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 218

post #6511 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

This is rare though - most video content is 30fps or less, and few people use external scalers at all these days. There's very little need for them now, and even the high end stuff like Lumagen boxes cut corners when scaling.
And it's trivial to scale up 720p or 1080i/p to 4K. You just double or triple the size of the pixels, no complex interpolation required.
And if you do want to use interpolation, most displays' HD scaling capabilities are sufficient. It's not like SD where you are going from a very low source resolution without much detail.

I have grown to respect your comments, however your apparent ignorance as to the value of a Lumagen's capabilities greatly diminishes that respect. The major reason I have little interest in upgrading to 4k is the improvement a Radiance and a Darbee can make with a 70" Elite. PQ looks more detailed and has greater apparent 2D depth than the 55 & 65" Sony's I saw with 1080p source material.
post #6512 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

In what way did the Lumagen "cut corners" in their scaling?
Pretty sure they're still only using 4:2:2 chroma, which means that upscaled content could look better, and 4:4:4 sources are degraded.
In my testing with the madVR video renderer on PC, you can clearly get better than 4:2:2 resolution out of a 4:2:0 source.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsinger View Post

I have grown to respect your comments, however your apparent ignorance as to the value of a Lumagen's capabilities greatly diminishes that respect. The major reason I have little interest in upgrading to 4k is the improvement a Radiance and a Darbee can make with a 70" Elite. PQ looks more detailed and has greater apparent 2D depth than the 55 & 65" Sony's I saw with 1080p source material.
I had one of the original Radiance boxes and ended up getting rid of it. They have improved a lot of the functionality now, adding a much more useful CMS system, but I still don't think they are worth the cost in most cases - especially not if you are dealing with 720p or 1080i/p sources on a 4K display, where upscaling is considerably easier than SD.
And now that it has been years since I watched broadcast content, I don't even see the point in one. Maybe if you're still watching broadcast content they are still worthwhile, but the quality of broadcast content is so bad that it hardly seems worth it.

Back in the early days of HDTV where scaling and deinterlacing (particularly cadence detection) was terrible, they were much more worthwhile.

While I have not had the opportunity to do a direct comparison, madVR scaling on a HTPC can be configured to give better results than I remember getting from the Radiance.
Using a HTPC for playback also eliminated the cadence detection problems I had with the Radiance, and allows for things such as re-clocking PAL content to 24p, and decimation to output 24p from 3:2 interlaced NTSC sources. (e.g. 480i60 DVDs)

I've commented on the Darbee boxes before, but they just seem to add "local contrast enhancement" processing to the image, which looks terrible to me.
As someone that does a fair amount of photography/image editing work, I'm used to working with tools that offer that functionality (Photoshop's "clarity" tool, for example) and while I can understand how it might make the image appear to "pop off the screen" at a first glance, there are a lot of downsides to that kind of processing, and it goes against directorial intent. It's particularly damaging on scenes which are supposed to have a low contrast, dream-like quality.
In rare cases, I may use this type of processing at very low levels when editing an image, but it has to be adjusted on a per-image basis with care, and I would never try using it on top of already mastered content.
post #6513 of 9447
I would say that someone that hasn't watched broadcast TV for years must be in huge minority. Most if not all of the professional reviews I've read on the Darbee rave about it.
post #6514 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

I would say that someone that hasn't watched broadcast TV for years must be in huge minority.
Perhaps, but I would put money on there being fewer people with external scalers than those who no longer watch broadcast content, and the market for people looking to buy 4K external scalers is going to be almost non-existent.
Just about everyone I know has now replaced their cable or satellite with an internet connection and streaming services.

The most likely demand I can see for a 4K scaler is going to be from gamers who want a cheap low latency 2x or 3x "no interpolation" device, for displays which don't have this as an option.
One would hope that manufacturers will be smart enough to realize that they should be doing this with their game modes anyway.


I'm not saying that there is no need for HDMI 2.0 or DisplayPort inputs, to support refresh rates above 30Hz. I'm saying that for most of the market, it doesn't matter. Most video content - especially 4K native content - is 30Hz or less.
You can still watch your 720p60 sports channels at 60fps on a 4K display, you just can't run them through an external scaler and keep them at 60fps right now - but that's barely going to be a problem for anyone.

The main area where 4K being limited to 30Hz right now is an issue, is PC use. It mostly doesn't matter for video content, and doesn't matter for console gaming at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy sullivan View Post

Most if not all of the professional reviews I've read on the Darbee rave about it.
This is the problem when you have people writing reviews of displays and video processors that have no experience with creating content - which gives you a good understanding of what devices like this are actually doing to the image - or a proper understanding of what good image quality actually is.

It's becoming more of a problem than ever before, now that anyone can write up a review of a device and publish it online, and with how cheap calibration gear is now.
Someone can write up a technical-looking evaluation of a display by sticking a meter on it and hitting "measure" in a package like Calman without really having the understanding of how things work, or even the specifics of what it is they're measuring. (but lower error numbers are always better!)

I've even seen this problem crop up with people offering "calibration" services, where they will dial in the display to look good in a calibration report (without looking at saturation below 100%, of course) but then turn on all kinds of nasty image processing to make the image "pop more". If it doesn't show up in a calibration report, it can't be bad, can it?
post #6515 of 9447
^^^I've read two pro reviews on the Darbee Darblet (one in Home Theater Magazines, the other in Sound & Vision), and BOTH reviewers approached it expecting to hate it, or expose it as nonsense.
Except, both ended up raving about it, and bought one for use in their own systems.
So I wouldn't call those guys just "anyone", or inexperienced, or un/misinformed by any stretch...might try one myself!

By the way, I stopped in Best Buy's Richfield, MN Flagship store today to see the new curved 55" OLED display,...and was not impressed.
It looked small and colors dull. Curved face appears to be a gimmick. (Much more impressed with the 84" Sony 4K set on display!).
post #6516 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post






People are blowing Panasonic's announcement of ending Plasma R&D way out of proportion. I bet they will still be in production for years to come, unless they have really found some breakthrough in their printing process that allows them to sell 4K OLED sets for the same price as their previous Plasmas. (highly unlikely)

And finishing R&D doesn't necessarily mean the end of progress for Plasmas either. For all we know, they have improvements planned out for the next five years of Plasmas, and we will continue to see improvements in performance. (realistically, I would only expect improvements next year though)

Got me wondering, will we see 4k plasmas?
post #6517 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. wally View Post

Got me wondering, will we see 4k plasmas?

I would hope so!
If they & Sony can't make larger sized OLEDs panels for a similar price - then give me a 75" 4K Panny Plasma!
But I agree, that I'd expect Plasmas to remain around and even continue to improve at least while they're 'perfecting' OLED...if it can ever be perfected from a commercial/practical standpoint that is...
post #6518 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

I noticed on broadcastengineering.com they use both 1080i30 (28 results) and 1080i60 (66 results).
Oh well, at least I've got that new TestUFO interlacing web animation (view in Chrome) now to break through the muddiness of inconsistent terminology.
post #6519 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post

It's actually 60 images per second, displayed as the full screenful of odd scanlines, followed 1/60sec later by the full screenful of even scanlines. So there is the temporal resolution of two fields per interlaced refresh.
Isn't it more complicated than that though? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinterlacing
Though that isn't what should happen for the 30 fps (30Hz) within 1080i60 that is mentioned below.
Quote:
Remember, it's possible to encode 30fps or 60fps within 1080i60, and the 60fps-via-1080i60 looks twice as smooth as 30fps-via-1080i60. Much of the stuff you see in news shows, sports, olympics, sitcoms, soap operas, are often broadcast at 1080i60.
eg. a de-interlacer may use different methods for static sections and moving portions of the image? eg. if the entire picture was static, you wouldn't want to use line doubling as you would lose half the resolution.

Perhaps that's one of the demos that blurbusters could show - how well different TVs/Blu-ray players de-interlace different types of content? And as well as possible how the de-interlacing of TVs/Blu-ray players works.
eg. shooting a TV displaying an interlaced source with a high frame rate camera and displaying that back in slow motion.

I like the motion tests but I think it would be even better with actual footage from current HDTVs of how they (or the Blu-ray players) actually do the de-interlacing of the different types of content.
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 8/7/13 at 11:04pm
post #6520 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

Isn't it more complicated than that though? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinterlacing
Joe, I am not talking about deinterlacing.

I'm talking about watching 30fps versus 60fps material on an old interlaced TV (e.g. old analog TV, or CRT HDTV)

During 30fps displayed as interlaced (e.g. 480i or 1080i), both fields of an interlaced refresh come from the same original frame captured at one time period.
During 60fps displayed as interlaced (e.g. 480i or 1080i), each field of an interlaced refresh contains separate images (temporally 1/60 apart). Two "frames" (fields) encoded into one interlaced refresh, taking advantage of the temporal displacement of the displaying of even lines and odd lines, to gain the full temporal resolution of 60 frames per second when it's all displayed on the screen. You get twice the motion fluidity, the full 60fps soap opera effect.

I'm obviously talking about 1080i60 (same thing as 1080i/30 in the ECC preferred notation, no difference).
For UK, replace all "60" above with "50", and replace all "30" above with "25.
Edited by Mark Rejhon - 8/7/13 at 11:08pm
post #6521 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post

Joe, I am not talking about deinterlacing.

I'm talking about watching 30fps versus 60fps material on an old interlaced TV (e.g. old analog TV, or CRT HDTV)
But since all current TVs are progressive scan and they don't sell CRT TVs any more I think de-interlacing is more relevant. Since people nowadays will be watching interlaced sources (as well as progressive ones) on progressive HDTVs.
So how and how well players and HDTVs de-interlace content would be a good demo of how things work currently as opposed to when people used CRT TVs which is in the past (or mostly is).

eg. we were talking about current broadcasts/TV shows in HD and how they should be displayed. So de-interlacing and source rate is relevant to it.
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 8/7/13 at 11:23pm
post #6522 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

eg. we were talking about current broadcasts/TV shows in HD and how they should be displayed. So de-interlacing and source rate is relevant to it.
Got it. I understand now.
Good deinterlacers attempt to keep the original image rate unmodified, e.g. 30fps becomes 30fps, and 60fps becomes 60fps.
But obviously, that is not always the rule of thumb.
There's extra temporal information in the original for deinterlacers to take advantage of.

There can be other considerations/complexities such as motion interpolation being involved as part of deinterlacing. For interpolation being added, there are 60 original points for motion vector computations in 60fps sent over 1080i60, and 30 original points for motion vector computations in 30fps sent over 1080i60.

Yes, it does get horrendously complicated from here onwards.
But the point still stands -- there is extra original temporal resolution in 60fps over 1080i60 than 30fps over 1080i60 that can be taken advantage of by deinterlacers and/or interpolators, if their algorithms wish to use the extra temporal information (e.g. for computation of motion vectors, for choosing an optimized deinterlacing algorithm, etc)
Edited by Mark Rejhon - 8/8/13 at 10:04pm
post #6523 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. wally View Post

Got me wondering, will we see 4k plasmas?

I think the more pertinent question is: In 4 years, will we see plasmas?
post #6524 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by navychop View Post

I think the more pertinent question is: In 4 years, will we see plasmas?

My eight-ball says, unlikely.
Next year, looks good though.

- Rich
post #6525 of 9447
I certainly don't have the enthusiasm for OLED that I once did. I still hope for it to deliver on it's promises and even dominate the market- I just don't see that as a sure thing anymore.

Another question is: Will OLED's fate be determined before Plasma's? It seems the last nail is being driven into plasma's coffin, but maybe it can recover if OLED doesn't make it.
post #6526 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by navychop View Post

I certainly don't have the enthusiasm for OLED that I once did. I still hope for it to deliver on it's promises and even dominate the market- I just don't see that as a sure thing anymore.

Another question is: Will OLED's fate be determined before Plasma's? It seems the last nail is being driven into plasma's coffin, but maybe it can recover if OLED doesn't make it.

I think Plasma has independent problems because LED/LCDs outsell them by a wide margin and 4K is easy for LCD and not likey to happen for Plasma.
I am rooting for OLED. There is is a race and I think the technology issues will get resolved.

- Rich
post #6527 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

I think Plasma has independent problems because LED/LCDs outsell them by a wide margin and 4K is easy for LCD and not likey to happen for Plasma.
I am rooting for OLED. There is is a race and I think the technology issues will get resolved.

- Rich

If OLED goes by the wayside, and all we're left with is LCD/LED displays I don't know what we'll do for a great picture! eek.gif
I'm hoping plasma sticks around and gets into the 4K market if OLED bombs...or even if it DOESN'T bomb!
post #6528 of 9447
I can't help but view the next 12 months as being crucial for the short-term prospects of OLED as TV technology.

