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 191

post #5701 of 9447
"Clearly very expensive now, Shin believes OLED TVs could be a similar price to existing high-end LED screen in as little as two or three years."

These guys are such jokers it's essentially impossible to believe anything they say.

That caveat aside, the price of high-end LCDs is now $2500. So he's basically predicting a 75% cost reduction in 2-3 years. Give it 3 years and that means 35% per year (because it compounds) using the Korea price as a benchmark.

2014: $6500
2015: $4225
2016: $2750

I'm more than skeptical, but I'd be the first to say, I'd be delighted to see it.
post #5702 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by webgrandeur 
The curved screen has been around for a while for front projection home theaters. Google projector curved screen to get some examples. They are IMO more cinematic, but not something I'd want to watch regular TV on (or on a large screen at all).
The curved OLED reminds me of the 21:9 TV. Don't believe it will be a succesfull. Only traditional 16:9 TV sells wink.gif Just keep on squandering those Wons LG & Samsung smile.gif
post #5703 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

The curved OLED reminds me of the 21:9 TV. Don't believe it will be a succesfull. Only traditional 16:9 TV sells wink.gif Just keep on squandering those Wons LG & Samsung smile.gif

Time will tell, I guess, but my guess is they actually will sell pretty well.
post #5704 of 9447
I have no interest in curved displays. I get the argument that a curved display is equidistant at all points if you are sitting in the sweet spot, but it obviously limits viewing angles, and let's figure out curved camera sensors before we start making displays for content that doesn't exist. Even then, I don't want a TV to intrude any more on the room than they already do, and I don't think it makes enough of a difference to be worthwhile unless it's actually wrapping around you, completely filling your field of vision. (which would require content much wider than 21:9)

21:9 displays on the other hand are something I do want to see succeed, even though it seems that they are probably going to die off. (the 4K spec should have been 21:9 native) I don't watch television, so more than 90% of the content I watch is already natively 21:9 (films) and computers can output a native 21:9 image on the desktop or in games without any trouble. So for me, the vast majority of my content would be improved by a 21:9 native display.
post #5705 of 9447
Curved makes big sense for computer monitors if one looks at those 3-display sets people use nowadays. For monster TVs like those 110"@4K it makes sense too assuming the viewing distance at 2.5H and well defined sweetspot .

Nice example where curved would provide seamless substitute for 5 x 2K monitors in portrait mode, would have to be 6Kx2K eek.gif
Edited by irkuck - 4/17/13 at 2:41am
post #5706 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

Curved makes big sense for computer monitors if one looks at those 3-display sets people use nowadays.

And also for gaming I would think.
post #5707 of 9447
If you are talking about replacing a triple-display surround setup with a single curved display, then you are talking about 48:9.
But that is the kind of wrap-around FoV I was talking about where curved displays start to make sense.

Curved displays make no sense for large scale 16:9, and I would much rather see "flat" 21:9 displays on the market before anything else. There is no content for anything wider than 21:9 other than a PC source, but the vast majority of films in existence are shot in that aspect ratio and have to be letterboxed on 16:9 displays. Constant image height with a 21:9 display is much better than the variable height we have now. Pillarboxing is not distracting (especially with OLED black levels) but the image shrinking in size vertically is.
post #5708 of 9447
What a surprise. Another OLED-related delay. This article is talking about phone sized displays only, but it seems a delay with those doesn't bode well for the large-screen flexible displays we've been talking about here.


Samsung’s Hyped Flexible Displays are Once Again Delayed

Source: androidheadlines.com

Will Samsung’s highly anticipated flexible screens ever see the light of day? Samsung has once again announced that their flexible display’s release will be further delayed. Samsung said that their planned end of 2013 release goal would not be met.
post #5709 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

Time will tell, I guess, but my guess is they actually will sell pretty well.

The only reason I can see to offer this is so that LG can have a statement in its sales report that includes the phrase "sales of the curved model were de minimis."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

What a surprise. Another OLED-related delay. This article is talking about phone sized displays only, but it seems a delay with those doesn't bode well for the large-screen flexible displays we've been talking about here.


