117 replies to this topic

[jsmith]

Has everyone forgotten and/or did no one see the small models already released a number of years ago?

Sony XEL-1

LG EL9500

I never got to see the LG, but I saw the Sony overseas and it was quite impressive. I have been waiting since for a large screen size, so hopefully the pricing is decent within the next 2 or 3 years. I certainly wouldn't advise anyone to go and pay $8K for an early model, but the PQ of the new panels by Samsung and LG is and will be superior to what is currently available.

JSmith

[Owen]

The only thing that is known is that OLED should have better blacks than current flat panels but how LG's and Samsungs OLED systems compare to existing products for picture "quality" is completely unknown.
A display that suffers from posterization, colour issues, dither/PWM noise or simply a harsh digital looking picture is not what I call high "quality" even if blacks are perfect.

Not only is the jury still out, they have yet to hear the case.

[jsmith]

... or how about one of these OLED Professional Reference Monitor's available from Sony?

Now surely someone around here has seen one of these?

http://pro.sony.com....oadcastreleases

"Sony’s Trimaster EL OLED technology is designed to further enhance the next generation of monitor technology, with the greatest accuracy ever seen in monitors. The BVM-E and PVM range produce true blacks with the highest contrast range, blur-free motion and wide colour gamut."

JSmith

[ajm]

jsmith, this has been around since 2011 - apparently.

Pretty much speaks for itself.

[jsmith]

ajm, on 13 August 2012 - 10:32 AM, said:

jsmith, this has been around since 2011 - apparently.

Pretty much speaks for itself.

Yes I know these panels I have posted have been around for some time. My point is they have amazing PQ. I saw the 11" Sony overseas and it was amazing.

Further quote about the 25" Sony reference monitor;

"...that delivers precise colour reproduction, stunning picture uniformity, smoother-than-ever gamma performance, and picture quality consistency."

JSmith

[ajm]

In fairness though that's a quote from Sony marketing. You rarely see a brochure that describes picture quality as being in the bottom 1/3rd in it's class which is where 1/3 of all TVs sit.

[Owen]

The "OLED" technology used in Sonys professional reference monitors is very different to Samsungs TV's and totally different to LG's. The LG system is so different it deserves a separate and distinct name.
The design and performance standards for Sonys  pro reference monitors are in a totally different league to domestic TV's so no conclusions about the performance of Samsung and LG's "OLED" TV's can be drawn from the Sony monitors. Hell Sony's old CRT pro monitors from the 1990's put modern LCD and Plasma TV's to shame.

[jsmith]

Owen, on 13 August 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

The "OLED" technology used in Sonys professional reference monitors is very different to Samsungs TV's and totally different to LG's.

It certainly is, however the tech. used for the Sony XEL-1 11" is very similar to what Samsung are using for their 55".

You never had a chance to see one of those then?

See I'm not basing all my comments on reviewers comments possibly disguised as marketing, I'm basing it on what I've seen (being the XEL-1)... and what I saw was all good.

JSmith

[jliang70]

jsmith, on 13 August 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

It certainly is, however the tech. used for the Sony XEL-1 11" is very similar to what Samsung are using for their 55".

You never had a chance to see one of those then?

See I'm not basing all my comments on reviewers comments possibly disguised as marketing, I'm basing it on what I've seen (being the XEL-1)... and what I saw was all good.

JSmith

A cheap plasma and an expensive plasma are also base on similar technology and yet deliver they don't deliver the same picture quality.

[jsmith]

jliang70, on 13 August 2012 - 04:36 PM, said:

A cheap plasma and an expensive plasma are also based on similar technology and yet deliver they don't deliver the same picture quality.

Yes but plasma panels are an evolved technology now and are not new to the large panel market like OLED is. From what I recall when plasma's first hit the market they were also insanely priced and the few that were released offered similar PQ... so not much of a point really.

JSmith

[jliang70]

jsmith, on 13 August 2012 - 07:41 PM, said:

Yes but plasma panels are an evolved technology now and are not new to the large panel market like OLED is. From what I recall when plasma's first hit the market they were also insanely priced and the few that were released offered similar PQ... so not much of a point really.

JSmith

What I am trying to say is even if two screen use the same technology there is no guarantee that they deliver the same picture quality.

[pgdownload]

jsmith, on 13 August 2012 - 07:41 PM, said:

Yes but plasma panels are an evolved technology now and are not new to the large panel market like OLED is. From what I recall when plasma's first hit the market they were also insanely priced and the few that were released offered similar PQ... so not much of a point really

I'm happy to stipulate that OLED panels are everything and more that various posters have suggested in terms of PQ. But plasmas were released at insane prices... and people bought them. Then they settled for a few years at 480p sets with huge image retention issues and motion blurring (LCDs)... and people bought them. They bought them because digital channels were coming on line and they were 16:9 and HD and because they were thin and they were truly novel. And now everyone has them. Its not going to happen again any time soon.

OLED might be amazing and its great that people looking for the next step up in image quality have something to aspire to, however IMO they're not going to be available under $4000 any time soon (aka 10+ years)

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[Owen]

jsmith, on 13 August 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

It certainly is, however the tech. used for the Sony XEL-1 11" is very similar to what Samsung are using for their 55".

The only similarity between Sonys and Samsung's implementation is they both use RGB sub pixels (like almost all flat panels) and the name "OLED", after that its all different as each manufactures has its own pattented systems.

jsmith, on 13 August 2012 - 03:58 PM, said:

You never had a chance to see one of those then?

See I'm not basing all my comments on reviewers comments possibly disguised as marketing, I'm basing it on what I've seen (being the XEL-1)... and what I saw was all good.

JSmith

How can you make any meaningful judgements about picture "quality" on a screen only slightly larger than an iPad that has not been calibrated and has no calibrated competing products of the same size available for comparison?
Calibrate the little Sony OLED and a decent laptop LCD of the same size and they will look virtually identical unless the viewing environment is dark. It takes a much larger screen to reveal the subtle but important differences between displays.

[jsmith]

pgdownload, on 13 August 2012 - 09:24 PM, said:

I'm happy to stipulate that OLED panels are everything and more that various posters have suggested in terms of PQ. But plasmas were released at insane prices... and people bought them. Then they settled for a few years at 480p sets with huge image retention issues and motion blurring (LCDs)... and people bought them. They bought them because digital channels were coming on line and they were 16:9 and HD and because they were thin and they were truly novel. And now everyone has them. Its not going to happen again any time soon.

OLED might be amazing and its great that people looking for the next step up in image quality have something to aspire to, however IMO they're not going to be available under $4000 any time soon (aka 10+ years)

Regards

Peter Gillespie

I don't understand why you think that Peter. The investment is huge in OLED...

On a mass scale the profits from OLED production will be alot higher than LCD and certainly plasma. Whether the PQ increase is great or not, OLED will replace LCD sooner than you think IMO. There would be no point investing the billions of $'s in OLED large panels if the projection of comsumer acceptance was 10+ years.

I suppose we'll have to wait and see what happens...

Owen, on 14 August 2012 - 12:57 PM, said:

The only similarity between Sonys and Samsung's implementation is they both use RGB sub pixels (like almost all flat panels) and the name "OLED", after that its all different as each manufactures has its own pattented systems.

How can you make any meaningful judgements about picture "quality" on a screen only slightly larger than an iPad that has not been calibrated and has no calibrated competing products of the same size available for comparison?
Calibrate the little Sony OLED and a decent laptop LCD of the same size and they will look virtually identical unless the viewing environment is dark. It takes a much larger screen to reveal the subtle but important differences between displays.

They're are both AMOLED panels on a TFT substrate... how different do you expect them to be?

The viewing environment was dark and there were many Plasma and LCD's in the same dark room for me to compare to. We spent some time calibrating the screen. I'm well aware of what I'm looking for when I assess a panel.

OLED will replace LCD and plasma will dwindle away unless Panasonic can come up with a way to produce quality panels as cheaply as OLED panels will cost to produce.

JSmith

[Owen]

jsmith, on 14 August 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

They're are both AMOLED panels on a TFT substrate... how different do you expect them to be?

To be granted a patent the technology has to be unlike any other patented system or device, so the Sony and Samsung OLED systems are different.

jsmith, on 14 August 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

The viewing environment was dark and there were many Plasma and LCD's in the same dark room for me to compare to. We spent some time calibrating the screen. I'm well aware of what I'm looking for when I assess a panel.

I was not aware Plasma and LCD TV's came in an 11" size, the size difference alone makes any comparison impossible.
"calibration"is not playing with the settings, it requires a colour meter for adjustment of colour, gamma and very importantly light output. When these aspects of performance are equal (assuming thats possible) the displays will look virtually identical. The subtle differences that separate good displays from great ones will not be noticeable on an 11' screen.

Then there is the issue of personal preference. I am quite certain that our respective ideas of what constitutes  a "quality" picture are VERY different.

jsmith, on 14 August 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

OLED will replace LCD and plasma will dwindle away unless Panasonic can come up with a way to produce quality panels as cheaply as OLED panels will cost to produce.

JSmith

Who knows what will happen in the future, a new technology could come along and make all current technologies obsolete. Whatever happens I expect change will be slow.

Edited by Owen, 14 August 2012 - 03:39 PM.

[jsmith]

Owen, on 14 August 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

To be granted a patent the technology has to be unlike any other patented system or device, so the Sony and Samsung OLED systems are different.

Yes but to patent something similar requires nothing but a minor change and it can be considered a new patentable product.

Owen, on 14 August 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

I was not aware Plasma and LCD TV's came in an 11" size, the size difference alone makes any comparison impossible.
"calibration"is not playing with the settings, it requires a colour meter for adjustment of colour, gamma and very importantly light output. When these aspects of performance are equal (assuming thats possible) the displays will look virtually identical. The subtle differences that separate good displays from great ones will not be noticeable on an 11' screen.

Owen your response it rather arrogant, what makes you think I don't know the processes involved in calibrating a screen? I say this whilst agreeing I may not have had the ideal comparison available...

Owen, on 14 August 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

Then there is the issue of personal preference. I am quite certain that our respective ideas of what constitutes  a "quality" picture are VERY different.

Quite certain huh? Rec. 709 isn't a preference it's a standard... I just think I'm more accepting of variations in how the picture is presented than you are.

Owen, on 14 August 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

Who knows what will happen in the future, a new technology could come along and make all current technologies obsolete. Whatever happens I expect change will be slow.

I agree that is possible but highly unlikely given the huge investment in OLED panel production.

IMO the change will be quicker than some think, but hey time will tell.

JSmith

[pgdownload]

jsmith, on 14 August 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

I don't understand why you think that Peter. The investment is huge in OLED..

jsmith, If I read your comments right, you have two main ideas why OLED will be successful. 1) The PQ is notably better than the panels today and 2) the investment in developing OLED has been huge so the companies involved won't want to see that wasted.

I'm happy to agree with both. However I don't think that these two factors alone are enough to see OLED become ubiquitous. Plenty of superior products have been vanquished by inferior ones and plenty of big ventures have gone bust trying to develop new technologies. OLED is IMO trapped with the common chicken egg problem. It costs a bundle. Mass uptake will see the price fall. But mass uptake won't happen until the prices fall.

The wholesale move from CRT to panel over the last decade had a mass of push and pull factors. It was the perfect storm. But now any household interested in a 42"+ flat screen has a HD panel in their living room. If OLED makers could build millions of OLED panels and take them to households and say for $10,000 you can have this and throw out your existing panel, or $5,000, or $2,500, I think very few would be interested now days. They already have 80% of the product, why would they pay $1000's more for another 20%?

Personally, I think OLED will shine on small screen units (ie, phones and tablets), it will also settle in to the premium (say $5000) range of TVs which is great as all the forum members looking forward to them will be able to have one in the next year or two. Meanwhile, plasma and LCD tech will improve incrementally and get a little bit cheaper. But unless the panel manufacturers decide globally to stop production of panels and only sell OLED, I don't see OLED capturing even 10% of the market over the next decade.

Regards

Peter Gillespie

[Owen]

jsmith, on 14 August 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

Yes but to patent something similar requires nothing but a minor change and it can be considered a new patentable product.

An LG Plasma and a Pioneer Kuro both use similar Plasma technology, do they perform the same?
What would seem like minor differences in design can result is markedly different performance . Attempting to predict how well the Samsung and LG OLED TV's will perform based on the performance of a tiny Sony is silly.

jsmith, on 14 August 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

Owen your response it rather arrogant, what makes you think I don't know the processes involved in calibrating a screen? I say this whilst agreeing I may not have had the ideal comparison available...

To quote you,

jsmith, on 14 August 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

We spent some time calibrating the screen.

Did you “calibrate” the Sony or just play with the settings?
How do you reconcile the huge difference in size between the 11” Sony and much larger Plasma and LCD TV's?
How is the little Sonys performance relevant to the Samsung and LG TV's, the performance of which is untested.

jsmith, on 14 August 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

Quite certain huh? Rec. 709 isn't a preference it's a standard... I just think I'm more accepting of variations in how the picture is presented than you are.

Yes I'm quite certain, TV's that you have enthused about in the past I found quite objectionable so our personal preferences vary markedly. To each their own.

Rec. 709 is a standard but strict conformance to it is not vitally important, chromaticity has to be a fair way off before its noticeable so minor errors are no big deal. What I find more important is how well colour intensity tracks over the luminance range from bright to dark. This is an aspect of performance that is not normally examined in reviews and is not adjustable, its an area of performance where LCD/LED TV's often have significant problems and its a deal breaker as far as I am concerned, yet most people don’t seem to notice or care.


“OLED” (or some iterations of it) may turn out to be a great advance, but lets not count our chickens before they have hatched. Its normal for new technologies to take quite a while before they can be considered mature and a true advance on what they are intended to replace. No reason to expect OLED will be an exception.

Edited by Owen, 14 August 2012 - 11:08 PM.