Rollable displays are irrelevant for home viewing.
Wrong. I'm the target group. I want auto screen curve feature for my 88 inches OLED, which will not be had without rollable. and your argument holds no water as you're ignorant to future plans of such flexible displays. And contrary to what you say, I've heard plenty from people whose family members hated unsightly TV screen for various reasons.
doubly irrelevant in this thread about Gaming Displays.
Wrong. My ultimate dream gaming rig will be three 150 inches LG 8K OLED TVs in rollable orientation and I will adjust screen curve myself accordingly. Can't do that with non flexible TVs, and LG will not sell 150 screens in inflexible form factor as that will drive up logistics and storage cost too much compared with rollable. And even consoles have just the right content to drive such orientation : Forza, Gran Turismo.
My brother games and use productivity softwares on his 32 inches Dell Ultra widescreen monitor which is curved. Plenty of PC gamers and developers are using Ultrawide screen curved monitors and Samsung's latest Quantum Dot monitors are as of such. Flexible displays are relevant for gaming.
put it out of the way over HDR, refresh rate, uniformity, contrast ratio, etc
There is a no compromise, and that's the beauty of OLED over competition. The first auto curve prototypes already had 60000 roll ups durability. The current ones, easily the double that.
A display has to be suitably sized.
A rollable is easier to carry then flat panels. Have you tried to bring Sharp 90 inches LCD TV to your apartment? Elevator? There is an argument for portability. If there are portable projectors on sale, why can't rollable OLED be?
A 10mm display OTOH is no less desirable than a 1mm display. They are all below the usefully-slim threshold.
I agree but the number of consumers flocked to continuously purchase Samsung's thinnest edge-lits say otherwise.
Your stating that because no LCD has won now, LCD is inferior, but LCD's suffer from weak contrast ratios.
I can't state that decidedly because contrast ratios can mean different things. It was not the first time LCDs had better "contrast ratio" than self emissive displays like plasmas, but still ultimately lost. Take Samsung's best non PSA SPVA panel for example. It had 0.03 cd/m2 of ANSI 50% pattern MLL (Minimum Luminance Level), while holding 120 cd/m2 luminance level (SDR reference) Divide 120 cd/m2 by 0.03 cd/m2 and that will give you 4000:1. Take my plasma for example next. My Panasonic S60 has 4094:1 contrast ratio according to Rtings (
https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/panasonic/s60) They measured 0.013 cd/m2 black level and 56.22 cd/m2 peak brightness. So yes, those two panels have similar brightness, and for other lower end plasmas like the Panasonic UT50 and U50 has it even worse, like 36 cd/m2 so contrast ratio will be like even lower. With such a mediocre top end, the Samsung should have performed excellently at presenting highlight right? Nope. With such close "ANSI contrast ratio", the Samsung should have performed close to my plasma correct? Not even close. And yes, I do have two such Samsung panel TVs, one from Sony and another from Samsung (FH6400) and did compare side by side. The reason? Floating black. HDR is not something entirely new that favours peak brightness at all. It's just an extension of SDR we have.
If you have LCDs with 1000000:1 contrast ratio and higher peak luminosity than OLEDs, you have better HDR.
No, because of floating black, which is already proven by Vincent Teoh. Do the math yourself. Is dividing 1000 cd/m2 by 0.004 cd/m2 giving you 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio? No, it's 250,000:1. How about dividng by 0.008 cd/m2? It further drops down to 125,000:1. This is only competitive against plasmas (worse than modded Pioneer Kuro) , not OLEDs. OLEDs suffer from no floating black. LCDs, because of their transmissive nature, are inherently flawed with floating black, and the higher peak brightness it goes, the worse the black level will be.
OLED can't be amped up to 1000nits AFAIK.
Panasonic GZ2000 says hi. It does, when uncalibrated.
Now you sound bitter and irrational. If you want to raise a point about power efficiency, which is a fair argument, but all means do so, but don't throw it out there suddenly as a moving goalpost on why OLED is the best thing ever and LCD is teh doomed. Stick to sensible, rational arguments.
No personal sidewaying please. I was simply stating things as is, no ill feeling. Regulations are simply a life, and I do not blame Europe at all for nerfing console specs with leadless solders, killing cadmium Quantum Dots , etc. Even without Europe's lead and energy restriction, plasma would have closed shop unable to scale up to 4K and beyond. But you also have to admit regulations and innovations can't go hand to hand sometimes, and we have to deal with it and move on once that happens.
For the insanely bright HDR, not because it has two layers of LCD. A TV with the same peak brightness as OLED won't run anything like as hot and won't need fans, will it?
No, because of LCD cell's aperture ratio. That's assuming when LCD cells have perfect aperture ratio which they do not. (6% only from light guide plate to viewers) A typical backlit (non FALD) LCD has LEDs located at the back emitting light will go through a light guide plate to tighten up as an array of beams, then goes thorugh a diffuser sheet, a prism sheet, a bottom polarizer, a glass substrate, a TFT, a Liquid Chrystal cell, a common electrodes, then finally goes through color filters, then going further through exterior glass substrate, top polarizer, and top chassis to finally output an image.
Biggest drop of light passthrough occurs at polarizers, an LCD cell, and color filters. Polarizer light lose is 50% as only monodirectional light will be able to pass through. Light output lose from glasses passthrough is 5%. Light output lose from passing through Liquid Chrystal cell is 5% but 45% of passed through light output is rendered worthless, so really, the actual aparture ratio of an LCD cell is only 50%. Color filters are the biggest brightness killers. While light output lose from color filters is only 20%, the remaining 80% has to go through 3 color filters, having to divide light output into three, which will be around 26%.
Now this is what's happening with dual layer LCDs. The light passthrough will be as equal until the arrival at the first LCD cell. It will not need to go through color filters as this cell will only display greyscale, but here's a kicker. Unlike regular LCD cells, It HAS to shine at 1000 cd/m2 at ALL.THE.TIME. Even if we want 100% APL full white screen to only deliver 10 cd/m2, it will still shine at full 1000 cd/m2. Why do we need to produce such excess, wasteful brightness? The rear cell has to be ready to shine at 1000 cd/m2 at anytime, anywhere, that's why. This is the single biggest factor for out of this world power consumption, as no consumer LCD TVs can ever shine 1000 cd/m2 at 100% APL full white screen, the Sony Z9D included. But wait, that's not it. I said going through each LCD cell incurs 50% light penalty each time right? So in order for second cell to pass through 1000 cd/m2 of total light output, the greyscale cell will have to operate at 2000 cd/m2 at 100% APL full screen white just to compensate. Outputting 1000 cd/m2 is already bad enough, imagine being required to output at 2000 cd/m2 or even 4000 cd/m2. This thing will not compete against OLEDs once OLEDs get to over 2000 cd/m2 with TADF in next 5 years. At least this thing will have outstanding ABL performance just like Mini LEDs. Hisense is settling with 1080p greyscale cell instead of 4K cell because they needed to keep aperture ratio in check since they are aiming at even bigger size with 65 inches.
Have you seen the size of
Sony's reference OLED?
Here are product manuals for both
https://pro.sony/s3/cms-static-content/uploadfile/55/1237494980655.pdf (Sony OLED BVM X300)
https://pro.sony/s3/2019/01/18022258/4748188111.pdf (Sony BVM HX310)
The OLED's front dimension is 74.24 cm x 46.35 cm. The depth is 13.65 cm not accounting for stand. Maximum power consumption is 280W and typical power consumption is rate at 150W. Product weighs 16.2 Kg
The LCD's front dimension is 77.8 cm x 50.35 cm. The depth is 20.37 cm not accounting for stand. Maximum power consumption is 450W. Product weighs 29 Kg
Still trying to find the actual Hisense consumer pictures, not the show prototype