News: displays and their technologies

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by I DO BLU

https://youtube.com/watch?v=d8dlz5LW...MgdGVjaCB0aXBz

Beginning of the end of OLED

[I DO BLU]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Beginning of the end of OLED

At that price I don’t think so and already a dead pixel

[Jay Mammoth]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Beginning of the end of OLED

Lol

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Beginning of the end of OLED

Oh dear. Not again lol.

[Auditor55]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Beginning of the end of OLED

An OLED TV can be made that large. The tech itself doesn't make OLED obsolete. I believe that TV and the Wall were designed to take on the front projection market and not mainstream.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

An OLED TV can be made that large. The tech itself doesn't make OLED obsolete. I believe that TV and the Wall were designed to take on the front projection market and not mainstream.

Can it be made that large affordably and at the 5000 nits brightness + high contrast that had that tech reviewer blown away? No, it can't.

This tech definitely obsoletes the high end front projector market, and it is the beginning of the end for OLED.

As for the same reasons it blew him away, when there is a 5000nit TV with high contrast sitting next to a 1000nit OLED on the showroom floor, most people are gonna have a tough time going with the OLED which will look positively dull in comparison. Remember, people dumped plasma for a similar reason for LCD, and LCD was not even close in contrast to plasma unlike this tech vs OLED.

[Auditor55]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Can it be made that large affordably and at the 5000 nits brightness + high contrast that had that tech reviewer blown away? No, it can't.

This tech definitely obsoletes the high end front projector market, and it is the beginning of the end for OLED.

As for the same reasons it blew him away, when there is a 5000nit TV with high contrast sitting next to a 1000nit OLED on the showroom floor, most people are gonna have a tough time going with the OLED which will look positively dull in comparison. Remember, people dumped plasma for a similar reason for LCD, and LCD was not even close in contrast to plasma unlike this tech vs OLED.

That guy is hardly a credible reviewer. He's more of a rich kid showing off a new toy and how privileged he is. He knows some stuff and can articulate very well. But he's hardly someone we should take very seriously as a credible reviewer.

With that being said, no OLED will ever reach 5,000 nits. Neither will consumer-level TVs be 115 inches and mass-marketed. OLED will be mainstream until it is replaced by Micro-LED. A 115-inch Mini-LED is not the future. Now that TV is cool as a replacement for the front-project as you don't even need to darken the room. If they think some commercial cinemas are experimenting with huge Mini-LED based screens in select Theatres.

BTW, that TV still employs Local Dimming which is obsolete. Even the reviewer admitted that TV still has blooming and dirty screen effect. Self-emissive displays like OLED and future Micro-LED are the future of display technology.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

That guy is hardly a credible reviewer. He's more of a rich kid showing off a new toy and how privileged he is. He knows some stuff and can articulate very well. But he's hardly someone we should take very seriously as a credible reviewer.

With that being said, no OLED will ever reach 5,000 nits. Neither will consumer-level TVs be 115 inches and mass-marketed. OLED will be mainstream until it is replaced by Micro-LED. A 115-inch Mini-LED is not the future. Now that TV is cool as a replacement for the front-project as you don't even need to darken the room. If they think some commercial cinemas are experimenting with huge Mini-LED based screens in select Theatres.

BTW, that TV still employs Local Dimming which is obsolete. Even the reviewer admitted that TV still has blooming and dirty screen effect. Self-emissive displays like OLED and future Micro-LED are the future of display technology.

20,000+ zones that can actually do real HDR with 4000+nit grades is better than infinite zones that can only do a neutered 1000nit pseudo-HDR. OLED is most definitely the "720p" of HDR, people just don't realize it yet because only a select few have seen unfettered HDR.

Anyhow, the market will decide

[Ruined]

https://x.com/Vincent_Teoh/status/17...704951079?s=20

Sony's flagship is now Mini LED, replacing the prior OLED flagship.

It has begun

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by NX-74205

And yet they chose to benchmark this er, 'OLED killer' MiniLED set against a sub-700nit A80L rather than an A95L... Might want to keep your expectations in check, as the X95L was also never in the same league as the QD OLED flagship.

The professionals are using MINI LED now instead of OLED for HDR grading, so Sony's move here in having MINI LED as the flagship makes sense to have the home environment reflect the true HDR grade per the filmmakers intentions as MINI LED is bright enough to actually render it - rather than a downscaled dimmer and less accurate version for OLED

[jvonl]

Blah blah blah... very happy with my OLED, thank you very much.

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by Ruined

The professionals are using MINI LED now instead of OLED for HDR grading, so Sony's move here in having MINI LED as the flagship makes sense to have the home environment reflect the true HDR grade per the filmmakers intentions as MINI LED is bright enough to actually render it - rather than a downscaled dimmer and less accurate version for OLED

TCL and Hisense are piling up pressure in the LCD space with big sizes and ultra bright panels. So Sony are caving in. Simples. This is good as I have been waiting so long for Sony to react.

If they come with a 85 beast that ticks my boxes I would happily retire my ZD9 & demote my 77 OLED to the bedroom.

If LCDs are so bright why doesn't it win any of the shootouts even in HDR category? Oh wait, all these are skewed. We have respected folks like David M / Stacey Spears sitting in the shoot-out panel almost every year and maybe their opinions weren't heard lol.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by lgans316

If LCDs are so bright why doesn't it win any of the shootouts even in HDR category? Oh wait, all these are skewed. We have respected folks like David M / Stacey Spears sitting in the shoot-out panel almost every year and maybe their opinions weren't heard lol.

There are actually many valid reasons for this, which may not always apply - but usually some of these apply as I've attended said shootouts in the past:

1. While MINI LED LCDs have been brighter than OLED, they haven't been as dramatically brighter as this new 2024 crop, which in some cases are 4-5x brighter in highlights - and bring the mini LED towards 100% brightness accuracy with the HDR metadata compared to 10-20% brightness accuracy in the OLED's case. This obviously has not been able to be tested at all in past shootouts.

2. The TV sets aren't setup properly. Often, when these shootouts are completed they match brightness levels not to "skew" things. But, this would be like increasing the black level of OLED to match LCD's to not skew things. By hamstringing the brightness of the brighter set, the test methodology is essentially invalid.

3. The tests aren't conducted properly. Generally these tests they put the two sets side by side and the sets are evaluated side by side. But this is not how the brain works when perceiving an image on a single TV, because they eye/brain dynamically adjusts based on the entirety of the field of view - thus putting them side by side one set would skew the result of the other and would not represent how watching the set by itself would look. The most valid way to do this test is to turn one set off entirely, turn the lights on, then turn off the lights and turn on the other set, and when you want to switch back repeat this. And of course, you'd need to blind the set manufacturer/model as not to induce bias. Side by side viewing is an invalid testing methodology.

4. Some long time vets have a specific vision of what makes a set superior, and often that vision is rooted in legacy SDR image metrics. By failing to take into account that virtually all pre-2024 sets are miserably failing in rendering what the HDR grade truly calls for, they similar fail to take into account which set gets closer to the true HDR grade as a point of accuracy. Instead, they fall back onto outdated SDR metrics as the primary shootout decider, resulting in a shootout outcome that basically determines which set is best with SDR content rather than HDR.

[I DO BLU]

Originally Posted by Ruined

There are actually many valid reasons for this, which may not always apply - but usually some of these apply as I've attended said shootouts in the past:

1. While MINI LED LCDs have been brighter than OLED, they haven't been as dramatically brighter as this new 2024 crop, which in some cases are 4-5x brighter in highlights - and bring the mini LED towards 100% brightness accuracy with the HDR metadata compared to 10-20% brightness accuracy in the OLED's case. This obviously has not been able to be tested at all in past shootouts.

2. The TV sets aren't setup properly. Often, when these shootouts are completed they match brightness levels not to "skew" things. But, this would be like increasing the black level of OLED to match LCD's to not skew things. By hamstringing the brightness of the brighter set, the test methodology is essentially invalid.

3. The tests aren't conducted properly. Generally these tests they put the two sets side by side and the sets are evaluated side by side. But this is not how the brain works when perceiving an image on a single TV, because they eye/brain dynamically adjusts based on the entirety of the field of view - thus putting them side by side one set would skew the result of the other and would not represent how watching the set by itself would look. The most valid way to do this test is to turn one set off entirely, turn the lights on, then turn off the lights and turn on the other set, and when you want to switch back repeat this. And of course, you'd need to blind the set manufacturer/model as not to induce bias. Side by side viewing is an invalid testing methodology.

4. Some long time vets have a specific vision of what makes a set superior, and often that vision is rooted in legacy SDR image metrics. By failing to take into account that virtually all pre-2024 sets are miserably failing in rendering what the HDR grade truly calls for, they similar fail to take into account which set gets closer to the true HDR grade as a point of accuracy. Instead, they fall back onto outdated SDR metrics as the primary shootout decider, resulting in a shootout outcome that basically determines which set is best with SDR content rather than HDR.

Really are you serious so in the case of Vincent teohs shootout of people who actually work in the field unlike you don’t know what there talking about nor do Stacey spears or Kris deering as names mentioned above do not know more the you do just because who you think is better did not win you who knows it all should then be the one who decides who wins with all your knowledge

[I DO BLU]

YouTube

[lgans316]

So some of YouTubers are already casting doom for OLEDs lol. 2 years ago it was all QD-OLED and they were drooling over it. Cringe.

I will still consider 85X95M as I have strong faith in Sony. They have finally woken up to the threats from TCL/Hisense.

Also OLEDs are going to spread into the monitor market.

Who knows someone might bring PHOLED and suddenly these companies will switch strategies.

We can have a 5000 nit TV with bad tone mapping and bad processing making specular highlights look less impactful than a so-called 720p HDR OLED.

[Auditor55]

Originally Posted by lgans316

So some of YouTubers are already casting doom for OLEDs lol. 2 years ago it was all QD-OLED and they were drooling over it. Cringe.

I will still consider 85X95M as I have strong faith in Sony. They have finally woken up to the threats from TCL/Hisense.

Also OLEDs are going to spread into the monitor market.

Who knows someone might bring PHOLED and suddenly these companies will switch strategies.

We can have a 5000 nit TV with bad tone mapping and bad processing making specular highlights look less impactful than a so-called 720p HDR OLED.

No need for tone mapping with a 5,000 nit capable TV.

[Auditor55]

Originally Posted by Ruined

20,000+ zones that can actually do real HDR with 4000+nit grades is better than infinite zones that can only do a neutered 1000nit pseudo-HDR. OLED is most definitely the "720p" of HDR, people just don't realize it yet because only a select few have seen unfettered HDR.

Anyhow, the market will decide

You make some good points, however, I don't think there's much of a market for 100-115 inch screens for $12K to $15K and that's the problem. OLED and its iterations are now mainstream. I don't see Mini-LED supplanting OLED at mainstream sizes.

[lgans316]

Originally Posted by Auditor55

No need for tone mapping with a 5,000 nit capable TV.

On paper yes but there are LCD-LED TVs out there that dim too much to prevent blooming thus resulting in muted highlights especially against dark background.

Sony seems to be the only company that lets the Tv to bloom without compromising APL and highlights in dark scenes.

[Auditor55]

Micro-Led technology is otherworldly. Destroying OLED and LED/LCD at the CES.