10 lumen tech.....educate me please? - Page 5

The real engine behind HDR is the actual production of an HDR source, either through image compilation or signal processing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_dynamic_range_imaging

Once the HDR signal is produced then you need a display capable of reproducing the desired HDR image. In that respect if Plasma gets ultra bright and ECC then I don't see why it cannot be used to display an HDR image.

Great stuff today xrox and company, I appreciate all the effort put in at keeping us up-to-date on the latest with PDP tech.

This may be far-reaching, but any idea when we might expect some type of HDR source?

Hmm........

It makes me wonder as to when plasma would hit a permanent roadblock in terms of R&D and technical improvements/enhancements.

I mean, once plasma achieves things like "perfect black", outstanding color gradation, energy efficiency, thinness, etc.

Would everything just stop?

Or to put it in a simpler note:

Once we've reached the point where we have perfected plasma (to the point that it has fully surpassed let's say CRT), is it possible to perfect something that has already been perfected?

Or do we stop from there?

Just a quick question

Higher resolution, reduced phosphor lag, higher ANSI contrast are but a few things that come to mind that can still be improved...

AFAIK, Pioneer Kuro plasmas have the highest ANSI contrast of any technology out there today. But anyway, further improvements are always possible. Plasma is far from being perfect yet. Here's where I see improvement potential with today's plasmas:

(1) True blacks (probably coming 2009).
(2) Thin & light (thinner coming 2009, really thin 2010?)
(3) Improving efficiency is probably a race which will never stop.
(4) Getting totally rid of any image retention.
(5) Improving speed of plasma cells further to achieve at least a true bitdepth of 10 bit per subpixel per frame.
(6) Improving speed of plasma cells even further to get rid of the last tiny bit of visible false contouring and dithering.
(7) Further improve fill rate.
(8) Try to reduce phosphor lag.
(9) Try to get rid of any audible buzzing.

With current half-tonning, spatial and temporal dithering we are loosing tons of resolution to achieve proper greyscale. This is by far the most important issue to improve.
I would also add a 10th point, which is improving on motion resoution by increasing nb of subfields and increasing blanking times. I would like a blanking time between frames, and well spread burst during hold time.

Plasma manufacturers can use the 10lum tech efficiency to address those issues as well instead of only focusing on brightness increase.

These two points are kind of against each other. Current PDP technology is well capapble of true 10-bit using a binary 10-subfield driving. However, binary driving causes false contouring (dynamic) and thus manufacturers are/have moved to contiguous driving (similar to Pioneers CLEAR driving)

Increasing the speed of the cell has been a driving force in Pioneer's research the past few years. Inceasing the speed inherently increases brightness among other important things.



Now to get true 10-bit using contiguous driving would require 1024 subfields all with an address step. This would inherently drop the brightness by a huge amount. Even if the discharge delay was near zero. However, if 10 lumen tech provides enough brightness it may be possible.


Increasing the number of subfields won't do much of anything for motion resolution IMO. What needs to be done is either lower the effective duty cycle or increase refresh rate and add interpolation just like a LCD. Both of these require higher lumen tech or brightness will be impacted.


They are essentially the same issue as they all require extra brightness per subfield.

Splitting subfields into smaller chunks allow us to better spread bursts during duty cycle (eg: "bit-splitting" used in DLPs). Hence, all pixels will start/end their duty cycle at similar times irrespective of there brightness. Wouldn't that improve on our perception of motion over having a contiguous duty cycle with varying blanking time across the screen? In other words, whats better between

a) have contigous duty cycle with varying blanking periods.
b) Spread duty cycle into defined period of time and get fixed blanking time lenght.

what you think?



Exactly, but you can't have it all at the same time and compromises will be made (like between brightness and blanking time or brightness and dithering) by the companies to leverage at max this extra efficiency.

Not quite sure I understand the "spread burst" concept. However, the way a plasma display works makes it impossible to drive individual pixels at different subfield timings and widths. Either the subixel is fired or it isn't, and all those that are fired have the exact same subfield width and time (for both binary and contiguous). There is no way around it.


I agree. With 5lm/w and even 10lm/w there will have to be some decisions made at what is best to use the efficiency for.

LOL. Can I get in on that wager? I'll wager a kajillion dollars that it will be available at "some point in the future!"

J/K.

Seriously, though. How can you say what you're saying? Panasonic will have 5 lumen tech in next year's panels!

Found this quote that better explains bit-splitting: "In the simple binary PWM addressing, spatial and temporal artifacts can be produced because of imperfect integration of the pulsed light by the viewer’s eye. These artefacts can be reduced to negligible levels by what is known as “bit-splitting”. In this technique, the longer duration bits are subdivided into shorter durations and these split bits are distributed throughout the video frame time.".
Those smaller chunks will still have fixed timing and width. The only difference is having more subfields for each bit mixed with others allows to "shuffle" better the "on state" across time and have a more uniform hold time. This technique is extensively used in DLP cause unlike plasma, there are no significant cost(in black and brightness) for adding extra subfields. The 10Lum tech is suposed to reduce this cost.
Since some manufacturers left binary division for CLEAR for better contrast on the expense of more dithering, we have an idea on what direction the industry is heading....
"brightness/contrast" sells more then "less dithering and less resolution loss"

Sounds similar to dynamic false contour reduction in Plasma displays.



Like I said before, increasing the number of subfields in a Plasma display increases the effective hold time and duty cycle. This will help reduce flicker but make motion resolution a little worse as well.



Manufacturers are/have switched to CLEAR driving in order to eliminate dynamic false contouring (which sounds exactly like your quote above). In fact CLEAR driving produced much worse black levels and contrast when first implemented because the single reset pulse had to be so long and intense.

The following slides were just showed by LG:







The most positive part is for me that they are going for noise free picture.

Sampo:

Since you have a long history of posting fake pictures and charts, you better post a link to the actual website that is displaying those charts.

A link to the source is all that is required.

No need. His slides are accurate from LGs perspective. Essentually the Koreans are following the Japanese in regards to 5 and 10 lumen tech. The only funny part about the slides is LGs 1,000,000 CR for 2008 LG PDPs. We all know how that turned out

When it comes to Sampo, I think it is always wise to demand transparency, and links to the actual sources.

Do you recall the time that he posted a fake daily newspaper headline, but he had the date on it, one month ahead of the actual date that he posted his forgery. That was Sampo in full FUD mode.

Speaking of LG. Have you noticed some people posting about the glass on their LG plasmas suddenly shattering, while they were just watching their sets. Do you have any info on how extensive that defect might be?

what's noise free picture?

FYI, 10 lumen tech is going to be launched in the spring with 50 and 65" screens. Can't wait to see. Panasonic is calling it "NeoPDP "


http://hdtvorg.co.uk/news/articles/2008110201.htm

NeoPDP is 5 lumen technology

NeoPDP is 5 lumen and beyond technology.

It is not 10 lumen that will be launched in 2009, and the article you linked to says nothing about 10 lumen, which this thread is about.

That is the problem with naming anything new. Eventually, it is old. Unless we have, Super Neo Tech of course

- Rich

What part of: "which this thread is about" do you not comprehend? DOH DOH!

Okay, so what is Plasma right now, 2.5 LT? I thought it was 5 LT and NeoPDP was to take it beyond to, say 10?

Sorry if I misinterpreted, I yearn for a brighter plasma panel, I find that whites are more grey, hence I am a current LCD owner.

Watch for Panasonic's release, in 2009, of their 5 lumen, NeoPDP models. They claim that you will have the option to double the brightness level, at the same power consumption level as the 2008 models.

The question I have is what technological advancements will we generally need to see in the future in order to advance from the 5 lumen NeoPDP sets to the 10 lumen tech PDP's?

I also sense that there is alot more of a difference between the 5 lumen NeoPDP's and the 10 lumen PDP's than just the lumens. Anyone have a sense as to what these differences might be?