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 244

post #7291 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Many folks here completely underestimated the speed at which 4K progressed.  Perhaps we'll be happily wrong about OLED as well.

And IMO it does not matter that there was a dinky Sony OLED screen years ago or that generalized flat panels "have been promised for 10 years."

And I'm doubly glad that the gloom and doomers about 4K clobbering OLED outright weren't right.

(cue Artwood in 5....4....3....2.... )

I didn't realize it had substantively progressed at all...
post #7292 of 9448
So just before OLED came out a month ago, we had plasma and LED.

---In the future what is the "new" competition going to be for OLED ??
Edited by Cleveland Plasma - 10/15/13 at 11:43pm
post #7293 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by rightintel View Post

I didn't realize it had substantively progressed at all...
There are 4K LCDs for around $700 now.
post #7294 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

There are 4K LCDs for around $700 now.
Not sure if it is good progress. A 720p or 900p plasma provides better PQ overall according to some. But Plasma has always had a high framerate.
post #7295 of 9448
The most expensive 55" 2K display is basically $2500. For a 4K, the bar is about $1000 higher by late next year.

OLED needs to get 70% cheaper. At even $4000, there will be virtually no sales and virtually no scale economics.

Ramping yields on pilot lines is nice, but has little to do with moving to 8G fabs. The parts that are not working out for Samsung and LG will be difficult to scale to 8G and in Samsung's case, almost certainly not scaleable to it at all.
post #7296 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Ramping yields on pilot lines is nice, but has little to do with moving to 8G fabs. The parts that are not working out for Samsung and LG will be difficult to scale to 8G and in Samsung's case, almost certainly not scaleable to it at all.

Unless you have some specific information indicating otherwise, the pilot lines are 8G. They are supposedly slicing the substrates into smaller partitions which is going to increase the manufacturing costs, but the initial LTPS/IGZO substrates are 8G.
post #7297 of 9448
Ignis' 55" OLED TV samples arrive, company says their technology enables lifetime and efficiency boost

Source: oledinfo.com

Last month Ignis Innovation announced that they began producing some 55" OLED TV evaluation samples for display makers to test their MaxLife compensation technology. The company now tells us that the first sample panel arrived at their offices, and they will start fulfilling orders (to display makers and OEMs) in about two weeks.

The company did some initial measurements, and they say that this panel offers the world's lowest power consumption (20% lower than LG and Samsung's current OLED TVs), longest lifetime (a significant boost over existing OLED panels). The panels are highly uniform (much better than the OLED TVs no the market).

The MaxLife external compensation technology continuously measures every pixel in the display and compensates for even the smallest shift in performance (due to burn-in or bad manufacturing issues), making it completely uniform and completely stable. MaxLife can work with a-Si, LTPS and metal-oxide backplanes (the 55" panels produced now use a metal-oxide backplane).

Besides the benefits listed above, Ignis says that MaxLife will improve production yields (and so lower production costs) and also offer an easy migration to high resolutions (UHD) due to the simple pixel design.


Edit:

For those not following the Ignis Innovation technologies, here's a summary:

According to Ignis Innovation their MaxLife technology aims to solve major issues in large area AM-OLED displays namely high cost and low lifetimes:

•High costs are due to low manufacturing yields which is caused by the need for complex pixel circuits to compensate for high levels of non-uniformities patterns known as "mura", resulting in stripes, speckles, or cloudiness in the display
•These non-uniformities are due to the manufacturing process of both the TFT and the OLED
•The current solution is to use complex pixel structures (with multiple TFTs per pixels) known as in-pixel compensation (IPC)
•The complex pixel structure results in a higher manufacturing defects and lower yield
•It is not practical to adopt such an approach for high volume large-area AM-OLED displays
•Achieving 2Kx4K AM-OLED displays will be difficult with the complex pixel circuits
•Adopting a simple solution with high compensation performance is crucial to reduce the cost, increase the capacity with the limited fabrication lines, and achieve higher resolution displays
•AM-OLED displays suffer from image sticking, where images can be permanently burned into the display - caused by the instability of both the TFT and the OLED which is a more serious issue at higher brightness and longer-running display operation

