hotly contested, and furthermore its price would be prohibitive to be used as a laptop display.
post #165 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgreen171 View Post

thats a reasonable guess

It's not a rumor or a guess Pickup the new MacLife magazine It is well known that Steve Jobs wants to be the first company to do this.

Quote:
most of the members of the OLED-related message board i subscribe to thought this was highly unlikely

So they're just 'guessing' then huh? Weird.

Looks like we'll find out who's right soon enough

Quote:
However, by early next year they probably will be able to make iphone-display sizes in sufficient quantities.

Hello, McFly... that's what I said

"No other information at this time, just that the first series of iPhones wouldn't have it, but then it would sometime early next year."
post #166 of 9450
hi planet hdtv

"It's not a rumor or a guess Pickup the new MacLife magazine"

Do you mind quoting the exact article or dialogue you are referring to? I highly doubt that an Apple spokesman or Steve Jobs said anything as specific as "We plan to use active matrix OLEDs in our second generation iphone". Had he said that, I would have heard about it, since the OLED world is pretty small and an apple product with OLED would be BIG news.

"It is well known that Steve Jobs wants to be the first company to do this. "

First company to do what? There are already cell phones and mp3 players with active matrix OLED displays. By the time early next year rolls around, there will be even more.

What is your source for the rumor about OLED-display laptops, might I ask?

"Looks like we'll find out who's right soon enough"

Oh, I wouldn't bet against you. It seems quite possible the next generation of iphones would have an OLED. Like i said before, by quarter 1 or 2 of 2008, samsung SDI will be able to make enough displays for the huge orders that apple requires.
post #167 of 9450
Well I read the article you were referring to, and it was interesting, but.....

There was noone at Apple that was quoted as saying they planned to put OLEDs in the second, third, etc, generation of iphones. In fact, there was noone at Apple who was quoted at all. The only thing the article said about iphones, was that it was doubtful that OLEDs would appear in the first generation iphone, and theoretically possible they would appear in the second generation. WELL, THAT IS OBVIOUS. I could have told you that.

The article DID NOT SAY that Apple loved OLED. The article also did not say that Apple was postponing its use of OLEDs as a result of their high price. The article DID NOT SAY that apple was planning on using OLEDs in their laptops, or anything of the sort.

You must have been referring to a different article, or just making stuff up. The one i saw was a list of 5 or so technologies that something to look for in the near future.
post #168 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Planet HDTV View Post



Where did I say that they were quoting Apple? You can either read what is written or you can read what you want to see. Looks like you read what you want to see There are many other sources for this information too. One was an open letter by Steve Jobs where he wrote about making Apple more green in the future and using these and other new technologies, but I guess you know more than him about what Apple wants to do. Glad you read the one article though. As mentioned before, in time we'll see who was correct. I'm not worried. Have a nice day

You're confusing OLED with LED-backlit displays. The open letter by Steve Jobs refers to the just-released LED-backlit Macbook Pros and other upcoming LED-backlit displays. This is in response to recent criticism of Apple's environmental practices. Nowhere in the letter is there a mention of OLED products. Before you resort to condescension, you might want to read what you're quoting.
post #169 of 9450
Wit? Class?

Those are unsubstantiated rumours with no credibility, one is from 2006 and doesn't cite a source, the other is from two months ago and is *lready* partially inaccurate merely because it claimed we would see a Macbook with an OLED display by June. None of the OLED manufacturers are at the stage where they could mass manufacture macbook-sized displays. Or if they did, the price would be astronomical.

Over the years, there have been 10-15 different rumours involving OLEDs and Apple, all of them turning out to be false.
post #170 of 9450
moderator

deleted some posts: please do not bash or insult fellow members if you wish to continue posting here
post #171 of 9450
Please tell me about passive matrix OLEDs! Do they exist outside a lab?
post #172 of 9450
Thread Starter 
PMOLEDs are the past; the industry is rapidly converting its PMOLED lines to AMOLED. Google is your friend, here's a link to start:

http://displayblog.wordpress.com/tag/pmoled/
post #173 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isochroma View Post

PMOLEDs are the past; the industry is rapidly converting its PMOLED lines to AMOLED

Thank you! There is something very important I want to know. OLEDs have a "response time" of 0.01 ms which is fantastic. However, there's an aspect of motion handling called "sample-and-hold effect" and that is what makes me see motion blur on LCDs. Now, I've been told that with PMOLED the sample-and-hold would not be an issue, but with AMOLEDs it would make OLEDs have motion blur like on LCDs. Based on that I want PMOLED. Are there any PMOLED screens I could buy to watch my HD sports and movies on? Could anyone explain this to me?
post #174 of 9450
Thread Starter 
There won't likely be any PMOLEDs for such screen sizes. Rather, to eliminate the SAH affect, AMOLEDs will be strobed @ 120 Hz. or whatever frequency they decide is cool. This will achieve the same effect, while also having the benefits of active-matrix transistorized switching.
post #175 of 9450
yeah, PMOLED is a dying technology, and is being replaced by AMOLED.
post #176 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isochroma View Post

There won't likely be any PMOLEDs for such screen sizes. Rather, to eliminate the SAH affect, AMOLEDs will be strobed @ 120 Hz. or whatever frequency they decide is cool. This will achieve the same effect, while also having the benefits of active-matrix transistorized switching.

This bugs me. Claiming that OLED screens will be much faster than even CRTs and then claiming they must use active matrix is counterintuitive. The two cannot exist together. Active-matrix = SAH effect even with faster refresh rates and PWM or strobbing or whatever.

The only way to get CRT speed is to use a single short impulse of light per frame. And to my knowledge CRT and SED are the technologies capable of this. PMOLED promised even faster but the lifetimes are just too short when using the high currents required for passive matrix. So now they want to use active matrix and along with it will come motion blurring from the SAH effect.

Also, this thread has multiple mentions of breakthroughs for Blue lifetimes for OLED materials from companies like CDT. This is very misleading as these long life blue materials have very poor spectral emmission purity. In fact the blue looks more like blue-white. Pure blue emitting materials still have extremely short lifetimes. There is still a lot of work to be done.
post #177 of 9450
Thread Starter 
Perhaps you should learn some basic electronics before posting such comments. Transistors such as those used behind each active-matrix cell can switch millions of times per second.

OLEDs can use any emission-cycle length desired to achieve specific visual effects. They can, like a CRT, activate cells for only a brief duration of the nominal frame-time, eliminating the SAH effect far better than CRT can (no phosphor decay time).

The only disadvantage of using shorter emission times, for both active- and passive-matrix, is the emitter material must be driven harder in inverse proportion to the emission-time in order to maintain a given brightness. This is true for CRT (refresh rate), plasma, the beloved SED, as well as ILED matrix-displays.

Short-duration high peak emission driving regimes will age OLED, ILED and phosphor emission materials significantly faster. The manufacturer must decide during the design phase how to compromise between lifetime and motion-rendering based on the power vs. luminance depreciation characteristics of the emitter material.

To conclude, the issue of active- and passive-matrix driving methods is an important, but not sole, determinant of such design decisions. In order to reach large sizes, all low-voltage displays must implement active-matrix designs in order to minimize I^2R losses in the ITO conductor planes, and minimize the current-carrying requirement for the matrix driver circuitry.

Plasma has the unique advantage that its gas cells ionize at relatively high voltage, minimizing current and thus I^2R ITO losses on glass and current in silicon (cost, size) - therefore allowing direct-drive passive designs. Depending on operating voltage, SED may also share this useful feature.
post #178 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isochroma View Post

Perhaps you should learn some basic electronics before posting such comments. Transistors such as those used behind each active-matrix cell can switch millions of times per second.

I wasn't trying to be nasty but if you want to belittle me that's fine. If you can't handle people questioning your info then at least try and act a little more civil and get your facts straight.

AM in OLEDs is used to maximize lifetime by minimizing current desity through the EL material. Switching from PM to AM and maintaining the same brightness fundamentally requires a "LONGER" emission time. Do you agree?

The longer the emission time the more the percieved motion blurring. Agree?

In OLEDs lifetime is the limiting parameter. This in turn limits current density through the EL material. This combined with luminous efficiency determines the hold time required to get a targeted brightness. With current technology (luminouse efficiency) they must use AM or PWM to get a long enough hold times to achieve high enough brightness with a usuable lifetime.

PM can be used to get ultra short hold times in the micro second range thanks to the ultra fast EL decay rate but to get a useable brightness you need to pump a lot of current through the device which kills the lifetimes.

Look at some actual OLED research papers regarding the SAH effect and AM. Using 120Hz and PWM really improves things but there is no possible way they can achieve shorter emmision times than a CRT and have any usuable brightness and lifetime.
post #179 of 9450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isochroma View Post

Transistors such as those used behind each active-matrix cell can switch millions of times per second.

Ask yourself how an AM panel is addressed and controlled. Why the transistors are there and why SAH is synonymous with AM. Furthermore, why LCDs use AM (which is not the same reason why OLED is using them) and how SAH,PM,AM relate to emission time and how emission time relates to motion blurring. If you can answer all of that you'll see why an AM OLED will not have better motion handling than a CRT.

Of course when longer lifetimes and higher luminous efficiencies are produced then large OLED TVs will be able to take advantage of the short decay rates that EL materials produce.
post #180 of 9450
Since emisssion time per frame determines motion blurring you can easily rate technology on motion handling by the emission times.

1) - OLED (passive matrix) - micro seconds
2) - CRT - 1-2 milliseconds due to phosphor decay
3) - SED (passive matrix) - same as CRT
4) - OLED (PWM) (several milliseconds)
5) - Plasma - 4-6 milliseconds
6) - OLED (active matrix 120 Hz) 8.33333 milliseconds
7) - LCD (active matrix 120Hz) 8.3333 milliseconds plus slow response times
8) - LCD (active matrix 60Hz) 16.7 milliseconds plus slow response times
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread