HDR is crayons

[koberulz]

I have a 3D TV, so I have no plans on downgrading to a new set anytime soon.

[Noremac Mij]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Maybe 2000 nit consumer OLEDs in a 3-5 years.

That's completely superfluous and one thing I don't care about HDR. My C8 already does 10 times the nits a state of the art IMAX stacked projection can. But what is absolutely essential about HDR and OLED is the ability to just about 100% replicate a theatrical projected 35mm film experience right in my living room. Full tilt boogie! Without these two technologies it would never be possible.

[flyry]

I'd be terrified to go OLED since my last 3 galaxy phones have had burn in. Not sure how similar the phone vs TV screens are, but still

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

...I don't want my viewing habits dictated by the TV tech.

This aptly summarizes my fear with OLED TVs. I do not want to worry about how my viewing habits could adversely affect my TV. If 9% of OLED TV owners really do suffer permanent burn-in issues, as was previously posted in this thread, that risk is higher than I am comfortable with.

I have read that OLEDs become dimmer as they age and that they do not resolve motion as well as other technologies. I happen to keep my TVs far longer than 3-5 years and I am concerned about how well this OLED technology will fare once it ages a few years. I guess we will have to wait until the LG 6 series turns 5 years-old to get any idea as to how well this OLED tech will truly hold up.

I am also anxious to see what becomes of the emerging micro LED technology that claims to have all of the benefits of both OLED and LED technology with none, or few, of the drawbacks of either.

OLEDs sure look gorgeous and they are as tempting as the Siren's song, but I don't want my hopes, and my wallet, to be dashed against the rocks when the music's over.

[Moonlight Shadow]

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

That's completely superfluous and one thing I don't care about HDR. My C8 already does 10 times the nits a state of the art IMAX stacked projection can. But what is absolutely essential about HDR and OLED is the ability to just about 100% replicate a theatrical projected 35mm film experience right in my living room. Full tilt boogie! Without these two technologies it would never be possible.

HDR video on an OLED TV is far from a 100% replication of the theatrical experience.
First you have the lousy motion resolution of the OLED screen and you either have artifacts from picture interpolation or the picture looks weird because of the sample-and-hold mode.
Then you have OLED's true blacks that you never had in the cinema.
In addition to that you have HDR which you don't have on 35mm film either plus you have the problem that HDR discs look slightly different on each TV.
And I haven't even mentioned the colour tints issues and other uniformity issues that most OLED TVs suffer from.

10 years ago watching a Blu-ray on a Pioneer Kuro was much closer to a "theatrical experience" although they weren't perfect either.
At least you had perfect BFI that made camera pans and movements look much more "cinema-like" and screen uniformity was much better than on any OLED TV.

Really, HDR on OLED looks fancy and shiny and it's very impressive but you are all deluding yourself if you think it looks like 35mm film in a cinema.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

Technology is moving so fast and it’s getting faster exponentially. At this point, it’s not easy to even predict what we’ll have in five years, but there will definitely be a genuine need to upgrade.

Science in general is moving at such an exponential rate, that in near future it will separate from our comprehension. It will become so fantastical and purely magic that we will no longer have the intellectual capacity to understand it and follow it. At that point it will be game over for the human race and possibly for the entire Universe. This is coming sooner than most of us think.

I'm not saying TVs won't improve the next 5 years or whatever. I'm saying I don't know what they could reasonably add that would incentivize a purchase for me. If you have an excellent HDR 10 set then you're pretty much good to go for this format, and I don't do much else with my TV other than watch Youtube. I don't use any processing modes, so improvements to those are meaningless to me.

Now that they're better with HDR 10 I might get an OLED for the contrast, as I said, but beyond that I don't see much a TV could do to get me to spend thousands during this format's run.

[mrpants]

How did a title "HDR is crayons" get to 44 pages?

[oddbox83]

Originally Posted by Moonlight Shadow

HDR video on an OLED TV is far from a 100% replication of the theatrical experience.
First you have the lousy motion resolution of the OLED screen and you either have artifacts from picture interpolation or the picture looks weird because of the sample-and-hold mode.

There are modes that help with this without causing the soap opera effect, but it confuses me why they even made this an issue in the design of OLED.

Could they not have just done the same as the cinema does to mitigate motion flicker and have each frame shown at least twice by default?

[MiName]

Originally Posted by mrpants

How did a title "HDR is crayons" get to 44 pages?

Because it is a worthy discussion. Read the first post, some claim make sense.

[Colson]

Originally Posted by oddbox83

There are modes that help with this without causing the soap opera effect, but it confuses me why they even made this an issue in the design of OLED.

Could they not have just done the same as the cinema does to mitigate motion flicker and have each frame shown at least twice by default?

I mean, on a 120Hz OLED screen, each frame in a 24p movie is shown 5 "times" as it is now. I think the instant response time on OLEDs has something do with the bad motion resolution but that's just a guess. Basically there's no "blending" happening between frames.

Again, just a guess. What are these modes that help with this without introducing soap opera effect? I certainly haven't seen them.

[nick4Knight]

Originally Posted by MiName

Because it is a worthy discussion. Read the first post, some claim make sense.

It may be a "worthy discussion" but having an all-or-nothing dichotomy is not a logic driven proposition. And so advocating for SDR over HDR as being a panacea? I deem to be from a position of fear-mongering propaganda, than credibility.

I like the topic because it gives the occasional nugget of further evidence why HDR indeed was chosen by the industry leaders in video technology, and it's benefits and impact on the viewer.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by Colson

I mean, on a 120Hz OLED screen, each frame in a 24p movie is shown 5 "times" as it is now. I think the instant response time on OLEDs has something do with the bad motion resolution but that's just a guess. Basically there's no "blending" happening between frames.

Again, just a guess. What are these modes that help with this without introducing soap opera effect? I certainly haven't seen them.

That's the problem right there, there's no blending because the response time is too fast.

With the LG C8 you can set TruMotion to 0 deblur and 0 dejudder and it brings the motion blur much closer to what I got on my plasma for 24p content. However, I am not sure if this is still true 24p playback, or if now I've gone and done 3:2 pulldown on my display. It doesn't look unnatural or ruin the film like cadence in any way but until I can figure out what it does, I have TruMotion off on my OLED. You do get used to it, honestly, but my plasma was much better in this regard. My plasma showed 24p content at 96Hz and it was quite fluid. It looked much like a real film projector in that case which I believe has a rotating shutter that passes over the film twice per frame, which reduces flicker.

[oddbox83]

Originally Posted by Colson

I mean, on a 120Hz OLED screen, each frame in a 24p movie is shown 5 "times" as it is now. I think the instant response time on OLEDs has something do with the bad motion resolution but that's just a guess. Basically there's no "blending" happening between frames.

Again, just a guess. What are these modes that help with this without introducing soap opera effect? I certainly haven't seen them.

Avoid TruMotion like the plague, and Real Cinema set to on on the LGs.

Originally Posted by singhcr

My plasma showed 24p content at 96Hz and it was quite fluid. It looked much like a real film projector in that case which I believe has a rotating shutter that passes over the film twice per frame, which reduces flicker.

Yeah, they seem to have just forgotten to include something like that in the core OLED specs. Forgotten because it wasn't ever required with LCD technology due to the lower response time? I've read Sony panels have much better motion handling, so perhaps they've added something similar, or as much as they can anyway since the panels themselves are still LG made.

None of this matters of course with 50i/p and 60i/p since the refresh rate is natively at least double that of film.

[Moonlight Shadow]

Originally Posted by singhcr

That's the problem right there, there's no blending because the response time is too fast.

With the LG C8 you can set TruMotion to 0 deblur and 0 dejudder and it brings the motion blur much closer to what I got on my plasma for 24p content. However, I am not sure if this is still true 24p playback, or if now I've gone and done 3:2 pulldown on my display. It doesn't look unnatural or ruin the film like cadence in any way, but until I can figure out what it does, I have TruMotion off on my OLED. You do get used to it, honestly, but my plasma was much better in this regard.

The problem is that even with TruMotion turned off the frames are still shown in "sample and hold" mode like on LCD screens. It means each frame is shown for 1/24 second and then it switches to the next frame.
In the cinema each frame is shown at least twice with a "black frame" in between each time. Since TVs are much brighter than the projected image in the cinema you have to get the refresh rate at least to 72 Hz to reduce flicker so you have to show each frame at least three times with a black frame inbetween each showing .
On Pioneer plasmas this worked perfectly fine.

The newest OLED TVs also have a Black Frame Insertion mode but I read that besides considerably lowering the brightness it also causes a strong flicker so apparently nobody uses it.
I haven't checked this out myself yet.

[Colson]

Originally Posted by oddbox83

Avoid TruMotion like the plague, and Real Cinema set to on on the LGs.



Yeah, they seem to have just forgotten to include something like that in the core OLED specs. Forgotten because it wasn't ever required with LCD technology due to the lower response time? I've read Sony panels have much better motion handling, so perhaps they've added something similar, or as much as they can anyway since the panels themselves are still LG made.

None of this matters of course with 50i/p and 60i/p since the refresh rate is natively at least double that of film.

My old plasma definitely kicked my OLEDs butt when it comes to motion clarity. It's my singular main complaint with the OLED, honestly.

[oddbox83]

Originally Posted by Moonlight Shadow

The newest OLED TVs also have a Black Frame Insertion mode but I read that besides considerably lowering the brightness it also causes a strong flicker so apparently nobody uses it.
I haven't checked this out myself yet.

I can imagine it makes it look like 4K CRT. The theory is sound but perhaps the panel needs to run at a much higher refresh rate than the same solution in projection, as that doesn't digitally insert a black frame, it is the momentary absence of light in an analogue display method, a small but perhaps crucial difference in how it works with our eyesight. It needs to be invisible to the naked eye unless it's not going to convince. I'm plucking 400hz out of the air as the sort of refresh rate that might make black frame insertion invisible on high temporal response panels.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Vilya

This aptly summarizes my fear with OLED TVs. I do not want to worry about how my viewing habits could adversely affect my TV. If 9% of OLED TV owners really do suffer permanent burn-in issues, as was previously posted in this thread, that risk is higher than I am comfortable with.

I have read that OLEDs become dimmer as they age and that they do not resolve motion as well as other technologies. I happen to keep my TVs far longer than 3-5 years and I am concerned about how well this OLED technology will fare once it ages a few years. I guess we will have to wait until the LG 6 series turns 5 years-old to get any idea as to how well this OLED tech will truly hold up.

I am also anxious to see what becomes of the emerging micro LED technology that claims to have all of the benefits of both OLED and LED technology with none, or few, of the drawbacks of either.

OLEDs sure look gorgeous and they are as tempting as the Siren's song, but I don't want my hopes, and my wallet, to be dashed against the rocks when the musics over.

Love to know where whomever pulled that 9% burn-in figure came up with that number? Got empirical, factual data? I hope they didnt use a few forum posts to deduce that percentage. Either way, 67.8% of statistics are made up anyways . Seriously though - almost 10% permanent burn-in? Really? Im calling insane BS on that. Someone forgot to carry a 0 or something. Its probably more like .009%. But whatever.

It is fine to stay away from a tech for valid reasons - as in your use case truly is on the edge. I would exercise the same caution with OLED and if my use case was heavy gaming, lots of the same channel being played all day, stuff like that. Id buy an LCD for anything like that. No question.

But, if you vary content as in like MOST people on Earth then avoiding OLED makes no sense although we all gotta do what we gotta do. Movies, sports, TV streaming, etc is 100% perfectly fine and wont cause any burn-in. But, like I said, we gotta do as we see fit. I wouldnt call any of those edge use cases letting the TV dictate how I used it though. Its just that some techs arent right for certain/very specific situations. I dunno.

This whole burn-in thing reminds me of the plasma days. Loads of fun back then too.

Hey - if Micro-LED becomes the "thing" or even if they come up with a new way for LCDs to get blacks & viewing angles sorted to my liking I am so IN! Bring me the best TV tech and Ill buy it!

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Noremac Mij

That's completely superfluous and one thing I don't care about HDR. My C8 already does 10 times the nits a state of the art IMAX stacked projection can. But what is absolutely essential about HDR and OLED is the ability to just about 100% replicate a theatrical projected 35mm film experience right in my living room. Full tilt boogie! Without these two technologies it would never be possible.

If you don't care about HDR, then you don't care about UHD BD since that is an essential aspect to 99.9% of the releases. With HDR, remember the perceptual quantizer (as a transfer function) is entirely based around absolute brightness levels. More nits will be better and not to give you an eye blowingly bright image necessarily, but simply to maintain sufficient APL while allowing the least amount of compressed highlights. More nits means fewer compromises with any form of tone mapping.

[Patsfan123]

Originally Posted by singhcr

That's the problem right there, there's no blending because the response time is too fast.

With the LG C8 you can set TruMotion to 0 deblur and 0 dejudder and it brings the motion blur much closer to what I got on my plasma for 24p content. However, I am not sure if this is still true 24p playback, or if now I've gone and done 3:2 pulldown on my display. It doesn't look unnatural or ruin the film like cadence in any way but until I can figure out what it does, I have TruMotion off on my OLED. You do get used to it, honestly, but my plasma was much better in this regard. My plasma showed 24p content at 96Hz and it was quite fluid. It looked much like a real film projector in that case which I believe has a rotating shutter that passes over the film twice per frame, which reduces flicker.

For 24p, it's always 120hz:
TruMotion to 0 deblur and 0 dejudder (Real Cinema is overriden) = 3:2 pulldown
TruMotion:off/Real Cinema:On= 5:5
TruMotion:off/Real Cinema:Off= 3:2 pulldown
TruMotion:On (Real Cinema is overriden) = interpolation

[Noremac Mij]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

If you don't care about HDR, then you don't care about UHD BD since that is an essential aspect to 99.9% of the releases. With HDR, remember the perceptual quantizer (as a transfer function) is entirely based around absolute brightness levels. More nits will be better and not to give you an eye blowingly bright image necessarily, but simply to maintain sufficient APL while allowing the least amount of compressed highlights. More nits means fewer compromises with any form of tone mapping.

HDR is not just about those nits.