Samsung’s Hyped Flexible Displays are Once Again Delayed

Will Samsung’s highly anticipated flexible screens ever see the light of day? Samsung has once again announced that their flexible display’s release will be further delayed. Samsung said that their planned end of 2013 release goal would not be met.

So we should be clear on some things about these. Let me clarify again that I think for mobile, the killer app here is unbreakable and that "flexibility" beyond that is so uninteresting and irrelevant that no one in the industry is actually pursuing it at this time even though you periodically see demos of "rolling" and "folding" designs. That said:

1) Samsung has prototyped a flexible display but none of the actual technology to manufacture them. They don't have the ability to lay down flexible electrodes in mass production, for example.

2) To that end, there are basic pieces of the technology that don't really exist. While the flexible display has been demoed, the flexible touchscreen has not been. While there are flexible electrodes, indium-tin oxide is not flexible, but is used in all existing displays because it's transparent and able to be mass produced. While plastic-substrate displays are doable, OLEDs can't handle any air at all and films that will protect an OLED against constant flexing from any air exposure also don't exist in any mass-production sense.

3) Samsung's "delay" here is fiction. There was never any product to announce with this display so there was never any delay. I suspect they want to do something with it because, well, an unbreakable screen would be very cool and a selling point. But you'll see more technology announcements about solving these problems before you see a phone with a flexible display. Until then, don't hold your breath.
post #5710 of 9447
Does anyone in this forum believe this??????? It's been reported by many sources.


LG Announces Curved OLED TVs Coming This Year

Source: HDTV Review

At the beginning of the year, LG unveiled their first big screen OLED TV. The company did not release a release date, but many suspected that it would release later this year. Today, it was unveiled that LG does indeed have plans to release their OLED HDTV sometime in the second half of 2013. The model the company displayed at CES was the 55” TV from their new EA9800 series. It featured a curved screen so that users could feel more immersed in the display. LG has yet to announce retail prices, but the regular OLED TVs have been priced at around $10000 in Korea.

More Sources:
http://technewstube.com/theverge/201257/lg-aims-to-start-selling-curved-oled-tvs-this-year/
http://www.somedroid.com/2013/04/18/lg-aims-to-start-selling-curved-oled-tvs-this-year/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Somedroid+(somedroid.com)
http://gizmodo.com/5994950/lgs-curved-oled-tvs-are-actually-going-on-sale
post #5711 of 9447
Call me crazy, but how is a 55" curved screen immersive? People don't set a couple feet from their TV's, more like 8 feet. A curved screen is a complete waste of time. They should focus their attention on perfecting flat OLED screens and actually getting them on the market in numbers actually greater than a few hundred.
post #5712 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

Does anyone in this forum believe this??????? It's been reported by many sources.


LG Announces Curved OLED TVs Coming This Year

Source: HDTV Review

I still don't believe they've shipped 200 of the flat ones, even though they insist they have. So count me as a "no."
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWhip View Post

Call me crazy, but how is a 55" curved screen immersive? People don't set a couple feet from their TV's, more like 8 feet. A curved screen is a complete waste of time. They should focus their attention on perfecting flat OLED screens and actually getting them on the market in numbers actually greater than a few hundred.

It's moronic. "A complete waste of time" puts it so well, JWhip. In fact, everything you say puts it really well.
post #5713 of 9447
It would be great if it was wall sized and you sat within the 5ft center. Otherwise I think the effect would be minimal...
post #5714 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

I still don't believe they've shipped 200 of the flat ones, even though they insist they have. So count me as a "no."

I think LG fails to make a distinction between "selling" and "shipping/delivering". I'm pretty sure that every time they come out with these numbers, what they really mean is "pre-ordered". Depending on the pre-order terms and size of deposit, I guess it counts as a sale in their minds. rolleyes.gif

Until there is a retail unit unboxing video or pictures, it's all vaporware.
post #5715 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizziwig View Post


Until there is a retail unit unboxing video or pictures, it's all vaporware.