Dr. Reza Chaji, President and CTO, said, "Ignis MaxLife technology offers three major advantages over existing solutions: superb compensation capability for high degree of initial non-uniformity, comprehensive aging compensation, and detailed defect report for repair and tuning." Reza Chaji, added, "Despite its unique offerings, Ignis MaxLife technology provides for a very simple pixel structure leading to even higher manufacturing yield and higher resolution (e.g. 2Kx4K)."
Edited by Rich Peterson - 10/16/13 at 7:48am
post #7298 of 9448
^^^ They have an edge, they are FLAT smile.gif
post #7299 of 9448
it seems to me the MaxLife compensation technology would introduce additional lag time for processing...

and it refers to it as MaxLife external compensation technology: does that mean an external box?

seems to me if this technology is needed to fix the issues with this display it should be built in to OLED displays: and not further increase prices...

I am not criticizing the technology: I have not seen it: just raising questions
post #7300 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post

it seems to me the MaxLife compensation technology would introduce additional lag time for processing...

and it refers to it as MaxLife external compensation technology: does that mean an external box?

seems to me if this technology is needed to fix the issues with this display it should be built in to OLED displays: and not further increase prices...

I am not criticizing the technology: I have not seen it: just raising questions

I agree. with memory being as cheap as it is, tracking cummulative use per pixel is not difficult.
Of course, if it goes wrong, it will get interesting. smile.gif

- Rich
post #7301 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

Unless you have some specific information indicating otherwise, the pilot lines are 8G. They are supposedly slicing the substrates into smaller partitions which is going to increase the manufacturing costs, but the initial LTPS/IGZO substrates are 8G.

From what I know, none of the hard things are being done at 8G... By "hard things" I mean vapor deposition at LG and the SMS at Samsung. Slicing them into little pieces and then processing them makes things like SMS plausible. Doing it at 8G remains (likely) a dream. As for the vapor deposition, it's apparently harder for LG to get this right than anticipated. Doing it across an entire 8G sheet is going to be tricky.
post #7302 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

From what I know, none of the hard things are being done at 8G... By "hard things" I mean vapor deposition at LG and the SMS at Samsung. Slicing them into little pieces and then processing them makes things like SMS plausible. Doing it at 8G remains (likely) a dream. As for the vapor deposition, it's apparently harder for LG to get this right than anticipated. Doing it across an entire 8G sheet is going to be tricky.

I think that producing the substrate itself is pretty tricky considering that these are the first Gen 8 sized LTPS and IGZO substrates.

Samsung is slicing the Gen 8 substrates into sixths which is still considerably larger than the Gen 5.5 substrates that they were slicing into fourths while LG is only slicing the substrate in half. You are right that scaling up will still take time but LG's commercial M2 fab is supposed to be run without cutting the substrate. If LG's yields are up to 70% (obviously still a rumor), then I wouldnt be surprised if they are ready to take the next step when the M2 fab starts its commercial ramp.

Everything about the current process is kludgy...from a glass half full standpoint, both companies have a huge number of levers to reduce cost over the next few years.
post #7303 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by rightintel View Post

I didn't realize it had substantively progressed at all...
There are 4K LCDs for around $700 now.

So what? The operative word there was substantively. Even if they were $200 what would you watch on them?
post #7304 of 9448

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Many folks here completely underestimated the speed at which 4K progressed.  Perhaps we'll be happily wrong about OLED as well.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rightintel View Post

I didn't realize it had substantively progressed at all...

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

There are 4K LCDs for around $700 now.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rightintel View Post

So what? The operative word there was substantively. Even if they were $200 what would you watch on them?

 

The statement of mine you originally responded to was "Many folks here completely underestimated the speed at which 4K progressed."  A few operative words there.  And we are far past where many thought we'd be right now: We have 4K TV's for sensible prices that came out fairly quickly.  And HDMI 2.0 solidified.

post #7305 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

The MaxLife external compensation technology continuously measures every pixel in the display and compensates for even the smallest shift in performance (due to burn-in or bad manufacturing issues), making it completely uniform and completely stable.

I have a hard time seeing how this tech can work in practice. Do they have an optical sensor behind every pixel that "continuously measures every pixel"? How else could they detect and compensate for initial manufacturing defects? Also, the early OLED research papers showed a very non-linear wear curve so I don't know how accurate a purely predictive method would be - it might incorrectly compensate in cases where no correction is necessary.

I would also echo the concern about processing lag. It's pretty bad already. Maybe Samsung and LG are already doing some of this wear compensation?
post #7306 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizziwig View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

The MaxLife external compensation technology continuously measures every pixel in the display and compensates for even the smallest shift in performance (due to burn-in or bad manufacturing issues), making it completely uniform and completely stable.

I have a hard time seeing how this tech can work in practice. Do they have an optical sensor behind every pixel that "continuously measures every pixel"? How else could they detect and compensate for initial manufacturing defects?

 

All electronics have known electrical characteristics measurable on the way in and out.  These characteristics will change with heat, life span, resistance, capacitance, light output, harsh language and dog drool.

 

I'm being glib, but it's no major stretch to have the wear be entirely electrically detected with enormous accuracy.  Something producing light during it's lifespan would absolutely not have the same electrical characteristics as when brand new, and I'm betting such things are predictable.

post #7307 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by rightintel View Post

So what? The operative word there was substantively. Even if they were $200 what would you watch on them?
Well my PC is already rendering games at 4K and beyond internally, would support 4K on the desktop which would be a significant benefit, and will upscale any video to 4K. Everything I already use my current TV for would benefit from 4K.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

The statement of mine you originally responded to was "Many folks here completely underestimated the speed at which 4K progressed." A few operative words there. And we are far past where many thought we'd be right now: We have 4K TV's for sensible prices that came out fairly quickly. And HDMI 2.0 solidified.
We might be hearing about a 4K disc format some time in the not too distant future as well (CES is not that far off now) and I suspect it won't have the Blu-ray branding attached to it..
post #7308 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Well my PC is already rendering games at 4K and beyond internally, would support 4K on the desktop which would be a significant benefit, and will upscale any video to 4K. Everything I already use my current TV for would benefit from 4K.
We might be hearing about a 4K disc format some time in the not too distant future as well (CES is not that far off now) and I suspect it won't have the Blu-ray branding attached to it..

What a disaster if it leaves off the BluRay branding....

Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

I think that producing the substrate itself is pretty tricky considering that these are the first Gen 8 sized LTPS and IGZO substrates.

True enough.
Quote:
Everything about the current process is kludgy...from a glass half full standpoint, both companies have a huge number of levers to reduce cost over the next few years.

Which is good because they need to reduce cost by at least 70%.
post #7309 of 9448
Here's an interesting quote from koreaittimes
Quote:
According to industry sources, LG Electronics is reviewing the idea of lowering the price of its 55 inch OLED TV (flat panel model) from the current 9.9 million won to 6 million won at the end of this year.

That would be a change from about $9300 to about $5600.

And at the same time there's this article from Reuters saying:
Quote:
South Korea's LG Display Co Ltd warned that fourth-quarter profit will not match the third due to falling TV panel prices and it will counter that downtrend by pushing out bigger-ticket products such as ultra high-definition panels.

Edited by Rich Peterson - 10/17/13 at 4:52am
post #7310 of 9448
That tells me that they aren't selling many at all at the current price.
post #7311 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Peterson View Post

Here's an interesting quote from koreaittimes
That would be a change from about $9300 to about $5600.














i think they could drop the price to a buck and it wouldn't change their sales figures currently


judging from the sammy and lg oled owners threads here, very in home reports to date
post #7312 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by rightintel View Post

So what? The operative word there was substantively. Even if they were $200 what would you watch on them?
Well my PC is already rendering games at 4K and beyond internally, would support 4K on the desktop which would be a significant benefit, and will upscale any video to 4K. Everything I already use my current TV for would benefit from 4K.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

The statement of mine you originally responded to was "Many folks here completely underestimated the speed at which 4K progressed." A few operative words there. And we are far past where many thought we'd be right now: We have 4K TV's for sensible prices that came out fairly quickly. And HDMI 2.0 solidified.
We might be hearing about a 4K disc format some time in the not too distant future as well (CES is not that far off now) and I suspect it won't have the Blu-ray branding attached to it..

Upscaling is a nice feature, but I don't think it's enough to get people to start considering 4K displays. Hopefully the other factors you posted will quicken the pace(crossing fingers)...
post #7313 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

All electronics have known electrical characteristics measurable on the way in and out.  These characteristics will change with heat, life span, resistance, capacitance, light output, harsh language and dog drool.

I'm being glib, but it's no major stretch to have the wear be entirely electrically detected with enormous accuracy.  Something producing light during it's lifespan would absolutely not have the same electrical characteristics as when brand new, and I'm betting such things are predictable.

As I'm sure you're aware, there are % tolerances on all electrical components. This makes it hard to apply a hard rule on a device that could contain ~8 million pixels. Even if you were to display the exact same RGBA on every pixel, I suspect it will eventually develop non-uniform response across areas of the screen. The only way to combat this would be through some type of feedback. They seem to imply having such feedback with their comment about "continuously measures every pixel". I just wish they provided more detail. I've seen several high-end LCD monitors that have similar compensation for backlight non-uniformity and the results are very poor in practice.

Done incorrectly, wear compensation does more harm than good. Just look at the craziness that ensued over Panasonic plasma's "rising blacks" issue a few years ago.
post #7314 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWhip View Post

That tells me that they aren't selling many at all at the current price.

I suspect they're barely selling any. It's just really expensive for something that's marginally superior to existing products and lacks the snob appeal or visceral "superiority" of a luxury automobile.

This idea commonly espoused here that the world is raft with wealthy people who just spend any amount of money on anything is not borne out in reality. Things like the Maybach flat out failed because the price:value equation was off, not because the car itself was bad. I live within a few thousand feet of two of the wealthiest neighborhoods in the country and have seen two Maybachs ever on the road, for example. Ferraris, on the other hand, are hardly an unusual sighting.

When the pricing moves into the "this is a luxury good that is reasonable" range, they can begin to capture 1-3% of the market. Of course, that market is tricky to define. If you are looking at "high end 55+ inch TVs", you are looking at maybe a 3-5 million unit market (out of a sub-20 million unit 55" TV market). You can see the problem here: Even at 5% of that, the entire demand globally would <250K units. And at nearly $10,000, 5% is not reachable at all. So what do you do? You try to get to $5,000, where arguably they could target 10% of the narrower market. But it's very difficult to see looking at typical demand curves how you can get to anywhere near a million-unit market at $5K when the category itself isn't big, when the luxury category within that is pretty small, and when you'd still be twice the price of any competing product -- or $1000-1500 more than, say, a UHD LCD. And all this for performance that, while real, caters to videophiles, not normal people.

Compare that to a Ferrari, where the average driver can immediately see the uniqueness, even if they can't drive well enough (or fast enough) to appreciate the car. And all their friends and neighbors can see it too.

I don't think this even gets interesting until $5K is broken. And I think it gets a lot more interesting when $5K/4K is reached, the latter being the resolution. Once the OLED hits $3500 it can start making real inroads in terms of volume, because at that point the premium is $1000/40%. Until then, pricing is just so out of whack for a TV. As much as people at AVS loved things like the Elite from Sharp, it had absolutely no impact whatsoever on the TV business, which is why it disappeared as quickly as it came.
post #7315 of 9448
Quote:
From what I know, none of the hard things are being done at 8G...

Not right. LG uses 8G pilot-line with Oxide-TFT, Samsung 6G with LTPS. There is a reason why LG can showed a 77" UHD-OLED-TV at the last IFA and planned more and bigger sizes and Samsung currently stick with the 55" size.

http://www.kdbdw.com/bbs/download/171949.pdf?attachmentId=171949

47"
http://digital.orf.at/modules/produkte/ausgabe_receiver_detail.php?pr_id=1467

75"
http://digital.orf.at/modules/produkte/ausgabe_receiver_detail.php?pr_id=1470
post #7316 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWhip View Post

Assuming the best, namely 20%, that would make the current Sammy $7,200 which is still way too high for a 55" set. `In another year, that would be $5760 and another year after that $4600. They better get the yields up around 90% or you will be looking at 2017 for the sets to go mainstream, at least at these sizes. I could live with $5600 retail for a 70 inch display but not a 55"

Over five grand is way too much for a 55 ". Any other OLED TV coming out better be uhd as well.
post #7317 of 9448
I agree, which I why as interested as I am in seeing these sets, which I now have, I will be waiting for a few years before seriously considering one.
post #7318 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizziwig View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

All electronics have known electrical characteristics measurable on the way in and out.  These characteristics will change with heat, life span, resistance, capacitance, light output, harsh language and dog drool.

I'm being glib, but it's no major stretch to have the wear be entirely electrically detected with enormous accuracy.  Something producing light during it's lifespan would absolutely not have the same electrical characteristics as when brand new, and I'm betting such things are predictable.

As I'm sure you're aware, there are % tolerances on all electrical components. This makes it hard to apply a hard rule on a device that could contain ~8 million pixels. Even if you were to display the exact same RGBA on every pixel, I suspect it will eventually develop non-uniform response across areas of the screen. The only way to combat this would be through some type of feedback. They seem to imply having such feedback with their comment about "continuously measures every pixel". I just wish they provided more detail. I've seen several high-end LCD monitors that have similar compensation for backlight non-uniformity and the results are very poor in practice.

Done incorrectly, wear compensation does more harm than good. Just look at the craziness that ensued over Panasonic plasma's "rising blacks" issue a few years ago.

 

No you're talking about things measuring the aggregate effects, which I'll grant you is akin to doing brain surgery with a vice grip.  What I'm talking about is finer tuned than that.  Every single subpixel is already addressable (to some extent) with it's own electronic feed, even if it takes row and column lines to specify it.  There are already electronics to deliver precisely the right voltage to precisely the sub pixel.  I don't believe the electronics for measuring the lines is particularly complicated.


Edited by tgm1024 - 10/18/13 at 5:51am
post #7319 of 9448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizziwig View Post

As I'm sure you're aware, there are % tolerances on all electrical components. This makes it hard to apply a hard rule on a device that could contain ~8 million pixels. Even if you were to display the exact same RGBA on every pixel, I suspect it will eventually develop non-uniform response across areas of the screen. The only way to combat this would be through some type of feedback. They seem to imply having such feedback with their comment about "continuously measures every pixel". I just wish they provided more detail. I've seen several high-end LCD monitors that have similar compensation for backlight non-uniformity and the results are very poor in practice.

Done incorrectly, wear compensation does more harm than good. Just look at the craziness that ensued over Panasonic plasma's "rising blacks" issue a few years ago.

I think we are talking about an order of magnitude difference between pixel tolerance and burn-in due to long term wear.
A TV could use ram to accumulate statistics and save then non-volatile storage when powered down.

What Panasonic did was drive the televisions as very low levels (probably to achieve better reviews) and then up them to make sure the panels were stable.

The proposed feature is designed to keep them working as new as long as possible.

- Rich
post #7320 of 9448
I can only imagine that "burn-in" or "pixel wear" compensation is done via signal monitoring and pre-programmed look-up tables. No need for pixel measuring circuits IIRC.

Non-uniformities originating in the TFT is another story. Compensation circuits are needed and are costly.

This is all from my memory from a few years ago so things may have changed.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread