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 250

post #7471 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

It's not a bad thing, except for the fact that the only two commercially available OLEDs are not printed and therefore cannot see their production scaled up. And Sony has no OLED production facility of any kind*, even in the planning stage. So when they "announce" the sale of something for next year, we should be wary of that. It's certainly true that they are making progress. I believe they will be well served to scrap their progress and start over soon.

Hopefully, Panasonic is doing something with their soon to be mothballed factories.

Sony is working with Panasonic. Is it possible that they will produce the panels for Sony (perhaps not the TV)?

- Rich
post #7472 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

Hopefully, Panasonic is doing something with their soon to be mothballed factories.

Sony is working with Panasonic. Is it possible that they will produce the panels for Sony (perhaps not the TV)?

- Rich

I think they were only partnering with Sony on R&D and have since parted ways. I guess we will know for sure at CES this year. It is sure to be one of the biggest CES ever with tall the new tech coming. 4K OLED, 4K BLu-ray etc. In all likely hood, if Panasonic OLED printing method has not significantly increased yields they will most likely exit the panel business They have a few mediocre LCD and there 4K LED panels will not be selling in viable numbers until 2016. No one can compete against Chinese slave labor wages. You have to have a product locked down with patents and a method they can not legally duplicate to compete. Even the Koreans and Taiwanese are going to have trouble in the future.
post #7473 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by sytech View Post

.No one can compete against Chinese slave labor wages. You have to have a product locked down with patents and a method they can not legally duplicate to compete. Even the Koreans and Taiwanese are going to have trouble in the future.

You are right with the exception of "slave wages". They are paid their market wages. Wages are low due to the abundance of manpower and simple tasks but what people earn is way better than in the countryside. In some local markets in China wages went up significantly.
post #7474 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

So what exactly do you see as the show stopper for LG's approach?

There is huge material waste going on, combined with an inability to get an even deposition layer. It's solvable to an extent, but it will never be efficient and it will have high particle counts always and therefore yield issues... It also won't get cheap while it keeps wasting OLED and won't get fast since it requires three steps to deposit OLED.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

Hopefully, Panasonic is doing something with their soon to be mothballed factories.

Sony is working with Panasonic. Is it possible that they will produce the panels for Sony (perhaps not the TV)?

So there's confusion here on a couple of issues:

1) Panasonic currently has no plans to manufacture OLED even if chooses to make branded OLEDs. Neither does Sony.

2) Panasonic and Sony partnered on developing technology to make possible the manufacture of OLEDs, not actually OLED displays. In other words, the equipment itself. Some of that equipment is pretty important going forward, but I think they are going to be leapfrogged on pieces of the value chain very soon.
post #7475 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

There is huge material waste going on, combined with an inability to get an even deposition layer. It's solvable to an extent, but it will never be efficient and it will have high particle counts always and therefore yield issues... It also won't get cheap while it keeps wasting OLED and won't get fast since it requires three steps to deposit OLED.

You are right about the material waste, but I think you have to keep that in context. The total material revenues for OLED's are something like 5% of Samsung's OLED revenues. I am sure it is much much higher for LG right now but I see little reason that they wont be able to eventually close the gap with Samsung's yields in mobile. The only difference between the two approaches is getting rid of the shadowmask and that should actually increase yields. Some differences is in layer thickness and doping concentrations will also impact television cost structures, but I very much doubt that we are talking about dramatic increases in total costs.

I agree that printing changes the game in terms of throughputs and it is likely required if OLED's are going to truly become a LCD replacement. However, there is a big difference between getting down to that level and simply taking over a big chunk of the high-end market.
post #7476 of 9455
If anybody very much desire a high-end OLED reference monitor, the Flanders Scientific 24.5" reference OLED monitor is on offer for $7000 less than the regular price.

  • 12 bit signal processing & 12 bit signal support
  • All inputs provided at no additional charge (3G/Dual-Link/HD/SD-SDI, Component, Composite, and DVI-I)
  • Instantly selectable Rec. 709, EBU, SMPTE-C, & DCI-P3 modes
  • Compatible with industry leading 3rd party calibration solutions like LightIllusion's LightSpace CMS and SpectraCal's CalMAN Studio for advanced 3D LUT based calibration of your monitor
  • DIT LUT import for on-set use of technical or look LUTs. Using the Main Component of LightSpace allows you to instantly convert virtually any format to FSI's .dat format for use on the monitor
  • 12 Video Scope Modes that work across all inputs as well as audio level meters and an audio phase meter for use with SDI embedded audio
  • Durable metal construction, yet the monitor only weighs 17 lbs. (7.7 kg)!
  • AC or DC operation
  • ...and of course outstanding black level performance, unmatched by any other display technology!
post #7477 of 9455
Tempting but still not at $6500. Thanks for the head's up.
post #7478 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

There is huge material waste going on, combined with an inability to get an even deposition layer. It's solvable to an extent, but it will never be efficient and it will have high particle counts always and therefore yield issues... It also won't get cheap while it keeps wasting OLED and won't get fast since it requires three steps to deposit OLED.
So there's confusion here on a couple of issues:

1) Panasonic currently has no plans to manufacture OLED even if chooses to make branded OLEDs. Neither does Sony.

2) Panasonic and Sony partnered on developing technology to make possible the manufacture of OLEDs, not actually OLED displays. In other words, the equipment itself. Some of that equipment is pretty important going forward, but I think they are going to be leapfrogged on pieces of the value chain very soon.

It's a gamble, Sharp is betting the approach will pay off down the road. This is one of the reasons I like Sharp actually, they llike to think of new ways to do something like they did with the yellow subpixel . They tend to think outside the box, in many ways they remind me of Apple only not quite as smart. biggrin.gif

If Panasonic or Sony want to stay in the display industry they both need to start working on OLED technology, they know this so and so explains this joint venture. Whether or not they decide to go into the OLED display market together is yet to be seen but it would make sense. It's ether going to happen or they won't remain in the display industry for much longer which seems highly unlikely given their past ventures. cool.gif
post #7479 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by slacker711 View Post

So what exactly do you see as the show stopper for LG's approach?

There is huge material waste going on, combined with an inability to get an even deposition layer. It's solvable to an extent, but it will never be efficient and it will have high particle counts always and therefore yield issues... It also won't get cheap while it keeps wasting OLED and won't get fast since it requires three steps to deposit OLED.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

Hopefully, Panasonic is doing something with their soon to be mothballed factories.

Sony is working with Panasonic. Is it possible that they will produce the panels for Sony (perhaps not the TV)?

So there's confusion here on a couple of issues:

1) Panasonic currently has no plans to manufacture OLED even if chooses to make branded OLEDs. Neither does Sony.

2) Panasonic and Sony partnered on developing technology to make possible the manufacture of OLEDs, not actually OLED displays. In other words, the equipment itself. Some of that equipment is pretty important going forward, but I think they are going to be leapfrogged on pieces of the value chain very soon.
You love talking in absolutes.

Let's go back in time and kill the cd or prevent recorded video tapes. I am sure you made the same absolute statements about them failing to.

CDs and pre-recorded tapes had a lot of problems and or cost when first manufactured. And they eventually found cheaper methods for both.
post #7480 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

You love talking in absolutes.

You love trolling me, but whatever.
Quote:
Let's go back in time and kill the cd or prevent recorded video tapes. I am sure you made the same absolute statements about them failing to.

CDs weren't expensive to produce when they were new. CD players were, but that had an understandable path to getting stupidly cheaper. And, of course, it did. I have no idea what recorded videotapes have to do with this, but the issue there was always business model not technology.
Quote:
CDs and pre-recorded tapes had a lot of problems and or cost when first manufactured. And they eventually found cheaper methods for both.

Again, you are conflating almost entirely irrelevant things.

And tons of technologies, do, in fact, fail to get traction. Quadrophonic sound anyone? Digital Compact Cassette? SACD? In the heyday for projection TV, which many of you probably think was a success, it moved 4 million units globally per year. If OLED TV gets that far and no farther, it will never succeed and will be gone from the market faster than it arrived.

But all of this is irrelevant, if you actually read my last few posts above, they are bullish on OLED, not bearish. That said, I am aware of things that lead me to believe that we remain about 2-3 years from meaningful changes in OLED production and pricing. People expecting something major next year are likely to be disappointed. People who keep repeating that Panasonic is producing an OLED this year will look foolish. In the plasma announcement, they had no words about OLED. They don't see it as something that can be productized soon -- because it can't. And a lot of people I've been speaking with now believe that while it can be a success, the success is predicated on a whole new set of production processes. None of those are currently in place.

The situation is not terribly far from the situation with LCD TV at the turn of the millennium. When the first large-size LCDs were shown, they were not manufactureable. It was impossible to get the LC material evenly distributed on the substrate in less than hours or days for each TV. Then a manufacturing change came along and that process took minutes. It was possible afterward to start ramping up production of LCD fabs all over and for LCD to take over the TV world. OLED isn't suffering from one process flaw, but from two different processes that both cannot scale. Fortunately, people know the solution. Making it world is going to take time.
post #7481 of 9455
From the HDJ insider thread I sense no optimism about near term OLED production.
2 to 3 years, at best, sounds right to me. So right, that I upgraded to Panasonic ZT60 display.
I will just have to suffer through the years tongue.gif

I get the feeling that 4K is going to be such a huge push, that Panasonic felt that the technical hurdles were not worth the investment and this lead to the decision to cease production.

I think it is a shame that they never built a 75 inch Plasma. I can't say it would have been commercial success but would have bought one in a heart beat.

- Rich
post #7482 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

From the HDJ insider thread I sense no optimism about near term OLED production.
2 to 3 years, at best, sounds right to me. So right, that I upgraded to Panasonic ZT60 display.
I will just have to suffer through the years tongue.gif

I get the feeling that 4K is going to be such a huge push, that Panasonic felt that the technical hurdles were not worth the investment and this lead to the decision to cease production.

I think it is a shame that they never built a 75 inch Plasma. I can't say it would have been commercial success but would have bought one in a heart beat.

- Rich

Hear! hear!
Guess I'll have to wait for a decently priced 75" OLED, 4K display with good off-axis viewing now...cool.gif
post #7483 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

I think it is a shame that they never built a 75 inch Plasma. I can't say it would have been commercial success but would have bought one in a heart beat.
They do have 85" models though.
post #7484 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichB View Post

From the HDJ insider thread I sense no optimism about near term OLED production.

As I've said, they are simply not close to production.
Quote:
2 to 3 years, at best, sounds right to me. So right, that I upgraded to Panasonic ZT60 display.
I will just have to suffer through the years

Good call. Minimal suffering, I'd say. smile.gif
Quote:
I get the feeling that 4K is going to be such a huge push, that Panasonic felt that the technical hurdles were not worth the investment and this lead to the decision to cease production.

I think it is a shame that they never built a 75 inch Plasma. I can't say it would have been commercial success but would have bought one in a heart beat.

Funny thing is they had the motherglass to make a 150". Not sure why they didn't cut some 75s and see what happened...
post #7485 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

They do have 85" models though.


It seems to be the older technology and too pricey for me.

- Rich
post #7486 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

If anybody very much desire a high-end OLED reference monitor, the Flanders Scientific 24.5" reference OLED monitor is on offer for $7000 less than the regular price.

Too small for me and worthless for gaming although I'm sure it has a nice picture for static images.
post #7487 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Norseman View Post

Hear! hear!
Guess I'll have to wait for a decently priced 75" OLED, 4K display with good off-axis viewing now...cool.gif

What will be your viewiing distance to the 75"@4K OLED if it materializes before your EOL?
post #7488 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogo View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

You love talking in absolutes.

You love trolling me, but whatever.
Quote:
Let's go back in time and kill the cd or prevent recorded video tapes. I am sure you made the same absolute statements about them failing to.

CDs weren't expensive to produce when they were new. CD players were, but that had an understandable path to getting stupidly cheaper. And, of course, it did. I have no idea what recorded videotapes have to do with this, but the issue there was always business model not technology.
Quote:
CDs and pre-recorded tapes had a lot of problems and or cost when first manufactured. And they eventually found cheaper methods for both.

Again, you are conflating almost entirely irrelevant things.

And tons of technologies, do, in fact, fail to get traction. Quadrophonic sound anyone? Digital Compact Cassette? SACD? In the heyday for projection TV, which many of you probably think was a success, it moved 4 million units globally per year. If OLED TV gets that far and no farther, it will never succeed and will be gone from the market faster than it arrived.

But all of this is irrelevant, if you actually read my last few posts above, they are bullish on OLED, not bearish. That said, I am aware of things that lead me to believe that we remain about 2-3 years from meaningful changes in OLED production and pricing. People expecting something major next year are likely to be disappointed. People who keep repeating that Panasonic is producing an OLED this year will look foolish. In the plasma announcement, they had no words about OLED. They don't see it as something that can be productized soon -- because it can't. And a lot of people I've been speaking with now believe that while it can be a success, the success is predicated on a whole new set of production processes. None of those are currently in place.

The situation is not terribly far from the situation with LCD TV at the turn of the millennium. When the first large-size LCDs were shown, they were not manufactureable. It was impossible to get the LC material evenly distributed on the substrate in less than hours or days for each TV. Then a manufacturing change came along and that process took minutes. It was possible afterward to start ramping up production of LCD fabs all over and for LCD to take over the TV world. OLED isn't suffering from one process flaw, but from two different processes that both cannot scale. Fortunately, people know the solution. Making it world is going to take time.
Typical rogo. Try and change the subject.

Anyway CDs were massivly expensive to make when first produced they had every issue you spoke of as a reason for oled never getting cheaper to manufacture, but they did. And all it took was persistence at improving the method they used tiny steps at a time.

Vhs tapes took 2 hours to make even when prices dropped by 2/3rds. There are many things that go into making something profitable and all your reasons behind your attempt for years now to say oled will not be sold are now so many tears on the rain.
post #7489 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Anyway CDs were massivly expensive to make when first produced they had every issue you spoke of as a reason for oled never getting cheaper to manufacture, but they did. And all it took was persistence at improving the method they used tiny steps at a time.

 

What makes CDs a particularly crummy analogy is that in the beginning they were expensive to create but the end price never reflected the massive decrease as time went on.  Annoying as hell, especially now it costs more for that @#$%ing STOOOPIDLY designed jewel case than for the disc.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/05/arts/pennies-that-add-up-to-16.98-why-cd-s-cost-so-much.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Quote:

"In the early days of compact disks in the 80's, CD's cost between $3 and $4 to get manufactured," said David Grant, the vice president of sales at WEA. "But as CD making processes have become more automated and capacity has been added, CD costs have come down and the market has steadied."

 

Further, it just doesn't fit this discussion for yet another reason: the technology involved in TVs advances continually.  CD's, aside from manufacturing techniques, don't increase resolution, or color, or sound fidelity, or or or or or....they're not a moving target.

 

CD-R's might have been a better example, because they were TRULY whackjob expensive in the beginning.

post #7490 of 9455
CNET compares OLED, LCD, and Plasma in this article. Here's a summation. More info in the article.


Light output (brightness)
Winners: LCD, OLED (sort of)
Loser: Plasma


Black level
Winner: OLED
Loser: LCD
Runner-up: Plasma


Contrast ratio
Winner: OLED
Loser: LCD
Runner-up: Plasma


Resolution
Winner: LCD
Loser: Plasma
Runner-up: OLED


Motion blur
Winner: Plasma
Loser/Runner-up: LCD and OLED


Refresh rate
Winner: Plasma, OLED, LCD


Viewing angle
Winner: Plasma
Loser: LCD
Runner-up: OLED


Energy consumption
Winner: LED LCD
Runner-up: Plasma and OLED
post #7491 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by irkuck View Post

What will be your viewiing distance to the 75"@4K OLED if it materializes before your EOL?

Right now we're about 10 feet from my 65" Panny, but want to move to about 7 feet away or so in a future set up...
Some people sit even as close as 5 feet away right now.
Also, a 75" would be perfect for the space I have available, whereas 84" or up would be too large.
77" might be do-able (if with a thin bezel), and I think one manufacturer is working on such a size(?). smile.gif
post #7492 of 9455
^^^

75 inch is the new 65 tongue.gif

For me 75 would be great but I would not turn something bigger at a reasonable price.

- Rich
post #7493 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by David_B View Post

Typical rogo. Try and change the subject.

Seriously, go get a life that doesn't involve trolling me. Seriously. It will help you.

You also should buy a mirror on the way to getting that life. It is precisely you that goes and tries to change the subject.
Quote:
Anyway CDs were massivly expensive to make when first produced they had every issue you spoke of as a reason for oled never getting cheaper to manufacture, but they did. And all it took was persistence at improving the method they used tiny steps at a time.

By 1987, CDs were under $16 on average. They would get slightly cheaper over the next few years, to under $13. They would then rise in price. The idea that CDs were ever "massively expensive" to end consumers and also purchased is simply a lie.

You can see that CD sales didn't exist as a detectable number before 1986, I could easily have chosen 1988 or 1989 as the "first meaningful year" but 1987 was the first year the average price was below $16.



The facts, of course, belie your false claims.

There is truth that CD players were ridiculously expensive at first. I remember a friend's dad doing business with Sony and getting a $900 CD player as part of the work. We were all blown away by it because no one we knew would buy such a thing (even those people who could afford one). Of course, within 2 years, that was $200.
Quote:
Vhs tapes took 2 hours to make even when prices dropped by 2/3rds. There are many things that go into making something profitable and all your reasons behind your attempt for years now to say oled will not be sold are now so many tears on the rain.

Again, there exist two possibilities and only two:

1) You lack basic reading comprehension skill.

2) You are just trolling.

For years, I've been explaining why it would be very challenging to produce cost effective OLED TVs and lo and behold there are still no cost effective OLED TVs anywhere on earth. Guess what, I have been 100% correct. About the only mistake I made was to be duped by CES 2012 into believing that (1) LG and Samsung would deliver TVs in 2012, which, of course, they didn't do. (2) Believing LG had developed some breakthrough that would allow mass production of OLEDs, which, of course, they haven't.

If one wishes to go back and read what I've written here, it more or less predicted that mass production of OLED televisions was due in the second half of this decade and, lo and behold, mass production of OLED televisions is due in the second half of this decade. There remains a zero percent change that worldwide OLED TV volume will reach 1 million units next year which means there is a zero percent chance OLED TV volume will reach even 1/2 of 1 percent of global TV volume. Or, put differently, if you look at the 10% of TVs that are 50" and up (~25 million units), OLED will not comprise anywhere near 5% of that market next year.

While it's hazardous at this point to make explicit guesses for 2015 production, it seems like the million-unit mark will be challenging to achieve given that Samsung has absolutely no means to mass produce TVs at this juncture and LG is planning on perhaps building its next gen fab late in 2014. LG's fab could supply something like 1 million units if it runs at full production and >60% yields in 2015.

So, again, in the real world, to sum up, I've been right all along. I've never say, "OLED TV will not happen." I've said, "it's going to be hard and there are challenges that need to be overcome for it to happen." If those are not overcome, it will not, in fact, happen. And if you actually talk to equipment suppliers in the industry -- as I have -- they are looking at things like reaching the 1% of the TV market plateau by 2016 and by decade's end starting to make serious market-share inroads.

By then, perhaps you'll be able to get one for your basement.
post #7494 of 9455
Interesting MIT Technology Review article regarding OLED inkjet printing: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/521656/inkjet-printing-could-be-the-key-to-next-generation-oled-displays/
post #7495 of 9455
Thanks for finding that. Hopefully the market ready comment is fact and not sales hype.
post #7496 of 9455
Quote:
Originally Posted by aleitry View Post

Interesting MIT Technology Review article regarding OLED inkjet printing: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/521656/inkjet-printing-could-be-the-key-to-next-generation-oled-displays/

Another one here: http://news.oled-display.net/2013/kateeva-yieldjet-to-print-cost-effective-flexible-large-oled-tv-displays/

This article as some interview questions/answers with the manufacturer. I am very excited and hopeful for this tech now! 6 x 55" at once...in 90-120 seconds! eek.gif HOLY CRAP! Imagine a huge display...done! cool.gif
post #7497 of 9455
Does anyone know if any of the key display manufacturers have purchased one of those bad boys or are they in the process of doing so?

EDIT: This is confidential courtesy of the NDA according to the company president.
Edited by vinnie97 - 11/20/13 at 2:25pm
post #7498 of 9455
From the Oled Display article, Rogo is in good company:
Quote:
Dr. Jennifer Colegrove President of California-based Touch Display Research, expects that 2016 will be the take-off year for OLED TVs. By 2020, she predicts that the market will reach $15.5 billion.

wink.gif
post #7499 of 9455
Blue still poses longevity issues:
Quote:
Nitrogen is the ultimate OLED processing environment. Early data shows that with Yieldjet device lifetime in certain applications more than doubles. What does that mean in hours?

Answer: Using the best red and green materials, LT50 lifetime of hundreds of thousands of hours are possible. And for the best blue materials, LT50 lifetimes of tens of thousands of hours are possible.
post #7500 of 9455
Looks promising. Let's hope it turns out to be in the real world.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › OLED TVs: Technology Advancements Thread