We've waited so long for this Holy Grail of TV tech to come along, and I'm just fearful we're not seeing enough momentum in the field for it to break through into the mainstream market.

Sony's TV division has just posted a rare quarterly profit, and this is being attributed to the success of its 4K LED screens...
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/x9-profit-201308083240.htm

The financially embattled TV companies are looking to make a profit - that's the bottom line. What worries me is that they'll consider the far-less tricky or costly manufacture of surprisingly popular 4K LED screens as a better prospect of maximising their profits, and just concentrate on this area in the short-term - perhaps sitting on OLED tech by keeping the prices unattainably high, and lining up affordable versions of these 'miracle sets' as the NEXT big advance for five to ten years' time (once the buzz of 4k/8k has worn off).

After all, if Joe Q Public is happy to pay out for LED screens, even if they are a far from perfect technology, why bother striving for anything better?

It's good that LG are pushing the technology forward. They're known to currently favour the cheaper end of the market, but producing innovative OLED tech could help raise their standing. It's just frustrating that we know Panasonic have an OLED manufacturing process that produces apparently 100 per cent yields, and should therefore be the best bet of getting sets onto the market, but that we're seeing little significant progress (it'll be interesting to see what emerges at next month's trade shows).

We need affordable OLED TV sets, and we need them soon.
Edited by Desk. - 8/9/13 at 5:48am
post #6529 of 9447
Offering cheer in the field of OLED technology (hopefully driving it into the TV market), material supplier and OLED tech licence-holder Universal Display announce better than anticipated second quarter profits...

http://www.rttnews.com/2170165/universal-display-shares-soar-22-as-q2-results-top-estimates-backs-outlook.aspx?type=ern
post #6530 of 9447
OLED is not going to bomb or fail: not a chance: I say that based on the commitments and investments the major players have made: these companies would not have undertaken such a risk unless they had a high degree of confidence they could overcome the manufacturing startup learning curve

But it does appear they are struggling much more than anticipated: and cheap OLED's are still a long way off: but they will come
post #6531 of 9447
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/08/130807133432.htm
(last paragraph in the article)
Some of these design concepts could also be applied to Organic Light Emitting diodes, a new and rapidly growing display technology, allowing for more efficient displays in cell phones and TVs.
post #6532 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desk. View Post

I can't help but view the next 12 months as being crucial for the short-term prospects of OLED as TV technology. We've waited so long for this Holy Grail of TV tech to come along, and I'm just fearful we're not seeing enough momentum in the field for it to break through into the mainstream market.

Sony's TV division has just posted a rare quarterly profit, and this is being attributed to the success of its 4K LED screens...
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/x9-profit-201308083240.htm

The financially embattled TV companies are looking to make a profit - that's the bottom line. What worries me is that they'll consider the far-less tricky or costly manufacture of surprisingly popular 4K LED screens as a better prospect of maximising their profits, and just concentrate on this area in the short-term - perhaps sitting on OLED tech by keeping the prices unattainably high, and lining up affordable versions of these 'miracle sets' as the NEXT big advance for five to ten years' time (once the buzz of 4k/8k has worn off).

After all, if Joe Q Public is happy to pay out for LED screens, even if they are a far from perfect technology, why bother striving for anything better?

It's good that LG are pushing the technology forward. They're known to currently favour the cheaper end of the market, but producing innovative OLED tech could help raise their standing. It's just frustrating that we know Panasonic have an OLED manufacturing process that produces apparently 100 per cent yields, and should therefore be the best bet of getting sets onto the market, but that we're seeing little significant progress (it'll be interesting to see what emerges at next month's trade shows).

We need affordable OLED TV sets, and we need them soon.

TLC will probably release them with in a year look at their 65 " 4K LED TV it is 1/5 of Sony's price smile.gif
post #6533 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

TLC will probably release them with in a year look at their 65 " 4K LED TV it is 1/5 of Sony's price smile.gif

Very good. :-)

Producing 4K versions of existing and relatively easily-manufactured LED tech is one thing. Manufacturing a cheap version of new tech that even the best companies are struggling to master is, of course, something entirely different.

That being said, if companies are able to radically undercut the prices of 4K LED tech from the likes of Sony, it might propel those larger companies to quickly roll out new OLED tech which can still command those high-end prices.
post #6534 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post

OLED is not going to bomb or fail: not a chance: I say that based on the commitments and investments the major players have made: these companies would not have undertaken such a risk unless they had a high degree of confidence they could overcome the manufacturing startup learning curve

But it does appear they are struggling much more than anticipated: and cheap OLED's are still a long way off: but they will come

Totally agree.
post #6535 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desk. View Post

I don't know if this has been penned by our very own 'Rogo', but this brand new Forbes article about the development of OLED TV by Mark Rogowsky is well worth a read...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/07/28/oled-finally-arrives-but-is-the-dream-tv-really-worth-it/

From the article:
Quote:
the initial rollout is limited to Best Buy/Magnolia locations in Los Angeles, New York, Miami, Houston, Dallas, San Francisco, Chicago, Seattle and San Antonio.

Rogo, I like the article, but I have to say I'm really hurt that you didn't mention Minneapolis as one of the initial locations, especially since we had it first! smile.gif
post #6536 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post

OLED is not going to bomb or fail: not a chance: I say that based on the commitments and investments the major players have made: these companies would not have undertaken such a risk unless they had a high degree of confidence they could overcome the manufacturing startup learning curve

But it does appear they are struggling much more than anticipated: and cheap OLED's are still a long way off: but they will come

So what's to prevent consumers from rejecting OLED the same way they rejected Plasma? Despite what the manufacturers want, ultimately, they can't force people to buy a tech they don't want. Even if the major players stopped making LCD, there would always be lesser guys who can't make OLED and continue to sell super-cheap LCD.

Has there ever been a consumer survey conducted to determine why people chose LCD over Plasma when shopping for 42"+ displays?
post #6537 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizziwig View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post

OLED is not going to bomb or fail: not a chance: I say that based on the commitments and investments the major players have made: these companies would not have undertaken such a risk unless they had a high degree of confidence they could overcome the manufacturing startup learning curve

But it does appear they are struggling much more than anticipated: and cheap OLED's are still a long way off: but they will come

So what's to prevent consumers from rejecting OLED the same way they rejected Plasma? Despite what the manufacturers want, ultimately, they can't force people to buy a tech they don't want. Even if the major players stopped making LCD, there would always be lesser guys who can't make OLED and continue to sell super-cheap LCD.

Has there ever been a consumer survey conducted to determine why people chose LCD over Plasma when shopping for 42"+ displays?

good question: there are factors that make this unlikely in my opinion:

--- many of the plasma/ LCD panel OEM's have committed to OLED going forward: that means they will switch from making plasma/ LCD panels in favor of OLED

--- I think OLED has the potential to compete price wise with LCD once they get past the learning curve: to me OLED has significant advantages over present technology in terms of PQ, thickness, weight, power consumption to name a few: those AVS members lucky enough to get to see the new OLED displays have all lauded them for a stunning picture.


as far as a survey, not sure of that but it has a lot to do with what the retailers want to push: LCD's are more profitable, and easier to sell because they look better in the showroom, and their thin, lightweight design is more appealing, easier to ship, handle, and mount, and have more appeal in the home.

sure there will be a legacy market for LCD displays, just as there continues to be with plasma: but I am talking about the long term: if only we knew how long 'long term' really is...
post #6538 of 9447
"....we know Panasonic have an OLED manufacturing process that produces apparently 100 per cent yields...."


I really can't accept that uncritically. Let them prove it.
post #6539 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by navychop View Post

I certainly don't have the enthusiasm for OLED that I once did. I still hope for it to deliver on it's promises and even dominate the market- I just don't see that as a sure thing anymore.

Another question is: Will OLED's fate be determined before Plasma's? It seems the last nail is being driven into plasma's coffin, but maybe it can recover if OLED doesn't make it.
You were one of the more bullish about OLED types up until recently. That number keeps dwindling. eek.gif
post #6540 of 9447
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post

OLED is not going to bomb or fail: not a chance: I say that based on the commitments and investments the major players have made: these companies would not have undertaken such a risk unless they had a high degree of confidence they could overcome the manufacturing startup learning curve

But it does appear they are struggling much more than anticipated: and cheap OLED's are still a long way off: but they will come



Question is if the manufacturing difficulties persist, and these display providers can now make very healthy profits selling 4ks, do they continue to invest oled, which remains an unproven tech on displays this size.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread