MicroLED: Technology Advancements Thread - Page 14 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 172Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #391 of 407 Old 09-18-2019, 08:02 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Stuntman_Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 784 Post(s)
Liked: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achillias View Post
Without producing, the cost never gets down. How do you think OLED got that cheap now after 4-5 years being mainstream and having good production capacity.

Actually it will be cheaper. Why do you think the cost of televisions are mostly based on size as well. A 55 inch model is always more expensively than 49, 42, 40 etc.
In this case, it would likely be more expensive, just because the tech isn't there yet. You'd have to spend a ton on R&D to be able to shrink the size of the LEDs and/or decrease the distance between them, in order to get smaller sizes than they currently are producing. The design is modular, so if in the case of Samsung with their not yet released 75" 4K Micro LED, that's the smallest that they can currently make a 4K Micro LED. If they were to make an 8K Micro LED, it would just be 4 of the 75" 4K modules, stacked together. To make a 4K 65" Micro LED, will not be cheaper. They have to go back, figure out, and spend money, in order to be able to develop a module smaller than they can currently. At this stage of the game, they know how to make a 180", or whatever 4K Micro LED. At this stage Sony knows how to make a 110" 1080p Micro LED. What neither can do right now is make a 4K Micro LED smaller than 75".

Stuntman_Mike is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #392 of 407 Old 09-18-2019, 08:25 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,315
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achillias View Post
Without producing, the cost never gets down. How do you think OLED got that cheap now after 4-5 years being mainstream and having good production capacity.

Actually it will be cheaper. Why do you think the cost of televisions are mostly based on size as well. A 55 inch model is always more expensively than 49, 42, 40 etc.
Because all flat-panel TVs prior to MicroLED are manufactured on substrates, meaning cost is proportional to area (screen-size). Whether you manufacture 1080X1920 pixels or 2160x3840 or 4320x7680 pixels in that same area is a question of technology limits and pushing those limits with R&D, but essentially does not impact cost.

As has already been stated, MicroLED is fundamentally different - cost is associated with pixels rather than area. The cost of manufacturing a 75" MicroLED with 8 million pixels is going to be much higher than the cost of manufacturing a 75" MicroLED with 2 million pixels, while the cost of manufacturing a 150" MicroLED with 8 million pixels is not going to be much more than the cost of manufacturing that 75" MicroLED display with 8 million pixels (and may even be less expensive due to the relaxed tolerances required).

The likelihood of MicroLED ever being 'mainstream' (i.e.: in a significant % of living rooms) is vanishingly small. If resolution had maxed out at 1080p or possibly even 4K, perhaps. But with the trend to 8K gaining monentum, MicoLED will endlessly be one step behind in resolution at all but the very largest of display sizes.

this comment applies only to tiled and picked-and-placed MicroLED.

The MicroLED-on-silicon monolithic display is another story entirely (but will never be suited to large-screen flat-panel displays, watches and VR headsets only).
Cam1977 and AnalogHD like this.
fafrd is online now  
post #393 of 407 Old 09-18-2019, 08:39 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuntman_Mike View Post
In this case, it would likely be more expensive, just because the tech isn't there yet. You'd have to spend a ton on R&D to be able to shrink the size of the LEDs and/or decrease the distance between them, in order to get smaller sizes than they currently are producing. The design is modular, so if in the case of Samsung with their not yet released 75" 4K Micro LED, that's the smallest that they can currently make a 4K Micro LED. If they were to make an 8K Micro LED, it would just be 4 of the 75" 4K modules, stacked together. To make a 4K 65" Micro LED, will not be cheaper. They have to go back, figure out, and spend money, in order to be able to develop a module smaller than they can currently. At this stage of the game, they know how to make a 180", or whatever 4K Micro LED. At this stage Sony knows how to make a 110" 1080p Micro LED. What neither can do right now is make a 4K Micro LED smaller than 75".
Decreasing the distance is actually a bad way. You need to remember these are self emission displays and you need something to diffuse the light. Just because the pixel is off doesn't mean that neighboring pixels light can't bleed over. It's the reason Sony has the total area of the LED in each cell at only 1%, even though their LED are quite a bit smaller than Samsungs. It's not that they can't decrease the pixel pitch, it's that they don't want to. They need something to more efficiently diffuse the light more than anything. The combined area of the 3 LED in each cell is only 0.003mm^2. I'm pretty sure there was some pretty huge tradeoffs for Samsung. They're quite a bit dimmer, the full image at D65 is only 250 nits(for the "luxury living" version) vs 800-ish on the Sony. Also, I doubt that 4k prototype displays blacks in a darkroom setting. Put up a clip of stars and I'm sure theres lots of bleed. Decreasing pixel pitch isnt an issue, but it will start effecting the image at a certain point.
Airikay is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #394 of 407 Old 09-18-2019, 08:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Stuntman_Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 784 Post(s)
Liked: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airikay View Post
Decreasing the distance is actually a bad way. You need to remember these are self emission displays and you need something to diffuse the light. Just because the pixel is off doesn't mean that neighboring pixels light can't bleed over. It's the reason Sony has the total area of the LED in each cell at only 1%, even though their LED are quite a bit smaller than Samsungs. It's not that they can't decrease the pixel pitch, it's that they don't want to. They need something to more efficiently diffuse the light more than anything. The combined area of the 3 LED in each cell is only 0.003mm^2. I'm pretty sure there was some pretty huge tradeoffs for Samsung. They're quite a bit dimmer, the full image at D65 is only 250 nits(for the "luxury living" version) vs 800-ish on the Sony. Also, I doubt that 4k prototype displays blacks in a darkroom setting. Put up a clip of stars and I'm sure theres lots of bleed. Decreasing pixel pitch isnt an issue, but it will start effecting the image at a certain point.
I hear you, just saying the two ways that they could go about making a smaller 4k Micro LED, and how either method would add to the cost of manufacture.

Stuntman_Mike is online now  
post #395 of 407 Old 09-19-2019, 02:05 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Wizziwig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SoCal, USA
Posts: 3,546
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2238 Post(s)
Liked: 1521
99% of what people watch at home or in movie theaters is still mastered at 2K. Until that changes, the value of 4K (and even more so 8K) is not that relevant beyond a marketing bullet point. You just need to sit at an appropriate viewing distance for a given screen size to avoid visible pixel structure.

Then there's the fact that most current displays drop down to ~300 lines of resolution as soon as the image starts moving. If someone could figure out how to get 1080 lines of motion resolution out of a MicroLED like we had with CRT and Plasma, it would help compensate for loss in static resolution.

I would gladly take a 2K MicroLED if it produced a better overall image than current 4K/8K OLEDs or LCDs. Main problem is the pricing and no method to mass produce them.
Cam1977 likes this.

Last edited by Wizziwig; 09-19-2019 at 02:46 AM.
Wizziwig is offline  
post #396 of 407 Old 09-19-2019, 06:50 AM
Advanced Member
 
AnalogHD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 722
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 416 Post(s)
Liked: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achillias View Post
Without producing, the cost never gets down. How do you think OLED got that cheap now after 4-5 years being mainstream and having good production capacity.
WOLED has always been cheap to make - it's produced on somewhat modified LCD lines. The added cost was in R&D and refitting the lines for OLED-specific technology. Once that's been paid up for, OLED TVs are going to go down in price alongside LCD ones.

RGB-OLED doesn't scale like that. As a result, in the 10 years it's been around, it hasn't gotten cheaper at all. The OLED displays for the Note 10, iphone 10x, etc. cost in the same $40-$60 range as they did in 2009 with the very first AMOLED phones.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Achillias View Post
Actually it will be cheaper. Why do you think the cost of televisions are mostly based on size as well. A 55 inch model is always more expensively than 49, 42, 40 etc.
Why think when you can know? LCD manufacturing is priced per square meter, because they're made in huge glass sheets, which are later cut apart into TV panels of desired size. Larger panel, fewer panels per sheet.

Many other technologies are not made like this. Which is why a 12" ultra-portable with equal performance to a 17" laptop doesn't sell for half the price of the 17", but rather for twice as much.

Micro-LED (TV type, not the single-chip 1" type) is assembled like laptops, not cut from sheets like LCD screens.

Last edited by AnalogHD; 09-20-2019 at 03:16 AM.
AnalogHD is online now  
post #397 of 407 Old 09-20-2019, 01:17 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 0
https://www.sony.com/en_us/SCA/compa...solutions.html

Quote:
Sony's Crystal LED direct view display system uses ultra-fine micro-LED measuring 0.003 mm² –half the width of a human hair – which are 100 times smaller than traditional LEDs. The display recently received a prestigious 2019 Display Industry Award for "Display of the Year" from the Society of Information Display, recognizing Crystal LED’s unprecedented visual experience. The technology delivers crisp, blur-free moving images with high frame rate up to 120p for razor-sharp motion rendition that is far beyond the reach of conventional video.

Here is the bit I don't understand. Why is it the uLED is so small and yet the size of pixel is literally 100 times the size?
K Sec is offline  
post #398 of 407 Old 09-20-2019, 05:02 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Bruce2019's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Vienna
Posts: 1,043
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 549 Post(s)
Liked: 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by K Sec View Post
https://www.sony.com/en_us/SCA/compa...solutions.html




Here is the bit I don't understand. Why is it the uLED is so small and yet the size of pixel is literally 100 times the size?
Cooling could be one reason..

2013 Panasonic TX-P42STW60 PDP
2009 Panasonic TX-P42S10E PDP
Bruce2019 is online now  
post #399 of 407 Old 09-20-2019, 07:29 PM
Member
 
KensingtonPark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 74
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by K Sec View Post
https://www.sony.com/en_us/SCA/compa...solutions.html




Here is the bit I don't understand. Why is it the uLED is so small and yet the size of pixel is literally 100 times the size?
Isn’t because there are four microLEDs per pixel?
KensingtonPark is offline  
post #400 of 407 Old 09-21-2019, 07:18 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by K Sec View Post
https://www.sony.com/en_us/SCA/compa...solutions.html




Here is the bit I don't understand. Why is it the uLED is so small and yet the size of pixel is literally 100 times the size?
Even though its self emissive, you still need to diffuse the light. You don't want neighboring pixels that are turned on bleeding over to pixels that are turned off. Also, it keeps the pixels in the center of the cell so they don't light up the edges during viewing. It might be the pixel pitch can be made smaller, but it also be somewhat future proofing so they can introduce brighter LED. The brighter the LED, the more control you need.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KensingtonPark View Post
Isn’t because there are four microLEDs per pixel?
Should only be R, G & B
Airikay is offline  
post #401 of 407 Old 09-21-2019, 02:18 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 90
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 98 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogHD View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achillias View Post
Without producing, the cost never gets down. How do you think OLED got that cheap now after 4-5 years being mainstream and having good production capacity.
WOLED has always been cheap to make - it's produced on somewhat modified LCD lines. The added cost was in R&D and refitting the lines for OLED-specific technology. Once that's been paid up for, OLED TVs are going to go down in price alongside LCD ones.

RGB-OLED doesn't scale like that. As a result, in the 10 years it's been around, it hasn't gotten cheaper at all. The OLED displays for the Note 10, iphone 10x, etc. cost in the same $40-$60 range as they did in 2009 with the very first AMOLED phones.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Achillias View Post
Actually it will be cheaper. Why do you think the cost of televisions are mostly based on size as well. A 55 inch model is always more expensively than 49, 42, 40 etc.
Why think when you can know? LCD manufacturing is priced per square meter, because they're made in huge glass sheets, which are later cut apart into TV panels of desired size. Larger panel, fewer panels per sheet.

Many other technologies are not made like this. Which is why a 12" ultra-portable with equal performance to a 17" laptop doesn't sell for half the price of the 17", but rather for twice as much.

Micro-LED (TV type, not the single-chip 1" type) is assembled like laptops, not cut from sheets like LCD screens.
No why think when you can know. There is also R&D cost for creating a product line for Microled panels with a good panel ratio. That also cover a certain amount of cost for those panels. Which increase prices as well. Also cuting panels in smaller sizes doesn't mean that the cost of those increase. For example, 10 inch OLED panels for tablets for example are available for a far lower price than OLED panels in laptops. It doesn't say much.
Achillias is offline  
post #402 of 407 Old 09-22-2019, 09:40 AM
Advanced Member
 
AnalogHD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 722
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 416 Post(s)
Liked: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achillias View Post
No why think when you can know. There is also R&D cost for creating a product line for Microled panels with a good panel ratio.
The yield for microLED modules is 100%.
Defective LED don't pass to the soldering line, and can even be removed and replaced.

The R&D has been paid for gradually over the last 50 years. This is not a new tech, it's older than me and you. Only the marketing of LED walls towards sort-of-consumers - the top 0.01%, most of whom aren't interested anyway - could be called new.

Except even that isn't new. Barco long had the Cine9 and now the Thor, both with six-figure costs for a typical installation, and sometimes seven total with the room and the audio. Really the only new thing is making the general public aware of this, rather than keeping it within the high-end world as used to be the case.

Make no mistake, there's a market for these units. Has always been. And it's not an installation or two, it's dozens and hundreds of rooms around the world. Some double-walled rooms with tens of speakers and Trinnovs, some with Adam mainfields, no two alike. It likely has grown somewhat as well due to the growing wealth divide and the rise of an upper class in China.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Achillias View Post
Also cuting panels in smaller sizes doesn't mean that the cost of those increase.
MicroLED are not cut, they are assembled.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Achillias View Post
For example, 10 inch OLED panels for tablets for example are available for a far lower price than OLED panels in laptops. It doesn't say much.
It doesn't indeed, because there are no "OLED panels for laptops" - there's just one. And only one major manufacturer that ever made OLED tablets, with panels from just one maker. And all three are the same company.
AnalogHD is online now  
post #403 of 407 Old 09-27-2019, 08:46 AM
Member
 
KensingtonPark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 74
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 19
What has always baffled me is why they don't use micro-LEDs as a 1:1 backlight for LCD panels. Essentially, you'd have one to one microdimming, which solves the contrast issue, and - because you'd have a color layer to pass through, you could solve the brightness problem. While you need to synchronize the two layers, I would have thought that this would only require advancing the local dimming technology that they have now. Not an engineer, but seems like for TV applications (which don't need as much brightness as a billboard), it is not necessarily imperative that that the solution be fully transmissive.
KensingtonPark is offline  
post #404 of 407 Old 09-27-2019, 10:15 AM
Senior Member
 
avernar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Liked: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by KensingtonPark View Post
What has always baffled me is why they don't use micro-LEDs as a 1:1 backlight for LCD panels.
My guess would be cost. At that point you’re 33% of the way to full micro LED anyways.
avernar is online now  
post #405 of 407 Old 09-27-2019, 11:20 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
lsorensen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,626
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1429 Post(s)
Liked: 824
Quote:
Originally Posted by avernar View Post
My guess would be cost. At that point you’re 33% of the way to full micro LED anyways.
And you get to keep 100% of the viewing angle problems.
PannyMann and Cam1977 like this.

Len Sorensen

Sony XBR55A1E, Marantz SR6012, Benq W7000, Oppo BDP-93, PSB Image T5/C5/B4/Subseries 200
lsorensen is offline  
post #406 of 407 Old 09-27-2019, 11:33 AM
Senior Member
 
avernar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 306 Post(s)
Liked: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsorensen View Post
And you get to keep 100% of the viewing angle problems.
I was saving all the LCD disadvantages for the next part of the conversation.

In addition to viewing angles there's response time and loosing 66% of your efficiency when displaying saturated colours. Very bright saturated colours are going to have a bit of the unlit subpixels leak through as well.
Cam1977 likes this.
avernar is online now  
post #407 of 407 Old 10-01-2019, 05:08 AM
Member
 
KensingtonPark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 74
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 19
KensingtonPark is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off