Precisely.
post #5716 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

If you are talking about replacing a triple-display surround setup with a single curved display, then you are talking about 48:9.
But that is the kind of wrap-around FoV I was talking about where curved displays start to make sense.

Curved displays make no sense for large scale 16:9, and I would much rather see "flat" 21:9 displays on the market before anything else. There is no content for anything wider than 21:9 other than a PC source, but the vast majority of films in existence are shot in that aspect ratio and have to be letterboxed on 16:9 displays. Constant image height with a 21:9 display is much better than the variable height we have now. Pillarboxing is not distracting (especially with OLED black levels) but the image shrinking in size vertically is.


Chron, do you have a 21:9?
post #5717 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Chron, do you have a 21:9?
No - none of the previously released 21:9 sets met my requirements. I would prefer a 21:9 display if everything else was equal though.

The problem with the current sets is that they are scaling 1920x810 or thereabouts to 2560x1080.
What should have happened would be 4K having support for 5120x2160 (native 21:9) rather than being 3840x2160. (16:9)

That way you could have native 21:9 content that is scaled down on 16:9 displays, rather than having to scale up from 3840x1620. (letterboxed 16:9)

At least it's still more feasible to upscale with a 4K source, as there's more information there to begin with, but I would rather not be scaling it at all.
post #5718 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Chron, do you have a 21:9?
No - none of the previously released 21:9 sets met my requirements. I would prefer a 21:9 display if everything else was equal though.

The problem with the current sets is that they are scaling 1920x810 or thereabouts to 2560x1080.
What should have happened would be 4K having support for 5120x2160 (native 21:9) rather than being 3840x2160. (16:9)

That way you could have native 21:9 content that is scaled down on 16:9 displays, rather than having to scale up from 3840x1620. (letterboxed 16:9)

At least it's still more feasible to upscale with a 4K source, as there's more information there to begin with, but I would rather not be scaling it at all.

I was wondering what they were doing.

Does Blu-Ray allow fields for native 2560 across?

I've only seen the Vizio 21:9. And it looked like crap.
post #5719 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Does Blu-Ray allow fields for native 2560 across?
No-and there wouldn't be any content for it even if they added support, because current players wouldn't be able to scale that image down for 16:9 TVs.
Moving to 4K was an opportunity to include native 21:9 encoded content, and require players to support downscaling it for 16:9 displays, but they didn't do anything about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

I've only seen the Vizio 21:9. And it looked like crap.
The last Philips set was supposed to be good (full local dimming) but it was severely overpriced compared to other displays here. But that's the main problem - most of them weren't good TVs, they relied on the aspect ratio as their main selling point.
post #5720 of 9447
I wonder if a curved screen is easier to manufacture?

Could be why they are pushing forward with it. Maybe yealds are higher for some mechanical reason when you make the screen curved?
post #5721 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

I wonder if a curved screen is easier to manufacture?

Could be why they are pushing forward with it. Maybe yealds are higher for some mechanical reason when you make the screen curved?
It's not that it is easier to manufacture than a regular one, it's that you can make a curved screen with OLED at all compared to LCD or Plasma. They are just looking for new ways to sell people another TV.
post #5722 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

I wonder if a curved screen is easier to manufacture?

Could be why they are pushing forward with it. Maybe yealds are higher for some mechanical reason when you make the screen curved?

I cannot imagine any reason it would be easier to make the curved screen. You'd have more steps not fewer and I'm not seeing any reason why it would be more forgiving.
post #5723 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

I wonder if a curved screen is easier to manufacture?

Could be why they are pushing forward with it. Maybe yealds are higher for some mechanical reason when you make the screen curved?
It's not that it is easier to manufacture than a regular one, it's that you can make a curved screen with OLED at all compared to LCD or Plasma. They are just looking for new ways to sell people another TV.


Well we've also talked a lot about the "gotta show it at a show first or early" thing, which has a momentum all its own completely devoid of ever believing it will truly sell or be manufacturable. Most recent such thing that comes to mind is the Crystal LED.

