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 233

post #6961 of 9446
I'm waiting for our local high end store to get the LG OLED in (it's coming). But yesterday they had the curved Sony 65" LED display, beside a non-curved version.
I couldn't see anything the curve added in terms of viewing experience, viewing angles etc. Except that I was aware of the image curve..not a great thing IMO.
post #6962 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post

I'm waiting for our local high end store to get the LG OLED in (it's coming). But yesterday they had the curved Sony 65" LED display, beside a non-curved version.
I couldn't see anything the curve added in terms of viewing experience, viewing angles etc. Except that I was aware of the image curve..not a great thing IMO.

 

I hope they coin the Smiley Face Effect (SME) as a term.  Top curve when under the dead center.

post #6963 of 9446
Should we expect an 84" 4K OLED at CES or too soon?
post #6964 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orbitron View Post

Should we expect an 84" 4K OLED at CES or too soon?

Why would OLED pick 84" for a size? The reason that 4K LCD chose the 84" size was because the plants making 42" displays were not being used as much anymore.
post #6965 of 9446
If not 84", than what size will the largest OLED be?
post #6966 of 9446
If not 84", than what size will the largest OLED be?
post #6967 of 9446
8G doesn't beautifully cut into anything bigger than 55". It can be awkwardly cut into many sizes.
post #6968 of 9446
post #6969 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Where did I make some emotional stand on that topic?  No where.  I was talking about why I thought there was an announcement of a new emissive tech.

But unemotionally?  Do you, or do you not realize that outside of AVS forum members there is endless confusion about what "LED TVs" mean?  As you said: "come on".

I disagree. I don't think there is any confusion whatsoever. I think there is a mass misconception to be sure, but no confusion per se. The misconception that is pretty universally held (outside avs...) is that led is something completely distinct from LCD as opposed to a way of lighting LCD. And understood that I may be splitting hairs on confusion vs misconception smile.gif

But I think it speaks to a larger issue, which is that in reality "it doesn't matter" for the buying public because people walk into Best Buy or the like and are drawn to big bright screens with very narrow bezels, not to one technology (or actual videophile performance) over another.
post #6970 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonymoody View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Where did I make some emotional stand on that topic?  No where.  I was talking about why I thought there was an announcement of a new emissive tech.

But unemotionally?  Do you, or do you not realize that outside of AVS forum members there is endless confusion about what "LED TVs" mean?  As you said: "come on".


I disagree. I don't think there is any confusion whatsoever. I think there is a mass misconception to be sure, but no confusion per se.

Quote:
And understood that I may be splitting hairs on confusion vs misconception smile.gif

 

Your 2nd statement stands to nullify the nonsensical 1st.  Give it up.

post #6971 of 9446
We stopped in to Best Buy last weekend to see the 15K OLED set. Was not set up great with a good demo, just the store loop. But I have to say at first glance I was not impressed. The lack of whites being white was a big factor to me. White was more grey. If I were to get a set like this it would be in a room with light most of the time and the lack of true white would be a negative for me no matter how black black is. On the otherhand the wife and I really liked the 4K Samsung. Of course not a fair comparison because it was on a special loop, but other than the colors being completely saturated (the city shots...and maybe that was the intent) it was quite impressive.
post #6972 of 9446
The 15K OLED is now listed at 10K, or $9,999.

I will wait for Black Friday and hope for a deal on the Samsung 55" OLED. After seeing it at BB, I decided the screen curve is not a big deal.
post #6973 of 9446
So So So... after all these years OLED is finally available in the US.
What was Rogos final prediction on availability?

Will buy 46" as soon as they hit $5k. 55" is too big for my space.
post #6974 of 9446
The wait continues for you since that isn't a size even in manufacturer contention (publicly in any case).
post #6975 of 9446
Quote:
LG will introduce its advanced ULTRA HD OLED TV technology to consumers in 2014.
Quote:
LG is hard at work developing OLED TVs with ULTRA HD picture quality in screen sizes greater than 70 inches.

http://www.lgnewsroom.com/newsroom/contents/63911
post #6976 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by NLPsajeeth View Post


http://www.lgnewsroom.com/newsroom/contents/63911

Let the games begin. biggrin.gif
post #6977 of 9446
An in-depth review of the LG OLED TV with a comparison with high-end plasmas and LCD's to follow.

http://www.displaymate.com/LG_OLED_TV_ShootOut_1.htm
post #6978 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

An in-depth review of the LG OLED TV with a comparison with high-end plasmas and LCD's to follow.

http://www.displaymate.com/LG_OLED_TV_ShootOut_1.htm

LG could not have hoped for a better review, than the one given to their product by Dr. Raymond M. Soneira.

They did provide him with the set, so I would expect that they made sure to select one that had no stuck pixels, etc.

His findings read like it is really almost a perfect display. Now we need someone like him to put five thousand hours on the display and then report on how well it has held up.
post #6979 of 9446
^^^

great review from a respected expert in the industry...I guess he wrote it before the curved LCD was announced smile.gif
post #6980 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post

^^^

great review from a respected expert in the industry...I guess he wrote it before the curved LCD was announced smile.gif
It is a great article, but there is a terminology minor error in Raymond's article, however.
He is a highly respected person and knows what he is talking about, but needs a minor modification of the terminology, in my opinion -- since the LG OLED has more motion blur than a plasma display. It's already confirmed by several sources (japanese scientists, HDGuru, myself, and others). So, I've sent emails to Raymond to point this out.
Quote:
Hello Raymond:

There is a minor error in one of your articles.
The phraseology "motion blur" should be changed to "transition time" or "ghosting":
http://www.displaymate.com/LG_OLED_TV_ShootOut_1.htm#Response_time

Although the transition time is excellent, the LG OLED still has motion blur caused by sample-and-hold, especially when we're doing fast motions (e.g. window dragging, scrolling, etc). There is still some sample-and-hold motion blur on the OLED's. Also, "ghosting" (remnants from previous refreshes) is the word that should be ideally used instead of "motion blur" (includes sample-and-hold, which the OLD still has).

Response time (based on MPRT measurement -- Motion Picture Response Time) is different from transition time (0.1ms). Several OLED's with ~0.1ms transitions actually have at least 8ms-16ms of sample-and-hold, creating an high MPRT measurement from things like MotionMaster and other MPRT measurement cameras.

HDTVTest said the LG55EA9800 has motion blur as bad as a 60Hz TV (120Hz TV). This is seen in moving resolution test patterns. We're not talking about the ghosting (correctly described and photographed by you) but the sample-and-hold motion blur.

For example, try viewing this motion animation on the OLED:
http://www.testufo.com/#test=eyetracking

Also, I have found a way to do inexpensive pursuit camera, using existing consumer cameras:
http://www.blurbusters.com/motion-tests/pursuit-camera/
Only a $150 low-friction camera rail and a consumer camera is now needed, because of a new technique of verifying tracking accuracy.

Sincerely,
Mark Rejhon

----
Quote:
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Mark Rejhon wrote:
>> HDTVTest said the LG55EA9800 has motion blur as bad as a 60Hz TV (120Hz TV).

Apologies, I meant HDGuru:
http://hdguru.com/lg-55ea9800-oled-hdtv-reviewed/

Also, you may want to see this japanese scientific stuff:
Journal of Vision also found that the Sony Trimaster OLED has an MPRT of 7.5 milliseconds:
http://www.journalofvision.org/content/13/7/6.full

Figure 19 has the following image:
F19.medium.gif

Also I have earlier written an article about OLED motion blur:
http://www.blurbusters.com/faq/oled-motion-blur

It is very important to distinguish the terminology "motion blur" (which can occur on instant-response displays, due to the sample-and-hold effect), and the terminology "ghosting". Some scientists would like to call you out on the use of the "motion blur" terminology.

OLED is an excellent technology but it still has more motion blur than many plasmas -- due to the sample-and-hold effect. OLED still has more motion blur than the new interpolation-free low-lag "Motionflow Impulse" found on certain Sony HDTV's. It does have more ghosting than OLED, but less motion blur than the LG OLED. So you see, how important it is for DisplayMate to be careful about the use of the "motion blur" versus "ghosting" terminology, because these can actually improve independently of each other.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

I have no knocks on Raymond and I highly respect him & his article is quite correct (when reading his "motion blur" terminology as "ghosting"). There is definitely zero ghosting on an OLED -- zero bleed between refreshes.

For writing to the (gradually-becoming-increasingly-educated) public, he will need to carefully make sure the phraseology now accomodates the sample-and-hold motion blur, which is a different cause of motion blur than the panel's own ghosting (LCD refreshes bleeding between refreshes). Stationary photography do not capture sample-and-hold motion blur, it only captures ghosting. Pursuit camera is needed for objective measurement of sample-and-hold motion blur.

Since many other sources have already confirmed OLED motion blur (japanese scientists, HDGuru, myself, and others), reviews needs to now recognize the sample-and-hold effect found during flickerfree / long-duration flickers / long-persistence. The sample-and-hold effect is an important consideration during very fast motion, the type of motions seen in computer use and gaming use, that is increasingly a use case of big screen displays, beyond slower-moving blurrier-video.

Current OLED displays flickers with a persistence of about ~8 milliseconds (give or take) per refresh at this moment, according to these measurements already made. This creates 8ms of persistence (sample-and-hold), leading to more human perceived motion blur (confirmed in moving-photo patterns such as http://www.testufo.com/#test=photo ...) than those found on known ultra-high-efficiency strobe backlights (e.g. nVidia LightBoost strobe backlight, Eizo's FDF2405W strobe backlight, and Sony's Game Mode Motionflow Impulse strobe backlight). There is still less ghosting on OLED, but far more motion blur on the OLED.

That said, the terminology needs to be fixed in his article.
So, DisplayMate's article is correct when the terminology "motion blur" is replaced with "ghosting".
Edited by Mark Rejhon - 9/9/13 at 12:23pm
post #6981 of 9446
It's definitely a comprehensive review and highlights something I was discussing a couple of years ago: The chance for near-perfect video to eventually become a mainstream product. It's not likely that OLED gets cheaper it's going to be made worse; it might get better.

I think Part II of the article is going to vindicate what I and others have been saying for quite some time.

By the way, I (like others) have tremendous respect for Soneira. And there is a lot of objective detail in his review that justifies the hype and excitement. But it's impossible not to read his personal excitement there too. This technology has not advanced quickly. That's just a mis-reading of history. It's been demoed for more than a decade and even when it was demoed at tiny sizes, the quality was never in question. The question was -- and is -- can it be built. In the interim, everything else closed an awful lot of the quality gap.

I think subjectively, it's very easy to see how much of the quality gap is already closed. And sophisticated reviewers with their own tools already know how close is it objectively. Soneira's second part will be interesting to see his perspective there.

(I can say as I sit on my couch typing this post, the idea I would prefer to see a curved screen from her such that I am seeing the right edge of the screen curl away from me (even a little) is beyond absurd. The idea that's an advantage strains the imagination beyond its limits).
post #6982 of 9446
More and more OLEDs are popping out of the woodwork at IFA - should be a real 3 ring circus by the time CES come around! - ie LG's 77" UHDTV OLED!
Edited by p5browne - 9/9/13 at 5:45pm
post #6983 of 9446
Hypothetical question and not sure if it's even a fair question - let's assume future technology allows an OLED to be made in 92" or larger. Does it surpass the image of a state of the art 92" or larger screen and projector? Overall, is the look of OLED better than the look of projection regardless of screen size?
post #6984 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orbitron View Post

Hypothetical question and not sure if it's even a fair question - let's assume future technology allows an OLED to be made in 92" or larger. Does it surpass the image of a state of the art 92" or larger screen and projector? Overall, is the look of OLED better than the look of projection regardless of screen size?

For many of us, the answer is clearly yes. For others, the answer will be no.

I hate to hedge (and you can put me in the former camp), but the idea your'e going to get an objective truth here is not the way it works.
post #6985 of 9446
Mark, how about a drop down flexible 92" OLED in 2.35:1 in 8K? It would be a replacement for my StudioTek 130. (In about 10 years)
post #6986 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

It's definitely a comprehensive review and highlights something I was discussing a couple of years ago: The chance for near-perfect video to eventually become a mainstream product. It's not likely that OLED gets cheaper it's going to be made worse; it might get better.

I think Part II of the article is going to vindicate what I and others have been saying for quite some time.

(I can say as I sit on my couch typing this post, the idea I would prefer to see a curved screen from her such that I am seeing the right edge of the screen curl away from me (even a little) is beyond absurd. The idea that's an advantage strains the imagination beyond its limits).

Yet this expert claims that curved TV's are better!? Go figure. His argument about reduced reflections does match up with what I observed on the Samsung but I think he's dismissing the top/bottom curve distortion too easily - especially at only 8ft.

So you really think that OLEDs will get better as they get cheaper? I'm kind of afraid that as these TVs fall in price, their quality control will tank - similar to what we see with LCD today. Sure there will always be a "golden sample" but I'm not so sure that the average random OLED will be as good as the average random $9K OLED we have available today. Hopefully you're right and the unit-to-unit variation will be much smaller for OLED than it is for LCD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orbitron View Post

Hypothetical question and not sure if it's even a fair question - let's assume future technology allows an OLED to be made in 92" or larger. Does it surpass the image of a state of the art 92" or larger screen and projector? Overall, is the look of OLED better than the look of projection regardless of screen size?

By the time we have such a large OLED at equivalent projector pricing, who knows what the projector world will offer.

Projectors also don't have fixed sizes like a direct-view panel so they can always go bigger depending on your setup and light requirements. I doubt one tech will ever replace the other.

All that being said, I would gladly give up my 110" JVC projector for a 92" or bigger OLED if they were reasonably priced (say < $15K). Perfect black levels, no bulb aging/replacing, massive brightness increase, etc. would make me give up a little size. 55" OLED, no way!
post #6987 of 9446
Lot of those projector folks do not care about TVs, and lots of TV folks do not care about projectors no matter how much an PQ upgrade switching might bring. OLED, top Plasma's and top LCd's offers better PQ than any projector out there seems to me. Projector has one advantage, it will always be bigger, and bigger is better some say.
post #6988 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orbitron View Post

Hypothetical question and not sure if it's even a fair question - let's assume future technology allows an OLED to be made in 92" or larger. Does it surpass the image of a state of the art 92" or larger screen and projector? Overall, is the look of OLED better than the look of projection regardless of screen size?
Projectors are inherently low contrast devices. Even the best projectors offering contrast ranges of 130,000:1 are not nearly as good as those numbers imply. As soon as there is any ambient light in the room, contrast from a projector drops precipitously. This includes light reflecting off the walls in the room from the projected image, back onto the screen. With three-chip projectors, you have convergence issues to deal with, and most projectors put out a somewhat soft image. Single-chip projectors are the only ones that are really suited for computer use, for example. (but those have other problems)

The advantage of a projector is that you only need a relatively small unit for a very large image. (far larger than 92") There are motorized screens, and motorized shelves for them, which means that when you are not using the projector, it can be completely hidden away.

With a large 92" OLED display, you have to figure out how to get it inside your home and (presumably) mount it on the wall.
Now you have a massive black slab stuck on your wall at all times. Even with a fixed projection screen rather than a motorized one, you are left with a large white surface on the wall when it's not in use, which is far more acceptable.

And there's something to be said for the look of an emissive display compared to a reflective display. Even if the OLED produces a technically better image on all fronts, some people would still prefer to watch a projector - just like some people still prefer to use an e-ink reader rather than a tablet with a high DPI display.
Another advantage which projectors have is that you can use an anamorphic lens and project a natively 21:9 image. Unless manufacturers decide to make 21:9 OLED displays (and I really hope that they do) projectors are your only option for that.


Personally, I am interested in OLED at "television" sizes - the current 55" models are as large as I would ever want to have. Actually, that is already larger than I really want for a television. I would be more comfortable with something in the 40-50" range.
I am much more interested in projection at larger sizes than OLED, for the reasons mentioned above. I don't have a room which I can dedicate to being a "TV room" and cover one of the walls in this black slate. I can, however, have a smaller television in the room, and a projector/screen which drops down from the ceiling when I want to watch a film on a big screen.


Now make the OLED display transparent when it's off, or replace the motorized projection screen with a rollable OLED display, and I'll take one instead of a projector any day.
post #6989 of 9446
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenland View Post

His findings read like it is really almost a perfect display. Now we need someone like him to put five thousand hours on the display and then report on how well it has held up.

 

(sometime in the near future)

"....after 5000 hours of testing, we discovered that the worries of wear and burn-in to be entirely overblown.  We must've found at least 120 pixels still working...."

post #6990 of 9446
From the article:
Quote:
But what makes this TV absolutely stunning is combining that with a very accurate factory calibration that takes full advantage of the OLED display technology and delivers picture quality and accuracy that is visually indistinguishable from perfect based on our extensive Lab tests.

So... is the author implying that these LG OLEDs will be sold to consumers pre-calibrated at the factory, or is he just implying that the cherry-picked sample LG sent him was pre-calibrated?

If it is the former, why is this suddenly possible with OLEDs, but hasn't been done with LED/LCD TVs? (I get that it would not be possible with plasma due to need for break-in of phosphors).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread