OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 162

This report claims that LG's 55" OLED is now scheduled for a spring release here in The Netherlands (and Belgium and Luxembourg):

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Ftweakers.net%2Fnieuws%2F86480%2Flg-brengt-eerste-oled-tv-in-voorjaar-uit-in-benelux.html

I don't know if this has already been reported, but I noticed if you go to lg's website http://www.lg.com, OLED is now front-and-center in position one on their banner near the top. That means it likely will be seen by people looking for TVs, washing machines, cell phones, etc.

They put lots of interesting OLED information out there, but I don't see any pricing or availability yet.
Edited by Rich Peterson - 1/7/13 at 6:10am

I've looked at this for a while now, and still don't understand something: how do the wires go from the base connections to the panel if the arm holding the tv is clear?

To put things into perspective regarding the initial cost to consumers of OLED displays, Sharp's initial IGZO LCD displays will not be inexpensive:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2023851/sharp-stays-big-with-its-2013-tvs-but-wheres-the-4k-.html

The 32-inch commercial grade PN-K321 monitor will be somewhere north of $7,000.
Edited by taichi4 - 1/7/13 at 10:40am

True, but isn't IGZO the substrate of choice for OLED? If so, goes to follow that IGZO/OLED is always going to be a major leap in $$ over IGZO/LCD for a while.

Taichi, the thing is, while those IGZO computer monitors will cost a lot (at first), they are unique in being 4K and 32". It's a specialized product and so it's pricey at first because there are segments that will overpay. It's too expensive, of course, but explainable.

$12,000 for a 55" TV, on the other hand, I don't grasp at all.

I would guess that the yields on the IGZO substrate are the major driver of the low yields/high cost. LG is using a pretty simple process for laying down the OLED materials on the substrate and the overall material cost shouldnt be dramatically higher than for a LCD. In mobile, Samsung uses the same substrate as used in the high-end LCD's(LTPS) but uses a much more difficult manufacturing process than LG's WRGB and is still within the ballpark of high-end LCD pricing.

It took Sharp about a year longer than they expected to get ramp some IGZO products (mostly mobile). We'll have to see how long it takes LG.

I believe you're right. All good points.

The thing is, Samsung is going to have to move to IGZO as well. They can postpone it for a bit, but only for a bit.

It appears their OLED TV business is quite far behind... I wonder what they'll say at their presser.

Engadet Report: Samsung unveils 55-inch OLED HDTV, really is planning to release it this year

No pricing or availability, but at least we have a model number now: KNF559500

http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/07/samsung-oled-hdtv-KN55F9500-/

Since Engadget reported the LG OLED sets incorrectly this morning, I wanted all to know they were the source of this...

just vaporware.

samsung has to get something out after lg's launch.

note it sez to be release this year, not when.

OLED is getting here as fast as jets got to the Germans in World War II--they were the best but they were too little and too late.

Only a nuclear bomb type technology display can win the war against the advancing LCD crap looking hordes!

Live in fantasy future land all you want--right now we're on the brink of LCD armies annihilating the quality video world!

Kuros and plasmas of all types are currently being moved to bunkers!

The hardest part is listening to the blind LCD lovers crow--"We SUCK and we WON"!

Millions and Millions of LCD plants here have taken over.

They're even part of the OLED conspiracy--Get people to wish for OLED so they won't raise Cain about LCD ASSIMILATING the whole planet!

Even junky 3-D is almost done.

People here talk about 2K, 4K, and 99K when you can't even get 1080p that isn't compressed down to the sewer level of LCD!

Is it true that Joan Baez is going to sing "The night they drove old plasma down"?

*Blue Phase Mode — commericalize soon please!
*IGZO
*4K

Means the future of LCD is evolving, Artwood.
Edited by homogenic - 1/7/13 at 6:43pm

By the way, with the advancements into 4K, are we *FINALLY* done already with the interlacing crap? I mean, I'm not going to turn around in 5 years and have Comcast advertising UHD, when what they really mean is 2160i managed by line doubling in the tv am I?

Artwood, (honestly) I absolutely love your posts---stay strong brother. I have no idea how you manage it without a Costco bucket of Prozac, but you hang in there even with the future bleakly over-run by the LCD Borg. I wonder if their eye pieces are 4K...

^Ditto (on loving his posts)!

I think the main use will be by doctors, examining digital x-rays/MRI scans. The need the highest resolution, in a screen size that will fit in the examining room. In that market, the $7,000 price is well worth it.

Is BOE in China manufacturing 65" UHD TV with AMOLED and Ink-Jet printing? Or is it just bad translation?

My experience would be just the opposite. While tacking on $7k to the price of an MRI or pet scanner would be trivial, I don't believe adding this kind of monitor adds much to the diagnostic ability of the radiologist.
1. They can zoom in on any area with interesting pathology in place of "high resolution".
2. They can adjust black or white levels to enhance any region where they think they see something.
3. They can apply any number of algorithms to enhance or sharpen edges.
4. They can use noise reduction to improve their diagnostic abilities on the image.
"deep blacks", "calibrated colour", preservation of film grain, detail without edge enhancement etc. are all things we want when viewing a movie, but are not particularly valuable when viewing diagnostic images. Higher resolution and lower noise help, but both are more important with the image acquisition than with the image display.

And millions of Photographers that shoot with cameras that 2-3 times the resolution of 4K and like to see more than the 2MP version of their photo. And Graphics designers that for a decade and more have been creating imagery for prints with 300-500DPI.
A 32" 4K monitor is not more than 137.68DPI, much less than many phones and tablets.

Yeah, it's too bad what happened to jet engine technology. Shame that isn't around these days.

OLED might be late, and expensive at first, but unless something better comes along, it's likely to take over. I don't know where you get the idea that we will have an LCD-only future.

This is funny, because if we are strictly speaking about technical accuracy of image reproduction - not a pleasing rendition, but a technically accurate one - including things like resolution/sharpness of the image, LCDs are far better than Plasmas in that regard.

There is nothing "compressed down" about the image of an LCD at all. I'm not even sure what you mean by that, and it makes me curious to know what your actual experience with LCDs is.

The only things you can really fault them on are motion handling, which is mostly covered now thanks to response time improvements, interpolation, and backlight scanning techniques. Plasma motion is hardly perfect either.

Contrast, which is probably going to be in excess of 5,000:1 native now with IGZO panels, exceeding Plasma with the use of full array local dimming.

And viewing angles, which are mostly fine in a well lit environment, and mostly fine regardless with a good IPS panel - though IPS has significantly lower contrast than other panel types.
And for "home theatre" applications, viewing angle is mostly irrelevant in my opinion, as I won't be sitting anywhere except for the couch in front of the TV, and viewing angles on the better sets are fine for that.
For what it's worth, displays like that have been available for years in the medical industry. Barco have a 10MP (4096 x 2560) display available now.

LOL!!!

Agreed. The OLED-can't-ever-catch-up-mantra is getting tiresome.


(?) I don't understand----how is resolution and sharpness of LCD far better than Plasma?

Plasma has a more obvious pixel structure, LCD displays a finer image. Plasma uses a lot of dithering when rendering the image, suffers from things like line bleed etc.

You can't master content on a Plasma display, there's a reason broadcast monitors are all LCD rather than Plasmas. (and now some OLEDs)

I think the more obvious pixel structure is merely subjective.

It's something that is no where near an issue for my PDP and I sit about 6-7 feet away from a 60" display.

[snark]Obviously, you need to get your eyes checked![/snark]

I understand the issues of pixel structure in a PDP in smaller sizes with higher resolution displays. But to use the reference monitor example seems a bit silly to me.

Any info from CES if the upcoming OLED tv's to be released this year will support actual 1080p@120hz input?

http://www.siliconimage.com/products/product.aspx?pid=216

Panasonic Debuts World’s First 4K Printed OLED TV, Just Half An Inch Thick (prototype).
Chinese mainland panel manufacturer BOE also claim to have mastered amoled ink-jet printing.

China having OEL manufacturing capabilities means we'll have affordable OLED panels sooner rather than later? Thank you God for the Chinese.

No one is printing OLEDs and BOE has no OLED products on the market.

They might well be pursuing both, but they aren't doing it yet.