Sure they can probably turn this curved thing into a real product, but I can't begin to take it seriously until I see it cleanly on a wall, hear a cogent reason how it could possibly matter at most people's viewing distances, etc. There's a big burden of proof on this thing that I just don't see them satisfying.
post #5724 of 9447
Predictions based on DisplaySearch data. I bolded some text.

OLED TV Prices Could Fall in Line with 2013 LCD TV Prices By 2018

Source: digitalversus.com

LG is the first—and for the time being only—TV maker to have started actually selling OLED TVs, although they're currently only available in South Korea. However, the competition isn't far behind. Samsung should be releasing one or more models this year, with Sony and Panasonic no doubt set to follow in 2014. We reckon we can expect to see the first Ultra HD (4K) OLED TV landing sometime around February 2014.

But OLED is an expensive technology—not because of the components, as OLED panels aren't necessarily any more expensive to produce than LCD panels (more on that soon)—but because of the 15 years of R&D it has taken to perfect it (since 1998!).

Working closely with all the main screen-makers, researchers at Display Search have compiled a document aimed at panel manufacturers outlining various predictions for sales volumes and turnover per screen technology type. Information from the report can be used to deduce the progression of OLED panel prices across all manufacturers. Note that we're not talking about finished TVs here, but about the main component used to build them—the screen and the electronics used to control it. But since the screen is the most costly part of a TV, panel prices can give us some idea of how TV prices may also evolve.

Prices: OLED 2018 = LCD 2013
In three years' time, prices are predicted to be 4.6 times lower than current levels. By extrapolating the results further, we can see that by 2018—five years after the first OLED TVs launched—the average price per panel should end up at around $475. That's comparable to the cost of LCD panels in 2013 ($460 according to Display Search).

By 2018, OLED panels should therefore be selling for about the same price as today's LCD panels. Still, we should bear in mind that:
• in 2018, screen sizes will probably be bigger than in 2013. We should see OLED TVs at about the same price as today's LCD models, but with bigger screens (by 2018, OLED TVs will be available in all sizes);
• between now and 2018, the cost of goods sold for LCD technology will drop. Unlike plasma, which is due to be phased out by 2015-2016, LCD will still be around as an entry-level alternative. LCD is eventually likely to be phased out sometime between 2020 and 2025;
• OLEDs are slimmer, lighter and easier to recycle than LCD TVs, which means they'll be less affected by transport costs, green taxes, etc. This may push prices down slightly further.
post #5725 of 9447
That is predicated on a 2013 launch, of which there is little evidence regarding this happening. Sony and Panasonic will "no doubt" have sets to follow in 2014? Funny.
post #5726 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinnie97 View Post

That is predicated on a 2013 launch, of which there is little evidence regarding this happening. Sony and Panasonic will "no doubt" have sets to follow in 2014? Funny.

As soon as I see a writer say something like "X times lower than" I want to smack 'em.
post #5727 of 9447
Yup, hogwild speculation, not even accounting for the dynamic realities of (and particularly slower than forecast) OLED development.
post #5728 of 9447
I can't stand hypesters, so let's take a look at what DisplaySearch actually had to say about OLED less than three weeks ago:
Quote:
"According to the latest Quarterly Worldwide FPD Shipment and Forecast Report, AMOLED revenues are expected to pass $11.3B in 2013, up from $6.9B in 2012. This is an important milestone in the growth of AMOLED production. However, as long as the AMOLED business model remains limited to a single source (Samsung Display) and customer (Samsung Mobile), its future growth is questionable."

Source: http://www.displaysearchblog.com/2013/04/2013-amoled-revenues-to-pass-10b/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DisplaysearchBlogDisplaysearch+%28DisplaySearch+Blog+%C2%BB+DisplaySearch%29

More intelligent things:
  • The likelihood of Sony and Panasonic shipping anything next year is very, very, very close to zero.
  • The likelihood of LCD being phased out in 2020-2025 is pretty darned close to zero. What do you think those Chinese LCD plants are being built for, exactly?
  • In 2018, LCDs will outsell OLEDs in the TV businesses. And not by a little.
post #5729 of 9447
post #5730 of 9447
According to the Panasonic Insider, Yield is a major issue for everyone except Panasonic.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread