Nature review article about display technologies

Entropy

Veteran
Didn’t know where to put this, but it is a surprisingly accessible piece on current and upcoming display technology, while still being in depth enough to stand head and shoulders above tech/video press articles.
Liquid crystal display and organic light-emitting diode display: present status and future perspectives

Since display technology often makes an appearance here and in other sub-fora as a side topic, i thought some might be interested.
 
Didn’t know where to put this, but it is a surprisingly accessible piece on current and upcoming display technology, while still being in depth enough to stand head and shoulders above tech/video press articles.

Since display technology often makes an appearance here and in other sub-fora as a side topic, i thought some might be interested.
TL;DR: LCD is better overall.
 
Didn’t know where to put this, but it is a surprisingly accessible piece on current and upcoming display technology, while still being in depth enough to stand head and shoulders above tech/video press articles.

Since display technology often makes an appearance here and in other sub-fora as a side topic, i thought some might be interested.

Some really interesting stuff in there indeed. For me personally the section on "Response time and motion picture response time." is quite reassuring.

There is a massive improvement in going from 30 to 60 FPS. A much smaller but still noticeable improvement going from 60 FPS to 120 FPS. And a relatively minimal improvement in going from 120 FPS to 240 FPS.

In practical terms.
  • 60 FPS is a cost effective sweet spot where you get most of the benefits of fast motion without the added cost (computational and display quality) of moving up to 120 FPS.
  • 120 FPS is the sweet spot for MPRT.
For myself, this means that once I move to 120 FPS displays and rendering, there's a good chance that I won't be tempted to move higher than that. And looking at 240 FPS content won't suddenly make 120 FPS content look poor and low quality as is currently the case for 120 FPS versus 60 FPS or 60 FPS versus 30 FPS.

While rendering at 120 FPS can be costly, it also opens up more temporal rendering techniques that will also help reduce the rendering cost.

WRT OLED.

It's good to see that there is some new tech to address the low lifetime of blue OLEDs. In some cases the improvement in lifetime luminance is quite drastic compared to how blue OLEDs are currently made.

Regards,
SB
 
TL;DR: LCD is better overall.

OLED won again in the important 2018 HDTVTest TV Shootout.

All TVs will be given adequate time to run in, and calibrated to the common standards used within the film and broadcast industry for day, night, game, HDR and (where available) Dolby Vision modes, with help from two experts from Portrait Displays who develops the industry-leading CalMAN calibration software. A selection of content (4K Blu-ray, Blu-ray, recorded terrestrial broadcast, HDR games, etc.) will be shown on all the TVs through a HDMI distributor kindly supplied by CYP Europe who will also provide technical support, and attendees will be asked to rate the TVs (1 to 5 scale) in the following categories (subject to change):

* Contrast performance;
* Colour accuracy;
* Motion;
* Video processing;
* Uniformity;
* HDR;
* Bright-room performance; and
* Gaming.

The TV which receives the highest score across all categories will be crowned the "Best TV of 2018". Awards will also be given out for the “Best Home Theater TV”, “Best Living Room TV”, “Best HDR TV” and “Best Gaming TV”.
The HDTVTest 2018 TV shootout event will take place on Sunday the 15th of July from 10.30am to 3.30pm at Harefield Academy, Uxbridge, UB9 6ET, United Kingdom. Attendance is free, but registration is required, and places are limited to 50 seats on a first come, first served basis. To register, please fill in the form at https://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/shootout

Best Home Theatre TV: Panasonic FZ802
Best Living Room TV: Sony AF8
Best Gaming TV: Samsung Q9FN
Best HDR TV: LG C8

Best TV of 2018: Panasonic FZ802


My notes:
Samsung: Black, near black and uniformity performance is awful when next to the oled’s. Great sets for gaming. Sweet spot is very narrow with major PQ deg. off axis. This set had a major dse issue making it not viable for purchase.

LG. Great all around but not masterful at anything. Still the price to performance leader. Opposite of Sony for strengths and weaknesses.

Sony: Great SDR, upscales the best, best gradation. HDR lacks punch significantly when compared to ref monitors and other oleds.

Panasonic: by far the best colors and closest to ref monitors there. Combine LG’s HDR with Sony’s video processing and you a Panasonic. Came at the expense of black crush.

Overall: all the oleds were quite close with nitpicking and individual use cases being the decider. Outside of hdr brightness, the Q9 falls well behind. The LCD tech, outside of a major breakthrough is going to struggle.

Another great event ran by Vincent and Company!

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/40-o...-af8-c8-fz-oled-vs-q9fn-qled-july-15th-4.html

As far as image quality is concernedt the LCD technology doesn't stand a chance anymore. It requires LED and then the fight could get exciting again.
 
Last edited:
OLED won again in the important 2018 HDTVTest TV Shootout.



Best Home Theatre TV: Panasonic FZ802
Best Living Room TV: Sony AF8
Best Gaming TV: Samsung Q9FN
Best HDR TV: LG C8

Best TV of 2018: Panasonic FZ802


https://www.avsforum.com/forum/40-o...-af8-c8-fz-oled-vs-q9fn-qled-july-15th-4.html

As far as image quality is concernedt the LCD technology doesn't stand a chance anymore. It requires LED and then the fight could get exciting again.
Sure, OLED wins in picture quality... for the little time before burn-in sets in.
 
I don't know about always but OLED certainly has some catching to do, specially in terms of durability:


They have posted a more recent video and this detailed that 25% window as a firmware issue due to the process which lg will come and fix, it is not a panel defect but a corruption to the lookup table. The update the engineers applied removed that from the screen, it did not affect issue on the CNN TV.

Looking at the other more normal usage patterns no real issues at all from rather heavy usage cycles.

So excluding old fault panels you cannot buy and worse case abuse the panels seem more than up to their intended use, or that's how I took the results.
 
They have posted a more recent video and this detailed that 25% window as a firmware issue due to the process which lg will come and fix, it is not a panel defect but a corruption to the lookup table. The update the engineers applied removed that from the screen, it did not affect issue on the CNN TV.

Looking at the other more normal usage patterns no real issues at all from rather heavy usage cycles.

So excluding old fault panels you cannot buy and worse case abuse the panels seem more than up to their intended use, or that's how I took the results.
It's not like that Youtube channel is the only source of reports of OLED burn in. Also, hardcore gaming is not really far away from what you'd call abusive TV usage :LOL:
 
It's not like that Youtube channel is the only source of reports of OLED burn in. Also, hardcore gaming is not really far away from what you'd call abusive TV usage :LOL:

Not to mention there's a huge question mark affixed to OLED in Near-Eye-Display land because it's unsure whether it can ever compete/withstand ambient light, and on the long run everyone wants non-isolating displays , so OLED's VR sweet spot might be at risk as well.
 
Sure, OLED wins in picture quality... for the little time before burn-in sets in.

Even with an unlikely burn-in the uniformity performance would still be bettar than from an LCD. A burn-in would rather occur on the edges of the display while LCDs are also inhomogeneous in the center which is more disturbng.
 
Last edited:
I'd disagree with the subjective assessment. Noise is harder to visually parse than clear geometric edges. A burnt in rectangle is probably more jarring than an amount of luminance variation.

That said, the burn-in demonstrated in the FIFA stress-tests wouldn't be visible, and doesn't affect darks which is where OLED is most valuable. That is, the burn-in constitutes a percent reduction of a colour in an area. The darker that area, the less perceptible that burn-in will be. In dark scenes, it won't matter. In mid-range scenes, it'll be invisible (as so far manifest in this ongoing test). At the brightest levels with the highest contrast between non-burnt and burnt-areas, it'll be the biggest problem, which don't represent normal TV or gaming use.

edit: One take away from actually looking at the test results is how the colours do shift on the 50% grey. You probably won't notice in use until you get a new TV, but it is true that in choosing the perfect blacks of OLED, you do lose longevity. Depending on how long you want your TV to last until your next upgrade, and how many hours you spend on it, longevity should probably factor into one's decision making process, moreso than artefact burn-in.
 
Last edited:
Even with an unlikely burn-in the uniformity performance would still be bettar than from an LCD. A burn-in would rather occur on the edges of the display while LCDs are also inhomogeneous in the center which is more disturbng.
Except if you play shooters in which case you'll have a permanent crosshair in the center of the screen.
 
Except if you play shooters in which case you'll have a permanent crosshair in the center of the screen.

