AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
421 - 428 of 428 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
643 Posts
^luckily for me I dont need you to remind me of how that works as I have LCDs and Oleds in my home. Provide facts rather than your opinion with your responses.
Umm, I have had many OLEDs and LCD's in my home as well, side by side. Currently I have an A1E and a Z9D and they have been placed side by side for comparison. The FACTS are simple. Some high-nit HDR scenes simply DO NOT HAVE BLACKS in them. They are daytime outdoor scenes where the sun is shining very bright. Since there are NO BLACKS in these scenes, there is NO BLOOMING to be seen on the LCDs. Yet the a high-nit capable LCD's show a greater dynamic range because they have a much higher nit capability and the color-volume is not diluted from an extra white subpixel.

I gave you an example. This beach scene from Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children looks noticeably better on my Z9D than it does on my OLEDs. Why do you think Vincent frequently uses this scene in his videos?

https://youtu.be/Z_aAV7WU5n4?t=223

Vincent wouldn't go ga-ga over Sony's 10,000 nit demo monster and their nearly 4,000 nit Z9G if OLED always looked better with HDR scenes. OLED looks better than LCD on SOME HDR scenes, but on others a top-performing LCD is better. What percentage of the time OLED looks better and what percentage of the time LCD looks better could never be measured, because it depends on what type of content one watches.

OLED's are still lacking when it comes to peak-brightness, and that is a FACT. Even if you prefer OLED to LCD (nothing wrong with that), OLED needs to improve brightness capability for HDR. It is not always superior to LCD in every way or in ever scene.

Certain OLED fanboys like to try to justify their display choice by telling themselves and others that HDR always looks better on their OLED anyway, so OLED always trounces LCD.

My only point is this. Even though I prefer my A1E a bit over my Z9D (they serve different purposes: the Z9D gets used as a monitor and the OLED would get burn-in if I used it this way), I can still acknowledge that in certain scenes of HDR the OLED is simply lacking compared to the LCD. Of course LCD cannot handle certain challenging black scenes in HDR like an OLED, so LCD's owner's have nothing to brag about either.

The reality is, those who own both OLED and a very high-end LED-LCD and set them side by side, can see that the OLED is not always better in HDR scenes, but could use some improvement.

So OLED shills should get off their high horse and quit pretending like their display always dominated LCD in HDR scenes. LCD owners already acknowledge that OLED is superior for SDR (except perhaps in bright room viewing) but that is not enough. Some OLED shills have to claim that their OLED perceptually beats LCD in HDR all the time too, because it has pixel-level control. Not the case. Certain HDR scenes just plain look better on LCD vs. OLED, and anyone who says otherwise is disingenuous and a liar.

As I said, if OLED always looked better, Vincent would not always be telling everyone how much of a nits-whore he is, and how impressed he is with high-nit LCDs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,989 Posts
The tenor of your posts never change, derogatory and demeaning. And wasn’t it you that just classified those that play video games as immature children? Interesting.

To help clarify my posts from the past for you, I have always insisted that many of the processing differences do become far more minimal at normal seating distances. Saying I saw an improvement going from my B6 to G7 doesn’t change my opinion nor does it make my comment about seating distances mutually exclusive. They can both apply. And having 2 displays in 2 different rooms does not make it impossible to see differences.

Give it a rest.
This.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,989 Posts
^if you aint first your last! Now to get a 10 second car to match my reading skills!
 
  • Like
Reactions: sd13

·
Registered
Joined
·
406 Posts
On the elevated black level discussion and how the A9G and C9 handled it differently... Man I would love an elevated black level tone mapping like feature where the tv can remove it and adjust it back to proper levels. User needs to have full control over it of course, since that will definitely have some drawbacks until some years of refinement take place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,584 Posts
Umm, I have had many OLEDs and LCD's in my home as well, side by side. Currently I have an A1E and a Z9D and they have been placed side by side for comparison. The FACTS are simple. Some high-nit HDR scenes simply DO NOT HAVE BLACKS in them. They are daytime outdoor scenes where the sun is shining very bright. Since there are NO BLACKS in these scenes, there is NO BLOOMING to be seen on the LCDs. Yet the a high-nit capable LCD's show a greater dynamic range because they have a much higher nit capability and the color-volume is not diluted from an extra white subpixel.

I gave you an example. This beach scene from Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children looks noticeably better on my Z9D than it does on my OLEDs. Why do you think Vincent frequently uses this scene in his videos?

https://youtu.be/Z_aAV7WU5n4?t=223

Vincent wouldn't go ga-ga over Sony's 10,000 nit demo monster and their nearly 4,000 nit Z9G if OLED always looked better with HDR scenes. OLED looks better than LCD on SOME HDR scenes, but on others a top-performing LCD is better. What percentage of the time OLED looks better and what percentage of the time LCD looks better could never be measured, because it depends on what type of content one watches.

OLED's are still lacking when it comes to peak-brightness, and that is a FACT. Even if you prefer OLED to LCD (nothing wrong with that), OLED needs to improve brightness capability for HDR. It is not always superior to LCD in every way or in ever scene.

Certain OLED fanboys like to try to justify their display choice by telling themselves and others that HDR always looks better on their OLED anyway, so OLED always trounces LCD.

My only point is this. Even though I prefer my A1E a bit over my Z9D (they serve different purposes: the Z9D gets used as a monitor and the OLED would get burn-in if I used it this way), I can still acknowledge that in certain scenes of HDR the OLED is simply lacking compared to the LCD. Of course LCD cannot handle certain challenging black scenes in HDR like an OLED, so LCD's owner's have nothing to brag about either.

The reality is, those who own both OLED and a very high-end LED-LCD and set them side by side, can see that the OLED is not always better in HDR scenes, but could use some improvement.

So OLED shills should get off their high horse and quit pretending like their display always dominated LCD in HDR scenes. LCD owners already acknowledge that OLED is superior for SDR (except perhaps in bright room viewing) but that is not enough. Some OLED shills have to claim that their OLED perceptually beats LCD in HDR all the time too, because it has pixel-level control. Not the case. Certain HDR scenes just plain look better on LCD vs. OLED, and anyone who says otherwise is disingenuous and a liar.

As I said, if OLED always looked better, Vincent would not always be telling everyone how much of a nits-whore he is, and how impressed he is with high-nit LCDs.
You are entitled to post what you feel about these TVs but your post is full of misinformation. If you simply watched the stream of the TV Shootout and payed attention to the first part where Joel Silver talks about picture quality you would see that no consumer TV technology but OLED, right now, can give more dynamic range.

I agree, time to close this thread since everything about the TV Shootout has been reported and discussed.
 
421 - 428 of 428 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top