Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

The place for all discussion on gaming hardware
Classicgamer
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Classicgamer »

The idea that no progress has been made in bringing lower cost high contrast displays to market is simply not true.

Manufacturers have been tweaking their tech (including LCD) to improve contrast for years. You can now buy a 55" OLED for $1500, which is affordable for all but the poorest people. A few years ago, OLEDs were $10,000.

There was a time when 30,000:1 contrast was reserved for the most expensive tech. In the last 5 years (or more) we have seen that on near entry level LCD home theater projectors from mediocre brands like Epson.

It helps to do a little research on what the specs actually mean. There is a difference between static and dynamic contrast. Measuring full on / full off contrast doesn't always tell you how a display will perform with regular content. Plus, you can't judge contrast in isolation of brightness. For example, the blacks you perceive with a 3500:1 contrast 7500 lumen projector is drastically different to a 3500:1 contrast 1000 lumen projector. The way our eyes perceive blacks is all relative to brightness.

Pc / gaming displays often have specs with a greater focus on brightness than pure black-levels because most of us game and use PCs in fully lit rooms. And, computer graphics are not generally what suffers most from poor contrast. They generally look nice on a bright display. It's dark movie scenes where it matters the most. That applies double to old film-based sources.

If the complaint is "I can't find the best displays for $400 at Walmart" then nobody can help. You get what you pay for. Always have, always will. Buy a nice used display. If you have to have OLED and can't wait, then pony up and make room for the 55".
User avatar
ASDR
Posts: 825
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:43 pm
Location: Europistan

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by ASDR »

Classicgamer wrote:The idea that no progress has been made in bringing lower cost high contrast displays to market is simply not true.
For TVs and such *plenty* of progress has been made, that's for sure. Just none of that has really found its way into PC monitors where we're stuck with the same ~1:1000 contrast with minor improvements since forever. And don't worry, I don't need any buying advice. Once upon a time I tried to find a PC monitor with TV-like black levels and contrast. I now know that this does not exist outside of a few very expensive special models and I've just given up on the idea. I just use my TV for games & movies and my monitor for productivity, problem solved :D
User avatar
Xyga
Posts: 7181
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Location: block

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Xyga »

VA monitors on average are around 3000:1, some can break beyond 4000:1 and even flirt with 5000:1, actually beating a massive number of TVs, and you'd have to be hilariously dishonest to call anything washed out on these.
Plus while VAs are slower in general the ones featured in monitors benefit from better adjustable acceleration, which TV all lack leaving the response to a safer slow level.

What do you call progress for LCD TVs - which are basically slower monitors - the expensive and imperfect FALD implementations? HDR that's only fully supported by flagship models and only makes sense for compatible contents? Well, okay, in practice they do increase contrast and blacks.

Or what, higher refresh rates? Monitors have been doing that for ages, including VAs.
Variable refresh? monitors again way before TVs where it's just appearing now.
Lag? it took TVs many years to catch up to monitors, and they still overall have more dealy than monitors.

I'd give only to plasma TVs to have combined many desirable aspects along with much better motion, way ahead of anything else,
and current TVs still suck at motion where monitors even if they still suck a bit too have again been ahead in the discipline of blur reduction (which TVs barely begin to implement at bearable lag levels)

But besides the case of plasma, until OLED entered the market slowly making its way to mainstream setting new standards for the entire world of displays, monitors have always been ahead of TVs.
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
User avatar
FinalBaton
Posts: 4461
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Québec City

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by FinalBaton »

Classicgamer wrote:If you have to have OLED and can't wait, then pony up and make room for the 55".
I can wait a bit :mrgreen: which is why I'm eyeing this upcoming 48" OLED. Q4 2019, or even after the january CES 2020 show or even spring 2020, I'm fine with.

energizerfellow‌ wrote:The 2018 LG OLEDs added black frame insertion and the 2019 models added a new graphics processor, along with HDMI 2.1 that supports both VRR and 120 hz refresh rate.
Forgot to say : It's pretty cool that my next purchase will support this, these are nice additions. I just checked a vid on the LG C9 OLEDs to better grasp this. and there's no reason why the 48" model can't also boast the same upgrades, in theory.
-FM Synth & Black Metal-
Classicgamer
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Classicgamer »

One thing I learned about displays, and I believe this to universally true, you can not make any meaningful judgement from manufacturer's specs. You have to see them in person.

There is no standard for how specs are calculated or stated or any real way to know if you are comparing like with like. It is not unusual for entry level specs to look almost identical to the most expensive models but that does not mean they have similar performance.

Anyway, it is not true to say that technical improvements have not found their way to computer or gaming monitors. You can get (almost) whatever you want if you are willing to pay for it.

The biggest factor is the market demand and there are very few people who will pay for the best performance possible on a PC monitor. Dell released an OLED gaming monitor but it sold like moldy bread because people usually only invest in their main living room display.

When you look at all the displays in person, there is no meaningful difference in perceived quality between PC monitors and TV's of the same tech, size and price point. They all use panels made by the same small number of manufacturers. Even Sony doesn't make their own TVs anymore.

Try comparing a $300 pc monitor to a $300 tv and see which is better. I'd put money on it being the PC monitor.
bigbadboaz
Posts: 1135
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:08 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by bigbadboaz »

How is the LG black-frame insertion on the OLEDs, in practice? On my LCD, it lowers the overall brightness so drastically that it's not really a practical option.
ikaruga007
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:55 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by ikaruga007 »

BFI on the 2018 OLEDs suffers from flicker and loss of brightness. Will supposedly improve in 2019 models, with 100hz/120hz and shorter black frame cycles.
Classicgamer
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Classicgamer »

Out of interest, why would you want black frame insertion while gaming?

I used it once to play 240p games at 120hz on a monitor that was 31khz only. Is there another reason?
User avatar
maxtherabbit
Posts: 1763
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2018 4:03 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by maxtherabbit »

Classicgamer wrote:Out of interest, why would you want black frame insertion while gaming?

I used it once to play 240p games at 120hz on a monitor that was 31khz only. Is there another reason?
it's used (ostensibly) to reduce motion blur
Classicgamer
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Classicgamer »

Seems like it would have the opposite effect. Frame interpolation or "frame smoothing" reduces motion blur by increasing the frame rate but the extra frames are duplicates or approximation of the frames before and after. It's not as good as actually increasing the real frame rate but the effect is noticable.


How does adding black frames reduce blur?
User avatar
orange808
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 5:43 am

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by orange808 »

Classicgamer wrote:Seems like it would have the opposite effect. Frame interpolation or "frame smoothing" reduces motion blur by increasing the frame rate but the extra frames are duplicates or approximation of the frames before and after. It's not as good as actually increasing the real frame rate but the effect is noticable.


How does adding black frames reduce blur?
Watch this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BJU2drrtCM

That's what new display tech is up against.

I won't bother trying to describe the scan out. No doubt, some cheeky fucker will find a reason to argue.

Just watch how it works.
We apologise for the inconvenience
bigbadboaz
Posts: 1135
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:08 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by bigbadboaz »

Classicgamer wrote: How does adding black frames reduce blur?
Read up on eye-tracking motion smear due to sample-and-hold technology. Basically, the black frames break up an otherwise persistent image so it no longer "drags" across your retinal field as you move your eyeball.

I can attest it works incredibly well, as far as eliminating blur. Problem is - as above - that on implementations I've seen it has a severe penalty as far as image brightness.
Classicgamer
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Classicgamer »

orange808 wrote:
Classicgamer wrote:Seems like it would have the opposite effect. Frame interpolation or "frame smoothing" reduces motion blur by increasing the frame rate but the extra frames are duplicates or approximation of the frames before and after. It's not as good as actually increasing the real frame rate but the effect is noticable.


How does adding black frames reduce blur?
Watch this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BJU2drrtCM

That's what new display tech is up against.

I won't bother trying to describe the scan out. No doubt, some cheeky fucker will find a reason to argue.

Just watch how it works.
There is nothing in there that explains why black frame insertion is a good idea to fix motion blur instead of increasing the actual frame rate or using frame interpolation. It's just a generic video on how TVs work which I already knew.
Classicgamer
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Classicgamer »

bigbadboaz wrote:
Classicgamer wrote: How does adding black frames reduce blur?
Read up on eye-tracking motion smear due to sample-and-hold technology. Basically, the black frames break up an otherwise persistent image so it no longer "drags" across your retinal field as you move your eyeball.

I can attest it works incredibly well, as far as eliminating blur. Problem is - as above - that on implementations I've seen it has a severe penalty as far as image brightness.
Which is why tv's use frame interpolation to reduce blur, not black frame insertion. Obviously making every other frame completely black would make the image look darker as less light is getting to your eyes in the same time period....

The frame rate has always had an effect on clarity and motion. Blur occurs in video during fast moving scenes but in video games, the effect is deliberately added in. Some people (myself included sometimes) think it should not be corrected as it is meant to be there. I.e. Frame interpolation removes the snappy camera effects in movies and lets you see things you shouldn't like stunt doubles and blatant cgi.

I tried watching Star Wars episode 2 with frame interpolation on once. It makes the cgi look terrible.

Anyway, for gaming, I am going to continue to assume that increasing the actual frame rate is the way to go to reduce unwanted blur and to make motion smooth as interpolation adds lag and black frame insertion doesn't make sense to me.
User avatar
Xyga
Posts: 7181
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Location: block

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Xyga »

A black frame removes from a brief moment what your brain does not need to see (the persistence)
Mid-to-high end TVs can feature a mix of interpolation and BFI.

Some day we will have fully adjustable blur reduction over 1000Hz panels, like, you can manually compose the upscan multiplier, interpolation, and bfi at will, while adjusting the timings to the source with a knob, all that without added lag...

But we will be old men, or dust by then. :mrgreen:
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
bigbadboaz
Posts: 1135
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:08 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by bigbadboaz »

Classicgamer wrote:I am going to continue to assume that increasing the actual frame rate is the way to go to reduce unwanted blur and to make motion smooth as interpolation adds lag and black frame insertion doesn't make sense to me.
The game's frame rate has nothing to do with the blur effect induced by the way modern panels display images.

Again: sample-and-hold. You either looked into it and understood it, or didn't. It is the reason both frame interpolation and black frame insertion reduce blur - different methods with different drawbacks. The longer a frame is held in place, the longer that image "smears" across your retina as visual perspective changes. If you add frames, that smearing time is reduced proportionately but those frames are not part of the source material and you get the "soap opera effect". If you insert black, the smearing time is also reduced, this time with no artificial picture data but at the cost of brightness.

We'd all love to see high frame rates on everything, but even perfect 60fps gaming will continue to suffer from blur on current display technology. As hardware evolves, we need panels to evolve alongside it.
User avatar
orange808
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 5:43 am

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by orange808 »

Classicgamer wrote:
orange808 wrote:
Classicgamer wrote:Seems like it would have the opposite effect. Frame interpolation or "frame smoothing" reduces motion blur by increasing the frame rate but the extra frames are duplicates or approximation of the frames before and after. It's not as good as actually increasing the real frame rate but the effect is noticable.


How does adding black frames reduce blur?
Watch this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BJU2drrtCM

That's what new display tech is up against.

I won't bother trying to describe the scan out. No doubt, some cheeky fucker will find a reason to argue.

Just watch how it works.
There is nothing in there that explains why black frame insertion is a good idea to fix motion blur instead of increasing the actual frame rate or using frame interpolation. It's just a generic video on how TVs work which I already knew.
I like turtles.
We apologise for the inconvenience
Classicgamer
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Classicgamer »

Saying that frame rate has not relavence to blur is simply not true.

Frame interpolation is adding more frames (I.e. Increasing the frame rate). It is necesarry for the display to manufacture those frames from the ones before and after on materials that can't natively increase the frame rate, like movies. Movies are shot with 24 frames per second so that is all they have. So the display makes more by repeating them or averaging the one before and after (depending on the algorithm). Either way, it reduces blur regardless if the display is high end or cheap.

On video games, PCs can natively increase the frame rate so interpolation is not necessary. A higher FPS will reduce blur that is not meant to be there. It won't eliminate blur effects added in to make games look more realistic. And it shouldn't.

Blur will not and should not ever be completely eliminated. There is blur in real life when things move too fast for our eyes so it is meant to be there in some cases. When you render frames in Maya, you can specifically choose to add in blur effects.

It doesn't sound like anyone here actually understands why black frame insertion is a better solution for blur. People that really understand things are usually able to explain them without getting defensive or directing people to YouTube.

I like turtles too btw.
Classicgamer
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:37 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Classicgamer »

This article explains it and it's all just as I thought:

https://www.cnet.com/news/black-frame-i ... o-lcd-tvs/

Note where it mentions that plasma TVs don't suffer the blur issue because they use 600hz panels. Which means a higher frame rate.

It also states that BFI did not catch on because of the darkening effect and the flicker it introduces. Instead, tv manufacturers favor frame interpolation as it's a superior method.
User avatar
Xer Xian
Posts: 881
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 3:23 pm
Location: Italy

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Xer Xian »

Frame interpolation adds lag and artifacts. The superior method (for sources that are stuck at a fixed frame rate) is mimicking CRTs in the way they refresh the picture, i.e. employing a rolling scan. Unfortunately this method isn't widely adopted as of yet.

Sample-and-hold blur, double-image effect for 60fps@120Hz and similar topics have been discussed several times already, people might find it aggravating to explain them in detail every time someone is too lazy to look it up for himself, or too conceited to wrap his head around new concepts.
User avatar
orange808
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 5:43 am

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by orange808 »

Want useful explanation and real insight on motion blur? Can you read? Will you take the time (and invest the effort) to learn?

If you answered "yes" to those three questions, click below. If you answered "no", please go back to neogaf or gbatemp (where you probably belong).

Linky: https://www.blurbusters.com/faq/motion-blur-reduction/

Good day.
We apologise for the inconvenience
User avatar
FinalBaton
Posts: 4461
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Québec City

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by FinalBaton »

ikaruga007 wrote:BFI on the 2018 OLEDs suffers from flicker and loss of brightness. Will supposedly improve in 2019 models, with 100hz/120hz and shorter black frame cycles.
Yep, it's a welcomed addition on the 2019 models to have 3 choices for the length of the black frames. Doesn't make things perfect, but it's a nice QOL tweak at the least. I'll take it

That along with HDMI 2.1(a bit of future proofing) is nice
-FM Synth & Black Metal-
User avatar
FinalBaton
Posts: 4461
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Québec City

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by FinalBaton »

Classicgamer wrote:plasma TVs don't suffer the blur issue because they use 600hz panels.
Plasmas' image doesn't appear fully constructed like that of a sample-and-hold LCD. They bloom in place and dim back to almost black with every pulse (the cells on a plasma are not continuously excited : they are excited in pulses, which is what "600Hz" refers to in this case : cells are excited 600 times per second. And it doesn't mess with the video cadence, it's an independant phenomenom. Your video cadence is still 60Hz)

Yes they reconstruct the image many, many times per second, but while it helps, it's not the main reason why motion is so tight on these. It's because it dims down to dark between pulses (which BFI tries to emulate, although plasma does it more "organically"), which reduces image persistence and helps your eye track moving objects better

So you can see that BFI is not a crazy idea at all, it does make sense to try and implement it. It has potential
-FM Synth & Black Metal-
User avatar
maxtherabbit
Posts: 1763
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2018 4:03 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by maxtherabbit »

FinalBaton wrote:
Classicgamer wrote:plasma TVs don't suffer the blur issue because they use 600hz panels.
Plasmas' image doesn't appear fully constructed like that of a sample-and-hold LCD. They bloom in place and dim back to almost black with every pulse (the cells on a plasma are not continuously excited : they are excited in pulses, which is what "600Hz" refers to in this case : cells are excited 600 times per second. And it doesn't mess with the video cadence, it's an independant phenomenom. Your video cadence is still 60Hz)

Yes they reconstruct the image many, many times per second, but while it helps, it's not the main reason why motion is so tight on these. It's because it dims down to dark between pulses (which BFI tries to emulate, although plasma does it more "organically"), which reduces image persistence and helps your eye track moving objects better

So you can see that BFI is not a crazy idea at all, it does make sense to try and implement it. It has potential
Correct. Plasma is still the best :lol:
fernan1234
Posts: 2167
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:34 pm

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by fernan1234 »

Yep, on plasma the picture pulsates intermittently. CRTs intermittently scans the picture across the screen. The black/emptiness in between the pulses/scans serves to "cleanse" our dumb eyes from the frame that they were seeing a tiny instant earlier. We didn't know what we had back then with CRT and plasma, until we lost it.
User avatar
bobrocks95
Posts: 3450
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:27 am
Location: Kentucky

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by bobrocks95 »

Xer Xian wrote:Frame interpolation adds lag and artifacts. The superior method (for sources that are stuck at a fixed frame rate) is mimicking CRTs in the way they refresh the picture, i.e. employing a rolling scan. Unfortunately this method isn't widely adopted as of yet.

Sample-and-hold blur, double-image effect for 60fps@120Hz and similar topics have been discussed several times already, people might find it aggravating to explain them in detail every time someone is too lazy to look it up for himself, or too conceited to wrap his head around new concepts.
I would guess a rolling scan would have less flickering and brightness loss than 60Hz BFI? Maybe not a big enough improvement on both over existing BFI for manufacturers to put the effort in?
PS1 Disc-Based Game ID BIOS patch for MemCard Pro and SD2PSX automatic VMC switching.
bigbadboaz
Posts: 1135
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 4:08 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by bigbadboaz »

Than 60Hz BFI, for sure. The "600Hz" nature of plasma referenced above is why you don't get a massive hit to brightness even though the screen dims down between every pulse. Unfortunately, rolling scan means they'd have to do R&D for an entirely new way of updating images on their panels, and I see precious little motivating them to do so.

Of course, hard to imagine any of the manufacturers doing what it takes to crank refresh rates up to approach ye olde plasmas either...
User avatar
Xyga
Posts: 7181
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Location: block

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Xyga »

bobrocks95 wrote:I would guess a rolling scan would have less flickering and brightness loss than 60Hz BFI? Maybe not a big enough improvement on both over existing BFI for manufacturers to put the effort in?
IIRC fudoh said something like it's better but still flickers enough that it will bother some.

In any case I can't see anything that implies black frames/strobing as working for everyone without much, much multiplied frequencies and brightness, and whatever it is it must be adaptive or fine-adjustable in several areas.
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
User avatar
Fudoh
Posts: 13015
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 3:29 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Fudoh »

IIRC fudoh said something like it's better but still flickers enough that it will bother some.
Remember when some people said that they find 60Hz strobing on LCDs to cause more eye strain than actual 60Hz on a CRT? While I don't see a huge difference, a rolling scan takes the display closer to what a CRT does, both in terms of objective behaviour and subjective flicker. IMO it's perfectly fine, if you're still used to see CRTs in action, but if you haven't used a CRT for years, it can be tough.
User avatar
Xyga
Posts: 7181
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Location: block

Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon

Post by Xyga »

Ah yes I remember now. Bizarrely I'm not disturbed with 60Hz CRT flicker at all, but I cannot stand 60Hz strobe on LCD...so I dunno what to think, anyway I have never witnessed rolling scan directly myself for comparison. ^^
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
Post Reply