[Scott Wilkinson]

Rumors that Samsung will use the white-OLED-with-color-filters approach emerged from Korea this week.

I normally don't report rumors, but this one is just too good to pass up. According to a recent article on Display Daily, Samsung might be returning to the OLED TV business using white-light OLED material with color filters, an approach that LG uses in its OLED TVs.

Previously, Samsung used separate red, green, and blue OLED material in separate subpixels, but that requires a more complex—and thus more expensive—manufacturing process. The OLED materials are deposited onto a substrate through tiny holes in a metal shadow mask, a technique that is very difficult to implement in large areas because of the extreme accuracy required.

By contrast, the white-OLED approach layers red, green, and blue OLED material together with no need for a shadow mask. The light from the three layers combines to form white light, which then passes through RGB color filters, much like an LCD TV. This is said to be easier and less expensive than the RGB approach, but the filters greatly reduce the final light output, making it more difficult to build a high dynamic-range panel. (The article does refer to LG's HDR OLED demo at CES this year, saying that it had great contrast, but the peak brightness was nowhere near what LED-LCD TVs can achieve.)

There is no way to verify if these rumors are true—at this point, I'm sure Samsung would say "no comment." The Display Daily article speculates that the motivation might be higher profits, especially since LCD TV margins are so incredibly thin. Whatever the reason, having more manufacturers in the OLED TV game would be great news for all video buffs. Of course, only time will tell, and I will be watching closely for any info in this regard.

Like AVS Forum on Facebook
Follow AVS Forum on Twitter
+1 AVS Forum on Google+

 

[mark haflich]

Thanks for the info. I think it was a good decision for you to watch this more closely than you might watch other things in the AV world. Though I suspect how closely you watch it is unrelated to this OLED technology not putting out as bright an image as the other OLED technology.

 

[They_call_me_Roto]

From the description I am guessing that the picture would be similar to current LCD/LED sets and would not achieve the same high contrast or black levels as an LG OLED. Would this be a correct assumption???

 

[barleyguy]

In my opinion white OLED is superior, because every sub-pixel will age the same. That means that it will hold calibration longer and may have a longer overall lifespan. (That is of course theory since large OLED sets haven't been around long enough to measure lifespan.)

There are lots of tricks that can be used to increase brightness, such as adding a light green subpixel. DLP has been using those types of tricks to increase brightness for a few years. It's likely that organic LEDs will just become brighter as technology advances so it will become a non-issue anyway.

 

[barleyguy]

From the description I am guessing that the picture would be similar to current LCD/LED sets and would not achieve the same high contrast or black levels as an LG OLED. Would this be a correct assumption???

No. LG already uses white OLEDs.

 

[WillowGlenDave]

Post #11193 in the OLED Tech sticky thread has a similar article.

Also, Samsung has registered Trademarks for "Super UHD OLED" and other variations. Posted this link in that thread just an hour ago.

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/super-oled-201503064026.htm

 

[imagic]

Fun times ahead if true. Samsung has an event in NYC on Thursday, I'll be there, I wonder it'll get a mention. I'm sure the press will be asking about it.

 

[JakeNY28]

I think Samsung will have to do this; my understanding was that it couldn't get yields up to anywhere near satisfactory levels using RGB OLED. There are clear manufacturing advantages to WOLED, though personally I feel Samsung's initial OLED was superior to LG's first one. But none of that matters if you can't produce them competitively.

I'm heading to the press event Thursday, but since there's currently no OLED on Samsung;s 2015 roadmap I'd be surprised if they talk about it other than to say they're looking at several options. Also, consider that of the 38 million TVs that will be sold this year, only 4 million will even be UHD LCD/LED sets, so Samsung's focus will be on SUHD sets. And right now, LG's 65-inch OLED UHD costs $9,000; there's no need to rush into this market, except for some ego bruising that you picked the wrong OLED manufacturing process. -- Jim Willcox, Consumer Reports.

 

[Kaldaien]

Gotta say... why are LCD profit margins so "razor thin" when they're the only affordable display technology on the market now? Collectively, consumer electronics manufacturers could set any price they needed to and people would still pay it since there are no other options. And if LCD profits are razor thin, then what of plasma? That was effectively a cas of losing money.

Surely this is all a bit of hyperbole?

OLED's realistically not going to change that equation any. The only people who are going to pay a premium for it are videophiles, and you need to give them a product they'd feel comfortable recommending to John Q Public before that works out as a viable business strategy. Otherwise you're just going to position OLED as the new plasma, out of the reach of and/or unappealing to someone who walks into a BestBuy and is brainwashed to believe brighter is better.

 

[sippelmc]

Thanks that was interesting. I get how the article hints that Samsung may use a different mfg process than LG for WOLED, but even then I just can't imagine that if this is true there won't be a huge patent dispute.

That said I believe it. Its pretty much basic marketing 101 that once your product becomes a fungible commodity (like LCD is quickly becoming, if not already except the high end displays) you need to innovate on a new high margin product or start to take second seat.

 

[barleyguy]

Gotta say... why are LCD profit margins so "razor thin" when they're the only affordable display technology on the market now? Collectively, consumer electronics manufacturers could set any price they needed to and people would still pay it since there are no other options.

Collectively pricing is called "collusion" and is against the law. Hard drive manufacturers and computer memory manufacturers tried it (for the same reason of driving up prices because of low margins) and got large fines and sanctions from multiple jurisdictions.

The price is set by competition, and becomes a race to the bottom, especially because non-mainstream manufacturers will sometimes release a new set for half of the current going rate, such as the Changhong 4K sets that sell in the $400 range.

 

[Ken Ross]

Pretty funny that after all of this, if true, they'll use the LG approach!

Let's see how long before we hear the screams of "Patent infringement!!!!".

 

[kleenex]

Why not stop at just white..... Go with even yellow, Maybe even black. Cyan, Magenta, violet as well..

 

[sippelmc]

Gotta say... why are LCD profit margins so "razor thin" when they're the only affordable display technology on the market now? Collectively, consumer electronics manufacturers could set any price they needed to and people would still pay it since there are no other options. And if LCD profits are razor thin, then what of plasma? That was effectively a cas of losing money.

LCD margins are thin because the competition is extremely tight on price and there's not much competitive advantage to be found in cost via better mfg processes/sourcing because its all pretty much been optimized as far as it can go. They can't set any price b/c that kind of collusion is pretty much illegal in most developed economies.

 

[Kaldaien]

LCD margins are thin because the competition is extremely tight on price and there's not much competitive advantage to be found in cost via better mfg processes/sourcing because its all pretty much been optimized as far as it can go. They can't set any price b/c that kind of collusion is pretty much illegal in most developed economies.

Why would it be illegal to set the price of a TV higher if you needed to in order to turn a large enough profit to keep the plant operational? The gloom and doom way things were described made it sound like Samsung is in dire straights.

 

[barleyguy]

Why would it be illegal to set the price of a TV higher if you needed to in order to turn a large enough profit to keep the plant operational? The gloom and doom way things were described made it sound like Samsung is in dire straights.

It's not illegal if you do it without talking to your competition about it. But if someone is shopping for TV sets, and sees two basically identical sets, and one is way higher price, they are probably going to pick the lower priced set.

In other words, it's difficult to increase prices without collusion, because it will result in low sales.

 

[kluken]

I hope this happens because I hate LG and if Panasonic does not do OLED then Samsung would be the next best choice.

 

[mark haflich]

Why do you hate LG? Did one of their kitchen appliances cause you misery?

 

[Ken Ross]

I hope this happens because I hate LG and if Panasonic does not do OLED then Samsung would be the next best choice.

And this 'hatred' for LG exists, why? OYE.

With what's going on in the world today, this is how you channel your hatred?

 

[kluken]

And this 'hatred' for LG exists, why? OYE.

With what's going on in the world today, this is how you channel your hatred?

Numerous bad expierience with LG products and their non existent customer service. Also on the appliance side they have been caught cheating on specs.