Wow. This guy seems to pretty much say almost EXACTLY what I said regarding motion on the OLED vs. LCD vs. Plasma. It's rare to see someone who doesn't just blindly state that the motion resolution test is the end all of motion testing but only a small fraction of what should be tested.
Here is some stuff I posted the past few days:
The experts gave the LG a lower score because they were more focused on test patters, where the LG only scored 300-400 lines on the test, while the LCDs scored full 1080 lines because of dark frame insertion.
The "average" (non-expert) viewer I think will be more bothered by the slow pixel response of LCD, which can/will leave colour trails, fringing, etc, even though it's passing 1080 lines vs. 400 for OLED. Let me give you an example, you are watching hockey on an LCD (with DFI) and even though you are getting less sample and hold blur, you will see a black jersey leave a trail onto the white ice, or the puck will leave a dark trail on the ice, etc. The OLED, even with it's sample and hold blur will have absolutely ZERO colour trails, fringing, etc.
VA LCD panels can have as high as 21ms pixel lag! in certain situations. There have been many debates on OLED motion and I fall into the category of being much more bothered by slow pixel response time, then sample and hold, and if this shootout proves anything, I think it's that the average person agrees with me, or the results don't make any sense.
FYI, the LG with motion smoothing settings engaged but set to zero, which will have to soap opera effect, will get upto 700 lines motion res and of course still have perfect pixel response.
Another example is DLP projection which is faster then even OLED (don't hold me to that but it refreshes at 2000hz) but still suffers from sample and hold and only passes 300 line on the motion test, BUT is considered the gold standard for motion. The newer LCD and LCOS projectors can do 1080 lines on the moving test pattern with DFI as well, but literally everyone in the projector forum prefers DLP because of its fast response time.
I've recently seen the Samsung 65 JS9500 and it doesn't hold a candle to the motion on the 55" EC9300 OLED, even though it's technically better on paper. Don't trust just numbers, or a single outdated motion test. Let your eyes be the judge of which set has better motion. BTW, WHY DON'T THEY TEST PIXEL RESPONSE FOR REVIEWS AND THIS SHOOTOUT! there are numerous ways to test this with simple test patterns, such as a white box moving over a black background at different speeds (run this test on an LCD, and then tell me it's better for motion then OLED) The main thing I'm getting at is motion is more then just sample and hold, it's a combination of sample and hold and PIXEL RESPONSE, but NOBODY TESTS FOR PIXEL RESPONSE!
With the motion setting on the LG set to 0 (debur and dejudder) there is no artifacts at all, and I'm not really sure how it's improving the motion res with a setting of zero, but it does.
Plasma does pass 1080 lines because of PWM, but you are right. Dithering, colour fringing on high contrast images, and breakup are very annoying. double judder anyone?
Yes OLED. OLED already has the fastest pixel refresh of any technology, but what causes the blur is caused by the way the human eye "blends" the image when it moves. Google Sample and hold effect for TVs. There needs to be an artificial flicker added to the display to break up the image so that our eyes don't see the loss of resolution. Man this stuff is hard to explain, LOL.
Basically, LG needs to add some sort of "dark frame insertion" and OLED will not suffer from any sample and hold effect, as well as having the fastest pixel response time, OLED is/will be the best for motion.
I personally already think the LG OLED is the best display right now for motion. I don't mind sample and hold blur so much. But, the really slow pixel response time of LCD BUGS me ALOT. Slow pixel response is often confused with sample and hold type blur.
Ex, of slow pixel response would be smearing of colours, fringing, trailing, etc. Also, OLED scored very high on motion from the shootout, which I'm guessing is that most people are more bothered by slow pixel response then sample and hold blur, and what people assumed was sample and hold blur was actually slow pixel response.
I've seen many threads over the years where people complained about trailing and smearing on LCD, and they always referred to it as "motion blur".
Yes, an OLED only passes 300 lines on the MOTION TEST. Find me 1 complaint about motion with ACTUAL CONTENT, either from a reviewer or owner. Most reviews only mention the motion res test, which by the way was specifically created to favor plasma, but fail to run other tests such as image smearing/trailing motion tests, or phophor lag tests. These additional tests would clearly show that LED LCD with scanning backlight and plasma, clearly have some serious motion issues and they all pass 1080 lines on the "motion resolution test". Don't drink the motion test coolaid and believe that it's the only measurement for great motion.
I'm one of the pickiest SOBs when it comes to motion and almost every tech other then CRT has caused me issues with motion. I have every motion test known to man, and ran them all on the LG OLED and many LCDs, Plasmas, DLPs, and LCOS projectors and I can definitely say that overall the OLED is only second to CRT. **** the one single motion test they do run. They should test overall motion with many more varied tests.
BTW, as a few reviews have mentioned, it's possible to run the LG OLED with Dejudder and Deblur at setting of 0 which raises the motion res to over 600 lines and doesn't add SOE at all. NOt sure how they do this technically, and one would assume frame interpolation but their is no evidence of SOE with these settings, so I'd say the motion res right now is 600 lines for ALL CONTENT.
I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have some kind of Dark frame insertion in the future, but as of now the motion is GREAT on OLED and I don't think people will have any issues what so ever. I will be certainly buying the upcoming 4K 65", even if the motion res is still only 600.
Here is a snippet from the article:
I have owned every nearly every high end plasma, and as far as Iâ€™m concerned OLED produces the best motion Iâ€™ve seen since CRT.
Being a plasma owner, I was able to check out some sports content on my VT65 when I returned home. It wasnâ€™t clearer, it didnâ€™t have less motion blur. I would choose the OLED over the LCD or the plasma as it presented the most watchable picture during motion.
We hear a lot about motion resolution test used by calibrators and reviewers but itâ€™s just a test, not real content, and itâ€™s completely outdated today. LCDs and OLED only manage 300 lines but the test works a certain speed; reduce the speed and LCDs/OLEDs resolution goes up, increase the speed and plasmas will not look good either. These tests used to make makes plasmas look good which is why it was used by manufacturers as a stick to beat LCDs with. While a particular speed of motion may give an advantage to one technology, with real content you canâ€™t see much difference. It may be different with 60Hz content but on a plasma at 50Hz and p24, itâ€™s all double/quad edges and judder; throw in the DFC and it becomes just a total mess. Despite the lower test figures, youâ€™ll get a cleaner, clearer picture on the OLEDâ€ś
There is much more to this than line resolution during motion. Pixel response of LCD is much slower than OLED, however using this pixel test it will produce 1080i with BFI engaged. However this slow response time will leaves colour trails, fringing etc., even though itâ€™s passing 1080 lines vs.300 â€“ 400 for OLED.
An example, you are watching fast moving sport like football on the Samsung and you have BFI engaged you will see less sample and hold blur, you will see white shorts leave a trail onto the grass. The OLED, even with sample and hold will have absolutely no colour trails, fringing, etc. VA LCD panels have as high pixel lag.
There have been many debates on OLED motion and they keep rearing their head.
Slow pixel response time has far more impact on smooth motion than sample and hold. If you set the LG motion flow setting de-blur and de-judder both to 5 it will create the opera effect and under the usual motion tests will give you around 600 lines motion res and of course still have perfect pixel response. So if you have the motion flow off you will get 300 lines of motion resolution, the pixel response time will still be perfect and because of this with real world content the motion on the OLED is far smoother than with any LCD or Plasma.
Having these sets side by side, the JS9000 the native motion is much smoother from the OLED even though the LCD is technically better on paper. These tests are just numbers, from an outdated motion test. Iâ€™ve always said trust your own eyes, no one else has yours and you donâ€™t have any one elseâ€™s. Motion is more than line number resolution pixel response time is more important and this is another area where LCD canâ€™t get near OLEDâ€™s performance. Some comments from people including reviewers say that the OLED motion can appear a little choppy. Well what you are seeing with motion is a collection of stills shown quickly, the fast pixel response time is simply able to produce these stills on screen quicker. And if there is movement it is not being smoothed by slower pixel response time. In fact OLED is producing those stills more faithfully.
Check out this link which does a much better job at testing OLED motion then most professionals.
"Response Time and Motion Blur
Motion Blur is a well known issue with LCDs. It arises because the liquid crystal, which is the active element within an LCD, is unable to change its orientation and transmission rapidly enough when the picture changes from one frame to the next. OLEDs, as solid state emissive devices, have very fast Response Times: LG specs the OLED Response Time at 0.1ms, which is more than a factor of 10 faster than LCDs. For a simple test of Motion Blur we photographed a DisplayMate Test Pattern moving at a very fast 1352 pixels per second using a Nikon DSLR camera with a shutter speed of 1/250th second, which is less than the displayâ€™s 120 Hz refresh cycle time. Figure 4 has a screen shot for the OLED TV and a similar screen shot for an LCD TV from a 2011 study. Both TVs have a 120 Hz Refresh Rate. On the LCD TV screen shot it is possible to make out latent images from more than 5 prior refresh cycles. The OLED TV screen shot shows a single sharp image. See our LCD Response Time and Motion Blur article for more details.
OLED TV Test Result: The OLED screen shot shows no visible Motion Blur or latent images from any previous refresh cycles, so the Response Time is visually indistinguishable from zero with no visible display based Motion Blur."