OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 164

I was just hearing today on NPR about how Android has eaten far deeper into their lunch than they had expected. 3rd hand reporting of course by NPR, so who knows.

OT bifurcations are hard to avoid. At least in the usenet days you could ignore an entire visible branch of it. LOL.....

I actually think the Journal got punked. Seriously.

OLED prospects are bleak as manufacturers are still struggiling with yield and cost of even small low-density panels despite many years of productivization efforts. With the general trend of pushing towards high-density OLED may not deliver in the end.

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/oled-tv-overtake-4k-201301172591.htm

I think the 4K forecasts fail to grasp that 4K is basically free to add to LCD and will give LCD a marketing edge and therefore will likely be on 100% of LCDs of 50" and up within a few years if there is any marketing reason to do so. And if OLED has a toe-hold, that's a marketing reason...

So....

EDIT: Digitimes actually agrees with me and has much bigger UHD numbers than the link you have above;


Ultra HD TV panel shipments expected to reach 10 million in 2014
Tony Huang, DIGITIMES Research, Taipei [Monday 14 January 2013]

Shipments for Ultra HD (3840 by 2160) TV panels sized 32-inch and above are expected to reach 3.83 million units in 2013 followed by a drastic increase in 2014 to 10 million units, according to Digitimes Research.

Digitimes Research said TV vendors including China-based TCL and Skyworth along with Japan-based Sony and Panasonic and Korea-based Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics are all looking to push Ultra HD TV sales in 2013, but only by a small amount due to high costs in producing the technology. Those costs are expected to drop throughout 2013, however, and TV panel makers are expected to bump up their production of Ultra HD TV panels throughout the time period into 2014 when Ultra HD shipments could reach as high as 10 million units, added Digitimes Research.

Meanwhile, OLED TV panel makers are still having mass production issues and are likely to face challenges from Ultra HD TV competition during both years, noted Digitimes Research.

The hdtvtest article seems to agree with your 50"+ assumption and still comes out bearish in their 4K forecast in spite of it.

Well, it was stunning to learn that 50"-and-up is a pretty small category overall. But when we compare it to the putative OLED market, it's a level playing field.

Within 5 years, I'd say very nearly 100% of LCDs in that category will be 4K. By contrast, half the category is unlikely to be OLED.

Ergo, half the category will be OLED.

Um, perhaps I didn't word that well.

It is unlikely that half the category will be OLED.

Better?

If OLED is so promising it would already be making significant inroads into the portable displays market. There are huge volumes and profits there. But seen now is significant weakening of OLED position due to the high-density LCDs.

Contrast and motion handling aren't a big concern on mobile devices, except perhaps the PlayStation Vita. (which uses OLED, but has a plastic screen)

Brightness, visibility in sunlight (not necessarily the same as brightness) power consumption and resolution are all far more important, and LCD wins at all of those in the mobile space, especially once IGZO becomes widespread.

I read what is posted on this and other threads with interest. I have no knowledge about how things work, I just have a view about the picture I watch. Whether one technology will win out over another is a moot point AFAIAC. I do not think anyone knows for sure.

There is much discussion about light bleed, flashing!, judder, DSE, lag (for gamers) and more, which leads me to the conclusion that folk are not too happy with the TVs on sale at the moment. So it seems logical to me that people will be looking for a TV that does away with these problems. OLED, on the surface, could be the answer. Sorry

When I read that 84" TVs are edge-lit I wonder whether this means the same problems will be visible as current edge-lit TVs - but on a grander scale.. Will OLED have burn-in/IR? I am waiting for the reviews of these UHDTVs and OLED. Until then my feeling is that LCD/LED, Plasma and Projectors are approaching their sell-by date. It could be a few years but I can't find the button to switch on my crystal ball.

So if that really starts to happen, it feeds into irkuck's theory that OLED is simply going to fail. LCD manufacturing didn't directly scale up from small screen (computer) to big (TV), but a lot of the processes did. They had to invent a few new things, but then they could rationalize building giant TV fabs and -- voila -- they took over the TV market. If OLED economics get harmed by the LCD guys taking back most of the mobile market, that's not long-term bullish for OLED.

First of all, gamers who care about this stuff are a small portion of the market.

Second of all, most gamers are cheap bastards. I don't see them buying $10,000 TVs.

Third of all, 100% of gamers somehow game today on these "terrible" screens.

Fourth of all, this "sell-by" date for LCDs is really freaking far out there.

Fifth of all, how do you know OLED will have no problems of its own?

Sixth of all, LCD technology is getting better. Uniformity is getting, even on edge lighting, IGZO is coming, etc etc.

Seventh of all, OLED has been "a few years away" for a decade. So whatever you do, don't hold your breath, OK?

Review of the 56" 4K OLED by Sony and Panasonic. This citation states the OLED problem clearly: A 56 inch TV is not enough to fully justify 4K resolution, at least not for the typical living room where viewers often sit 4-5 meters from the TV screen. There is nothing wrong with 4K, we praise that trend, but we also think that the wow-factor would have been higher if Panasonic and Sony had produced, for example, a 70” 4K OLED-TV.

