OLED Television -- the next big thing

[Hum]

OLED TVs I saw represented the most impressive change from what I'm currently getting from my 1080p TVs.

Don't get me wrong?there's a lot to like about Ultra HD TVs. Certainly the high-resolution 4K screens look great and let you get incredibly close to the TV without seeing any visible pixel grid (called the "screen-door effect"). For many of us, this means that you'll be able to get a larger screen while maintaining the same seating distance.

And for now, OLED manufacturers are having a tough time making larger OLED sets; the current size limitation is about 55 or 56 inches. At CES, we saw Ultra HD prototypes as large as 110 inches, and the few already being sold are 84-inchers. During the show, several companies announced models in the 55- to 75-inch range, a more suitable size for most prospective buyers, although I question whether a 55-inch Ultra HD TV can adequately showcase the higher resolution.

It's also likely that Ultra HD TV prices will fall faster than those of OLED sets. Ultra HDs are essentially LCD TVs with a higher pixel density, so they can be manufactured on the same production lines as standard LCDs. OLED TVs require a new manufacturing process, and yields so far haven't been great, which will likely keep prices high for a longer period of time.

But that's also Ultra HD TV's weakness: These 4K sets essentially remain LCD TVs, with many of that format's drawbacks?most notably backlight-uniformity issues, limited viewing angles, and often, mediocre contrast levels. Yes, the images look sharper, but most viewers will notice it only with top-quality source material, and 4K Blu-rays are at least a year away.

OLED, however, is a new type of TV, and it's the perfect vehicle for demonstrating that image detail is only one of a handful of attributes that contribute to great-looking picture. OLED TVs feel to me like an entirely new TV-viewing experience. Blacks levels are so deep that you to need see them to believe them.

In the first OLED demo I ever saw a few years ago?in room that could go almost absolutely dark?the TV seemed to disappear when the lights turned off; the images seemed to float in space.

OLEDs also deliver ultra-high-contrast images, with bold, vibrant colors that jump off the screen. Add with better-than-plasma brightness, unlimited viewing angles, and energy efficiency that trumps even LED-based LCD TVs, OLED delivers a dynamic viewing experience.

more

[+Fahim S. MVC]

Not exactly news though is it... everyone is still waiting for these to be widely available and cost effective.

[Hum]

I WANT !!! :woot:

[.Markus]

How about the best of both worlds? :woot:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/07/eyes-on-sonys-56-inch-oled-ultra-hdtv/

[oliver182]

Do we have something already against screen burn-in?

[Guest xiphi]

I've wanted an OLED TV ever since I first got my Zune HD. The picture quality just amazing, and I just love that the quality stays the same no matter the viewing angle.

[dvb2000]

Not exactly news though is it... everyone is still waiting for these to be widely available and cost effective.

Not only that, but most TV stations will never broadcast HD (or 3D for that matter) or higher anyway, so these new TVs would be useless.

A solution looking for a problem (i.e. manufacturers looking for more ways to sucker the customer into spending big dollars on something they don't need).

Australia used to have FTA HD channels (and 3D channel), but the politicians caved into the TV stations demands and allowed them to use the bandwidth to multicast multiple channels instead. Now everything is Standard definition or lower.

[grik]

Give better cameras to the film producers :)

Without it, Ultra HD is just Marketing, until then...

[LUTZIFER]

Yeah I'm gonna wait awhile. Like people say, not much point right now.

Besides, give 4k a year and the price will be a quarter what it is now.

I'm more than impressed enough with the picture quality of my 3D LED TV as it is.

[Guest xiphi]

Not only that, but most TV stations will never broadcast HD (or 3D for that matter) or higher anyway, so these new TVs would be useless.

A solution looking for a problem (i.e. manufacturers looking for more ways to sucker the customer into spending big dollars on something they don't need).

Australia used to have FTA HD channels (and 3D channel), but the politicians caved into the TV stations demands and allowed them to use the bandwidth to multicast multiple channels instead. Now everything is Standard definition or lower.

You've obviously have never seen an OLED screen.

[Churma]

OLED looks awesome, but they have a couple of major issues. One is the lifespan of OLED's and the second is that OLED displays are the worst for getting burn in. Hey they look great but unless someone can fix these issues along with the price, it is a pass for me.

My sources

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED

http://en.wikipedia..../Screen_burn-in

[LUTZIFER]

OLED looks awesome, but they have a couple of major issues. One is the lifespan of OLED's and the second is that OLED displays are the worst for getting burn in. Hey they look great but unless someone can fix these issues along with the price, it is a pass for me.

My sources

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED

http://en.wikipedia..../Screen_burn-in

I was kinda wondering about that too, after I heard stories of OLED smart phone screens having burn in issues.

Definitely no good if they get burn in, especially after paying so much for them.

[Arceles]

When I switched my laptop screen from the default 1366x768 glossy finish to 1080p matte finish I saw how there it was a world of difference between blacks in both screens, my current laptop bezel is black and I can say that my current display matches that level of black. My current panel isn't even IPS and gave me a huge color bost. My phone is a RAZRi and has an OLED pentile screen, while I do agree that it may have better blacks, the difference between my laptop's panel and the cellphone screen blacks remains almost null. 4K OLED screens are a no go for me, will go always for 4K IPS screens, plus they can resist screen burn in just no problem.

[LUTZIFER]

When I switched my laptop screen from the default 1366x768 glossy finish to 1080p matte finish I saw how there it was a world of difference between blacks in both screens, my current laptop bezel is black and I can say that my current display matches that level of black. My current panel isn't even IPS and gave me a huge color bost. My phone is a RAZRi and has an OLED pentile screen, while I do agree that it may have better blacks, the difference between my laptop's panel and the cellphone screen blacks remains almost null. 4K OLED screens are a no go for me, will go always for 4K IPS screens, plus they can resist screen burn in just no problem.

Actually that's another thing I've been wondering...

What is the difference between OLED and IPS?

And I assume that not all OLED TVs are 4k right, or are 4k TVs only IPS.

[Arceles]

Actually that's another thing I've been wondering...

What is the difference between OLED and IPS?

And I assume that not all OLED TVs are 4k right, or are 4k TVs only IPS.

IPS are LCDs, but they offer a far better viewing angle.

[I am Reid]

When I switched my laptop screen from the default 1366x768 glossy finish to 1080p matte finish I saw how there it was a world of difference between blacks in both screens, my current laptop bezel is black and I can say that my current display matches that level of black. My current panel isn't even IPS and gave me a huge color bost. My phone is a RAZRi and has an OLED pentile screen, while I do agree that it may have better blacks, the difference between my laptop's panel and the cellphone screen blacks remains almost null. 4K OLED screens are a no go for me, will go always for 4K IPS screens, plus they can resist screen burn in just no problem.

yeah, wait until you see an OLED screen that's larger than 4".

[Arceles]

yeah, wait until you see an OLED screen that's larger than 4".

My cellphone is 4.3", but even so... no. the main deal with OLED is not that they aren't better than IPS, because indeed they are but that comes with a price, and that price is screen burn in, have you heard of programmed obsolescence? OLED screens are exactly that, until they cannot match a reliability as the LCD panels I will not want them, they may look better but my ease of mind comes from having products that have an expire date.

[redfish]

I'm paying attention to some of the more advanced color e-ink technology. Looks more exciting to me than OLED.

[HawkMan]

Technically they burn out, not in.. but anyway.

[citan]

if these displays do better than Pioneer Kuros i'll be all over them :)

[Oni Ray]

Actually that's another thing I've been wondering... What is the difference between OLED and IPS? And I assume that not all OLED TVs are 4k right, or are 4k TVs only IPS.

IPS/TN are panel technologies not display technologies. They are both different types of LCD panels ;)

[oliver182]

Technically they burn out, not in.. but anyway.

Am what?

Screen burn-IN

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_burn-in

We are talking about this on OLEDs

[medhunter]

I think OLED screens are far more energy efficient and enviroment friendly

[PGHammer]

Not only that, but most TV stations will never broadcast HD (or 3D for that matter) or higher anyway, so these new TVs would be useless.

A solution looking for a problem (i.e. manufacturers looking for more ways to sucker the customer into spending big dollars on something they don't need).

Australia used to have FTA HD channels (and 3D channel), but the politicians caved into the TV stations demands and allowed them to use the bandwidth to multicast multiple channels instead. Now everything is Standard definition or lower.

Australia is an anomaly in the developed world - not the rule; the UK and the US have strong HDTV broadcast (and even cable/satellite) markets, and Japan is ahead of both.

In the United States, there are two HDTV formats - 720p (DIsney) and 1080i (Comcast, Discovery Communications, and TimeWarner) with broadcast TV using either one or the other (FOX uses 720p, while I include NBC - both broadcast and cable channels - with Comcast; CBS had adopted 1080i from the beginning, along with NBC and PBS). Rather amazingly, PBS and Discovery are major drivers of HDTV sales - any sales person with a clue will use real HD programming, not a loop, to sell HDTV - go to *any* Sony Style retail store, and see what's playing; same argument applies to the Magnolia Home Theater section of larger Best Buy stores.

While we have multicasters in the US, they are the exception, not the rule. (In fact, greater Washington, DC has a mere one that multicasts with NO HD content - however, that one multicasts international - not domestic - programming.)

[PGHammer]

My cellphone is 4.3", but even so... no. the main deal with OLED is not that they aren't better than IPS, because indeed they are but that comes with a price, and that price is screen burn in, have you heard of programmed obsolescence? OLED screens are exactly that, until they cannot match a reliability as the LCD panels I will not want them, they may look better but my ease of mind comes from having products that have an expire date.

Also, LED-backlit and IPS can now scale to the same sizes as typical/traditional LCD or plasma panels - Sony's BRAVIA and Samsung's current generation of LED panels staqrt at 40" and go north to 84"; not one is a projection TV of any sort, which used to own the north-of-46" turf.

There is also the matter of bandwidth requirements - how is a greater-than-1080p picture going to get to you? Satellite has issues with merely 720p - while fiber optics CAN deliver 1080p by the trainload, it's expensive to deploy. (Ask Verizon OR Google - better yet, ask their bondholders.) The demand will appear in computer displays WELL before it arrives in terms of TVs simply because of the shortness of the delivery path - for a computer, it's just feet, if not inches. Even if OLED solves the burn-in and scaling problems, why would it be needed if the bandwidth to take advantage of it isn't there?