Pixel shift/pixel orbiter would help here a lot since crosshairs are mostly thin.

Besides, you'd have to play the same shooter for hundreds of hours to have an effect. Crosshairs are also always different, depending on weapon, transparency, game, settings, etc.

Crosshairs didn't even glow on my plasma. The most problematic HUD of games I ever had were from Bad Company 1, 2 and AVP (marine fraction) from 2010. So you'll have to look at what kind of HUD it is. Most action games dont have something bright and permanent like that anymore.

I'd disagree with the subjective assessment. Noise is harder to visually parse than clear geometric edges. A burnt in rectangle is probably more jarring than an amount of luminance variation.

That said, the burn-in demonstrated in the FIFA stress-tests wouldn't be visible, and doesn't affect darks which is where OLED is most valuable. That is, the burn-in constitutes a percent reduction of a colour in an area. The darker that area, the less perceptible that burn-in will be. In dark scenes, it won't matter. In mid-range scenes, it'll be invisible (as so far manifest in this ongoing test). At the brightest levels with the highest contrast between non-burnt and burnt-areas, it'll be the biggest problem, which don't represent normal TV or gaming use.

edit: One take away from actually looking at the test results is how the colours do shift on the 50% grey. You probably won't notice in use until you get a new TV, but it is true that in choosing the perfect blacks of OLED, you do lose longevity. Depending on how long you want your TV to last until your next upgrade, and how many hours you spend on it, longevity should probably factor into one's decision making process, moreso than artefact burn-in.

Thick stripes in the center of the screen are nasty. That I can tell you for sure. Especially for ice sports, football etc. At the edge it is only something peripheral where it also depends on the seat distance and the screen size. At the edge I do not see sharply at all.
 
Last edited:
Pixel shift/pixel orbiter would help here a lot since crosshairs are mostly thin.

Besides, you'd have to play the same shooter for hundreds of hours to have an effect. Crosshairs are also always different, depending on weapon, transparency, game, settings, etc.

Crosshairs didn't even glow on my plasma. The most problematic HUD of games I ever had were from Bad Company 1, 2 and AVP (marine fraction) from 2010. So you'll have to look at what kind of HUD it is. Most action games dont have something bright and permanent like that anymore.



Thick stripes in the center of the screen are nasty. That I can tell you for sure. Especially for ice sports, football etc. At the edge it is only something peripheral where it also depends on the seat distance and the screen size. At the edge I do not see sharply at all.
When you have a major manufacturer doing damage control on its basic website you know it's a real issue:

https://www.lg.com/us/experience-tvs/oled-tv/reliability
 
How does that prove anything? If a rival posts FUD about you, don't you have to respond? All that webpage shows is people are talking about burn in. It doesn't show that it's a significant problem that OLED users are experiencing. For that, you want to go to the users and get a decent sampling of those who have issues versus those who don't.

One also has to factor in the risk with realities of operation. Yes, there's a chance to have burn in degrading your image. But then with an LCD, you'll 100% get image degradation when viewing off-centre. And you'll 100% get non-uniform light, and light bleed. So is a chance of your OLED degrading over time so that, after a few years, some areas of the screen are slightly darker, of more concern than over that same few years always having cloudy blacks and off-colours when not straight on?

No display technology is without its flaws. For consumers to make the best choice for them, the information needs to be accurate and impartial rather than driven by marketing forces.
 
FWIW I've had a LG B7 OLED for about a year and it is predominately used for gaming, BF1 being my MP game of choice and I've not seen any significant burn in even when I've left bright menus on the screen for a few hours. I do have the jitter and auto screen dimming features turned on FWIW

I'm still awaiting someone to make a UHD gamut colorimeter that isn't 5 times the cost of the tv so I can get real deep into evaluating colour shifts et al. I mean any set over time is going to show a degree of drift, my old KDL40W2000 had colour shift over time as it's CCFL aged and I've seen many folks hold on to old Kuro sets for an age despite the received wisdom regarding the aging of plasma.
 
I have the b7. Mostly used for gaming, and plenty of HDR. No issues to report at all. I can definitely see image retention when leaving static content in hdr that is red, orange or yellow coloured. Make sure to turn the set off every 4 hours for its automatic 10 minutes screen clean up.
 
Back
Top