Too bad AUO has nothing larger than 8G motherglass and cannot realistically mass produce 70-inch displays. Then there is the secondary issue of how tiny the worldwide 70-inch market is and will be.

Catch-22-22-22.

My comments were about the problems associated with LCD/LED and Plasma TVs. It was not about gamers per se but what a many people have complained about. I do not game but I would not describe gamers in the derogatory manner you did.

I do not know how things will progress over time. You may be right in your view. In the meantime I will not be holding my breath, I will wait until I can read reviews on UHDTV and OLED TVs to help make up my own mind.

Hmm, I don't really think I described gamers in a derogatory manner. I certainly see how the use of "cheap bastards" could be taken that way, however. Many of my good friends are cheap bastards. Sorry if I offended anyone.

Art, you really need to get out of the house and see what the better, properly calibrated, LED/LCDs can do. You'll feel better about life. There's a reason that many Pioneer Kuro owners switched to displays like the Sharp Elite and never looked back...not even once.

Someone please 'splain' this to me. Much is made of OLED's contrast ratio. When compared to a display like the Sharp Elite, which already has black levels close to zero and whites that can be eye-searing (if you so choose), where is this 'quantum leap' coming from?

Can I see marginal improvements in black levels from the already exceedingly dark blacks on the Elite? Sure. But a quantum leap? I'm having trouble with that one. There simply isn't enough room in the best display's current black levels and absolute black to define this gap as 'huge'...at least not in my book.

Peak whites? i don't think so as the whites can already be 'eye-searing', as i said before.

Sow much of this is hyperbole?

Response time? Plasma makes good use of that.

Well if it's the Sharp Elite you are comparing to, it never actually turns the LED zones off, so "black" still glows in a dark room. (I think they're something like 80,000:1 peak on-off) The Sharp Elite also has about 300 local dimming zones spread out over the panel, and due to the nature of how things work, the zones need to have diffused boundaries. So if you have a fully lit zone next to a fully dimmed zone, light bleeds into the dim zone and brightens it, reducing contrast.

Other local dimming LCDs tend to be in the 100-zone range (makes less of a difference than you would think) and can turn the zones completely off, for a higher on-off contrast (in excess of 100,000:1) but potentially lower ANSI contrast ratio than the Elite. (ANSI depends more on number of zones and the content displayed - it's closer to 10,000:1 on my Sony for example)

A 1080p OLED display essentially has six million "local-dimming" zones (1920x1080x3) with hard edges, due to subpixel-level control. ANSI contrast on both the Sharp Elite, and the Pioneer Kuros before them, tops out at about 15,000:1. ANSI contrast on OLED should be almost the same as on-off contrast - certainly in excess of 100,000:1.

I hear what you're saying, but when you actually see some of the best LED/LCDs today, you really don't see any significant light bleed, you just don't. I just wonder, in practical terms, if this quantum improvement isn't significantly overstated.

I even hear some of the reviewers raving about the more saturated colors as well as the ability to display a greater color palette with OLED. Well here too, I'm having a bit of trouble. If we have a hypothetical display A that today already calibrates beautifully to Rec709, then what is this display with 'richer and more varied colors' going to do relative to Rec709? You either calibrate accurately to that standard or you don't. Do we have a more 'saturated & varied color compliance' with Rec709? Not to my knowledge.

I remember first seeing the small Sony OLED that was on sale not that long ago. Yes, it was nice, but I surely didn't think it warranted some of drooling reviews I saw.

Just trying to separate the signal from the noise. Sometimes all the hyperbole results in a low S/N ratio.

You don't have to convince me of that - I'm very happy with my Sony HX900 after owning a 9.5G Kuro. But I still expect big improvements from OLED.
Well one of the differences is that OLED is fully saturated all the way down to black due to being an emissive display. (I assume Plasma & CRT are the same)

I'm quite sure it's better than this on a lot of panels, but here's an example from Sony:


But yes, today's displays are mostly fine with BT.709 content, wider gamuts only matter when looking to 4K onwards.

Full saturation down to black is interesting. I'd have to see an A/B between a conventional display and OLED at these lower luminance levels. Of course I also know of no camera that can maintain full saturation down to black.

But didn't just as many decide the "ugprade" wasn't quite worth all the hullabaloo? That sword swings both ways.

Have you not seen the comparisons on You Tube?

I'm for anything that can save the world from LCD--I'm starting to fear though that OLED will get here too little--cost too much--be too small--and be too late.

If you love plasma buy it quickly--nothing is stopping the probable 2015 day of infamy when plasma will be gone and we will be left with the horror of LCD!

I loathe the day when I'll have to visit the LCD forum with the ignoramuses they have over there gushing things like "man I saw a great 60HZ over at Wal-Mart"!

Nope, not at all. I've spent a considerable amount of time on that thread and the very happy switchers greatly outnumber those that weren't quite sure.

Trying to judge display quality on YouTube shot with cheap cameras? Not my thing.

You're frightening me now Art. I fear for you.