shmups.system11.org

Shmups Forum
 
* FAQ    * Search
 * Register  * Login 
It is currently Fri Aug 23, 2019 2:55 am View unanswered posts
View active topics



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:38 am 


User avatar

Joined: 08 Mar 2015
Posts: 3571
Location: Québec City
Well that's a good start

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7w3iQKq8jE


Date is pure speculation at this point, but hopefully we get one by 2020 (and in North America too, hopefully. Although it might just come out in Europe in the end)

I'd jump on a 48" OLED.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:56 am 



Joined: 26 Jan 2005
Posts: 7083
Location: Bedford, UK
Great for retro gaming. Sometimes these huge panels are just too big for the retro experience.
_________________
This industry has become 2 dimensional as it transcended into a 3D world.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:26 am 


User avatar

Joined: 07 Feb 2015
Posts: 506
Location: zip code 20151 USA
32" 27" and 24" OLED is what we need for retrogaming and at a decent price. That Dell 32" OLED that got discontinued was over $3k, crazy.
_________________
The Future Is Now


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:52 am 



Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 1370
Now if only these panels even quietly supported 3D, so I could play compatible PS3 and Xbox 360 games.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:28 am 


User avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2013
Posts: 6720
Location: block
Good news but...too slow!

Feels like by the time several smaller OLED panels become widely available, MicroLED - which should allow for any size you can think of - will have achieved mainstream status.
_________________
mycophobia wrote:
have tyou ever played dodponpatchi


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:38 am 


User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2017
Posts: 453
Location: Europistan
Always funny that the first commercially available OLED TV was 11"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_XEL-1

Maybe we'll get back down to that size one day :D


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:00 pm 



Joined: 11 Sep 2014
Posts: 648
They already make smaller OLED monitors. As with OLED TVs, price is still an issue for people on a budget. E.g.:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... A514&smp=Y

Now that 4K has become mainstream though, we might start to see some deals on used OLED monitors.

Personally, I wouldn't invest in OLED for vintage gaming though. IMO, anything 240p-480p is better on a decent CRT. For anything HD like the PS3, there are plenty of great options for monitors with deep dark blacks and great contrast without the OLED price tag.

For something in the 42" range, maybe look for a deal on a Pioneer Kuro plasma. They were the screen of choice for serious home theater enthusiasts for a long time. They are not OLED great but still very nice.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:51 pm 



Joined: 01 Aug 2009
Posts: 198
Location: The Netherlands
"deep blacks" sounds all great on paper or if you see the panel without any reference. See it next to an oled and the "deep blacks" of the other panels suddenly aren't so deep anymore!

There are plenty of smaller oled panels for phones and tablets, and bigger ones for tv's. What's the reason everything inbetween is nonexistant anyway?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 9:05 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2017
Posts: 453
Location: Europistan
Classicgamer wrote:
there are plenty of great options for monitors with deep dark blacks and great contrast


Really? I wouldn't want to play games or watch movies on a computer monitor because they generally have absurdly bad contrast and black levels. Normal TN/IPS displays only manage ~1:1000, if you can get a VA panel and can live with the viewing angles maybe 3-5000:1. All of which is utterly terrible compared to what a quality TV with FALD from 10 years (!!!) ago could do, not even comparing to a modern day OLED.

There are now a very select few PC monitors with FALD or BVM's with OLED panels and maybe a few other exotic technologies that don't have that typical washed out milky blacks PC monitor look, but the idea that any PC monitor that's not well into the 4-figures could display 'deep dark blacks and great contrast' is simply absurd.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:04 pm 



Joined: 16 Nov 2013
Posts: 320
Location: Tokyo, Japan
https://www.j-oled.com/eng/


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:54 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 08 Mar 2015
Posts: 3571
Location: Québec City
Classicgamer wrote:
They already make smaller OLED monitors. As with OLED TVs, price is still an issue for people on a budget. E.g.:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... A514&smp=Y

Now that 4K has become mainstream though, we might start to see some deals on used OLED monitors.

Personally, I wouldn't invest in OLED for vintage gaming though. IMO, anything 240p-480p is better on a decent CRT. For anything HD like the PS3, there are plenty of great options for monitors with deep dark blacks and great contrast without the OLED price tag.

For something in the 42" range, maybe look for a deal on a Pioneer Kuro plasma. They were the screen of choice for serious home theater enthusiasts for a long time. They are not OLED great but still very nice.

You're preaching to the choir here. I do all my retro gaming on CRTs. And my day to day HDTV is a plasma.

But my plasma needs to be replaced (it's got some slight burn in, and it's a 720p panel anyway, I'm long due for an upgrade. Lol), and while I could hunt down a used plasma, I want to make the switch for a brand new set (I don't really trust buying a 10 year old HDTV). And I personally can't wait to try OLED for movie. I bet it'll be quite nice for modern games too (although other factors than panel type are to consider, I know).


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 4:34 am 



Joined: 27 Sep 2018
Posts: 139
FinalBaton wrote:
But my plasma needs to be replaced (it's got some slight burn in, and it's a 720p panel anyway, I'm long due for an upgrade. Lol), and while I could hunt down a used plasma, I want to make the switch for a brand new set (I don't really trust buying a 10 year old HDTV). And I personally can't wait to try OLED for movie. I bet it'll be quite nice for modern games too (although other factors than panel type are to consider, I know).

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.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 4:44 am 



Joined: 04 Apr 2014
Posts: 638
I'd say for retro gaming you need a 24+ cause you lose a bunch of inches due to the black bars on the side from the different aspect ratio.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:15 pm 



Joined: 11 Sep 2014
Posts: 648
ASDR wrote:
Classicgamer wrote:
there are plenty of great options for monitors with deep dark blacks and great contrast


Really? I wouldn't want to play games or watch movies on a computer monitor because they generally have absurdly bad contrast and black levels. Normal TN/IPS displays only manage ~1:1000, if you can get a VA panel and can live with the viewing angles maybe 3-5000:1. All of which is utterly terrible compared to what a quality TV with FALD from 10 years (!!!) ago could do, not even comparing to a modern day OLED.

There are now a very select few PC monitors with FALD or BVM's with OLED panels and maybe a few other exotic technologies that don't have that typical washed out milky blacks PC monitor look, but the idea that any PC monitor that's not well into the 4-figures could display 'deep dark blacks and great contrast' is simply absurd.


I am not arguing that OLED is the absolute best modern display tech. It's just that it doesn't sound like you guys want to pay $3,000 + for a gaming monitor. If money is no object then it's the way to go for HD content.

But, if you are on a budget, you have to go with different tech. There are plenty of displays with very nice contrast. You get 50,000:1 on the best LCD, Plasma, CRT and lcos displays. A Pioneer Kuro might not be up there with OLED but it will produce darker blacks than what most here are used to. They are certainly significantly better than any consumer PC monitor or your average $500 - $5,000 Best Buy tv.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 10:44 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2017
Posts: 453
Location: Europistan
Classicgamer wrote:
But, if you are on a budget, you have to go with different tech. There are plenty of displays with very nice contrast. You get 50,000:1 on the best LCD, Plasma, CRT and lcos displays. A Pioneer Kuro might not be up there with OLED but it will produce darker blacks than what most here are used to. They are certainly significantly better than any consumer PC monitor or your average $500 - $5,000 Best Buy tv.


Looks like we're talking past each other a bit here. My point was that for a long time now plain IPS/TN displays have a contrast of ~1:1000 and VA displays push up to ~1:5000. In the TV realm you have all kinds of tech like plasmas, OLEDs and various LCD backlight enhancements like FALD or that really fancy double VA display they were showing at CES that enhance contrast way beyond that. But while that kind of tech is standard and downright expected on anything but low-end budget TVs, it has not really found its way into PC monitors in a mainstream kind of way. Yes, there are some professional HDR displays, there are OLED BVMs and ASUS makes like one model of a very expensive FALD gaming monitor, but basically any display <1000 bucks will have the same washed out look with IPS glow and milky blacks like PC monitors always had. And that's really frustrating since even ten years ago you could get FALD TVs that have huge contrast. A while ago I was thinking of getting a PC monitor that I could also use for occasional movie watching and gaming, but there was simply nothing out there. All normal LCDs are washed out crap like they always were and the few exotic PC displays that actually look good are so expensive I could just buy a 55" OLED for the money. It's just weird, what's going on there.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:48 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 08 Mar 2015
Posts: 3571
Location: Québec City
energizerfellow‌ wrote:
FinalBaton wrote:
But my plasma needs to be replaced (it's got some slight burn in, and it's a 720p panel anyway, I'm long due for an upgrade. Lol), and while I could hunt down a used plasma, I want to make the switch for a brand new set (I don't really trust buying a 10 year old HDTV). And I personally can't wait to try OLED for movie. I bet it'll be quite nice for modern games too (although other factors than panel type are to consider, I know).

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.

I really can't accomodate a 55" panel though. I really can't. My living room is super narrow and I'm sitting fairly close to the TV, acroos the short side of the room. 48" inch would be at like the max that's doable, but I could definitely live with it. But for sure at 52" and bigger I'd be moving my head left and right to see the edges of the screen, and you don't want to be doing that


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:20 am 


User avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2013
Posts: 6720
Location: block
ASDR wrote:
Yes, there are some professional HDR displays, there are OLED BVMs and ASUS makes like one model of a very expensive FALD gaming monitor, but basically any display <1000 bucks will have the same washed out look with IPS glow and milky blacks like PC monitors always had. And that's really frustrating since even ten years ago you could get FALD TVs that have huge contrast. A while ago I was thinking of getting a PC monitor that I could also use for occasional movie watching and gaming, but there was simply nothing out there. All normal LCDs are washed out crap like they always were and the few exotic PC displays that actually look good are so expensive I could just buy a 55" OLED for the money.

Can't agree with that, you over-generalize, I've been into flat panel displays for like over 12 years to the point that it's been a side-hobby in itself, and today I can certainly tell that quality varies A LOT.
Although they're mostly rare birds you'll find VAs with excellent viewing angles, IPSes with very little glow and contrast better than you'd expect.
There's considerable variations between series of produced panels and design on the manufacturing/engineering side, which makes monitors with similar specs on paper perform twice if not thrice better or worse.
Things you can still generalize these days because they're found in a majority of what's available on the market, are issues like frequent bleeding backlight for IPS, not-enough natural colors for VA, bad uncalibrated colors settings, bad scaling, too-grainy coatings, bad input refresh handling, not-well-balanced overdrive, and of course sub-par motion resolution, and I could mention many more.
With lots of attention and patience you'll find models that combine a lot of pluses and few of the minuses, and it's NOT even necessarily a matter of price, it's not that uncommon to find cheap monitors performing better or equally to $1000 ones in some areas.
Purchasing good LCD displays is actually quite complicated, there's like tens of parameters and details to take into account, and even the most competent reviews around don't cover half or not extensively-enough.
Anyway as I say the better ones are rare birds, every year there's only like a tiny handful of released monitors that really stand out and are worth your money (monitors and tvs combined actually), but in my experience the crushing majority of customers just follow the crappy reviews, retail websites customer ratings, flashy trendy features that manufacturers come up with essentially to maintain sales, and misleading/misunderstood specs statements.

That said I agree that it's so much simpler these days to just buy an OLED. They don't fix everything but at least eliminate a considerable portion of the 'things to worry about when buying an LCD'
_________________
mycophobia wrote:
have tyou ever played dodponpatchi


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2019 4:29 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2017
Posts: 453
Location: Europistan
Xyga wrote:
Can't agree with that, you over-generalize, I've been into flat panel displays for like over 12 years to the point that it's been a side-hobby in itself, and today I can certainly tell that quality varies A LOT.
Although they're mostly rare birds you'll find VAs with excellent viewing angles, IPSes with very little glow and contrast better than you'd expect.
There's considerable variations between series of produced panels and design on the manufacturing/engineering side, which makes monitors with similar specs on paper perform twice if not thrice better or worse.
Things you can still generalize these days because they're found in a majority of what's available on the market, are issues like frequent bleeding backlight for IPS, not-enough natural colors for VA, bad uncalibrated colors settings, bad scaling, too-grainy coatings, bad input refresh handling, not-well-balanced overdrive, and of course sub-par motion resolution, and I could mention many more.
With lots of attention and patience you'll find models that combine a lot of pluses and few of the minuses, and it's NOT even necessarily a matter of price, it's not that uncommon to find cheap monitors performing better or equally to $1000 ones in some areas.
Purchasing good LCD displays is actually quite complicated, there's like tens of parameters and details to take into account, and even the most competent reviews around don't cover half or not extensively-enough.
Anyway as I say the better ones are rare birds, every year there's only like a tiny handful of released monitors that really stand out and are worth your money (monitors and tvs combined actually), but in my experience the crushing majority of customers just follow the crappy reviews, retail websites customer ratings, flashy trendy features that manufacturers come up with essentially to maintain sales, and misleading/misunderstood specs statements.

That said I agree that it's so much simpler these days to just buy an OLED. They don't fix everything but at least eliminate a considerable portion of the 'things to worry about when buying an LCD'


I think my generalization on the issue of contrast/black level is appropriate and I doubt that even the manufacturers of these panels would disagree with me. What you're talking about are issues on top of the inherent poor contrast. Sure, clouding, viewing angles, glare, IPS glow, colors, coating etc. all vary based on how the panels were packaged and a million other things. But, and that's really my only claim, the only way you're going to get deep blacks and good contrast out of an LCD is by adding some kind of advanced backlight technology. Like FALD. And that's pretty standard in the realm of TVs but non-existent for 24-32" few-hundred-bucks computer displays. And if you're used to the kind of image quality you get from a TV, these displays are going to look very washed out if they're not displaying bright pictures of fruit and beaches like the manufacturers always use to show them of.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2019 6:27 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2013
Posts: 6720
Location: block
ASDR wrote:
I think my generalization on the issue of contrast/black level is appropriate and I doubt that even the manufacturers of these panels would disagree with me. What you're talking about are issues on top of the inherent poor contrast. Sure, clouding, viewing angles, glare, IPS glow, colors, coating etc. all vary based on how the panels were packaged and a million other things. But, and that's really my only claim, the only way you're going to get deep blacks and good contrast out of an LCD is by adding some kind of advanced backlight technology. Like FALD. And that's pretty standard in the realm of TVs but non-existent for 24-32" few-hundred-bucks computer displays. And if you're used to the kind of image quality you get from a TV, these displays are going to look very washed out if they're not displaying bright pictures of fruit and beaches like the manufacturers always use to show them of.

For me you're expressing a very radical view based on "only the higher standards are acceptable" and not placing the items in their context. Sure, of course LCDs even the best can't reach the contrast ratios and blacks of the better panel techs or LCDs boosted with expensive technologies, but that doesn't make everything else horrible for watching movies or playing games.
There really are models combining outstanding qualities for their respective type, VA or IPS, and the details I mention are not trivial, a good panel can be ruined by a terrible coating, poor colors managment, unbalanced overdrive, etc etc. so I don't agree with your statement about their inherent lackings, it's more complicated than that, I've said it: a successful LCD is a combination of factors.
The base panels performances vary sometimes significantly, manufacturers renew and create new series with different specs almost every year, some IPS produce about twice the contrast and blacks compared to others, some VAs have outstanding viewing angles etc but I've already said that.
Get one of these, packaged inside a monitor that doesn't suffer from the many side issues that can ruin an otherwise good panel, and it would really be an exaggeration to say you can't enjoy movies or games with it (edit: again placing things in the right context, of course you won't get crt/plasma/oled performance)
I've owned and tried enough LCDs to tell a good one VS a bad one delivers two to three times the viewing comfort and enjoyment, and it's definitely not always the expensive ones that do it, but maybe you haven't experienced some of these rare birds yourself, or again it's because your standards are set to 'very high period'.

Regarding FALD, I was never impressed, it's only good on very expensive flagship TVs which aren't necessarily good for games in other key areas. Also cheap FALD sucks, creating halos/clouds around high-contrast objects. And it's not that standard, look at the bulk of what's available from any name brand and you won't see that many. I know some manufacturers still use it, like LG for its bigger LCDs but mainly to compensate for what are poor panels to begin (LG really cheap out on their LCD panels today, guess all the cash goes to their insane OLED factories).
I prefer a LCD well built around the basis of a solid panel, rather than artifices (or then artifices on top of a good basis, why not)
Anyway IMO FALD was never a solution, more a sophisticated bandaid which never broke through because of its price and complexity, I kinda think the same of HDR which isn't exactly suited for LCD.

Okay now before you reply let me say it's not really worthwhile to argue ad nauseam over this, different people have different expectations, my idea of a what makes a good display is different from yours, we've seen many people show radically opposing tastes even in regards to CRTs (I've read enough ppl here talking about Sony broadcasts like it's a religion and everything else is crap) and that's that...
Some time ago I've realized that it's mostly pointless to talk displays tech and recommend models to people, because they haven't all had the same experience of displays, and also don't necessarily know what they are looking for, or don't express it in a way that others will get, it's all too random.
_________________
mycophobia wrote:
have tyou ever played dodponpatchi


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2019 7:30 pm 



Joined: 27 Sep 2018
Posts: 139
Xyga wrote:
Purchasing good LCD displays is actually quite complicated, there's like tens of parameters and details to take into account, and even the most competent reviews around don't cover half or not extensively-enough.

Anybody out there compare to TFT Central when it comes to PC display reviews? On the TV side it's definitely Rtings.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2019 7:55 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2013
Posts: 6720
Location: block
Sure, TFTcentral is still one of the best, most serious monitor reviews websites on the webs, though they do mostly expensive stuff.
pcmonitors.info is also very good and they review more affordable monitors. There are several other good references in various languages.

I really miss NCX who was the best independent monitors reviewer (obsessed with black bezels but still)

Rtings not too much for me, they're really useful for the frequency of their TV reviews, but parts of their tests and opinions can sometimes be slightly biased and misleading as a consequence. They got better over time though, I'm glad they're here but I wouldn't rank them as reference yet.
_________________
mycophobia wrote:
have tyou ever played dodponpatchi


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:19 pm 



Joined: 11 Sep 2014
Posts: 648
Xyga wrote:
ASDR wrote:
I think my generalization on the issue of contrast/black level is appropriate and I doubt that even the manufacturers of these panels would disagree with me. What you're talking about are issues on top of the inherent poor contrast. Sure, clouding, viewing angles, glare, IPS glow, colors, coating etc. all vary based on how the panels were packaged and a million other things. But, and that's really my only claim, the only way you're going to get deep blacks and good contrast out of an LCD is by adding some kind of advanced backlight technology. Like FALD. And that's pretty standard in the realm of TVs but non-existent for 24-32" few-hundred-bucks computer displays. And if you're used to the kind of image quality you get from a TV, these displays are going to look very washed out if they're not displaying bright pictures of fruit and beaches like the manufacturers always use to show them of.

For me you're expressing a very radical view based on "only the higher standards are acceptable" and not placing the items in their context. Sure, of course LCDs even the best can't reach the contrast ratios and blacks of the better panel techs or LCDs boosted with expensive technologies, but that doesn't make everything else horrible for watching movies or playing games.
There really are models combining outstanding qualities for their respective type, VA or IPS, and the details I mention are not trivial, a good panel can be ruined by a terrible coating, poor colors managment, unbalanced overdrive, etc etc. so I don't agree with your statement about their inherent lackings, it's more complicated than that, I've said it: a successful LCD is a combination of factors.
The base panels performances vary sometimes significantly, manufacturers renew and create new series with different specs almost every year, some IPS produce about twice the contrast and blacks compared to others, some VAs have outstanding viewing angles etc but I've already said that.
Get one of these, packaged inside a monitor that doesn't suffer from the many side issues that can ruin an otherwise good panel, and it would really be an exaggeration to say you can't enjoy movies or games with it (edit: again placing things in the right context, of course you won't get crt/plasma/oled performance)
I've owned and tried enough LCDs to tell a good one VS a bad one delivers two to three times the viewing comfort and enjoyment, and it's definitely not always the expensive ones that do it, but maybe you haven't experienced some of these rare birds yourself, or again it's because your standards are set to 'very high period'.

Regarding FALD, I was never impressed, it's only good on very expensive flagship TVs which aren't necessarily good for games in other key areas. Also cheap FALD sucks, creating halos/clouds around high-contrast objects. And it's not that standard, look at the bulk of what's available from any name brand and you won't see that many. I know some manufacturers still use it, like LG for its bigger LCDs but mainly to compensate for what are poor panels to begin (LG really cheap out on their LCD panels today, guess all the cash goes to their insane OLED factories).
I prefer a LCD well built around the basis of a solid panel, rather than artifices (or then artifices on top of a good basis, why not)
Anyway IMO FALD was never a solution, more a sophisticated bandaid which never broke through because of its price and complexity, I kinda think the same of HDR which isn't exactly suited for LCD.

Okay now before you reply let me say it's not really worthwhile to argue ad nauseam over this, different people have different expectations, my idea of a what makes a good display is different from yours, we've seen many people show radically opposing tastes even in regards to CRTs (I've read enough ppl here talking about Sony broadcasts like it's a religion and everything else is crap) and that's that...
Some time ago I've realized that it's mostly pointless to talk displays tech and recommend models to people, because they haven't all had the same experience of displays, and also don't necessarily know what they are looking for, or don't express it in a way that others will get, it's all too random.



I agree with that. Particularly the point about there being a broad range of factors that make displays perform better or worse. You also have to consider the purpose.

For PC gaming you'd consider brightness, refresh rate, input lag, motion blur, potential for burn in etc. OLED is not necessarily best in all categories.

I can think of some truly great displays that would satisfy and delight the most picky of enthusiasts in every display tech category from CRT to OLED (and beyond).

There is a really good reason why some enthusiasts who are serious about this stuff still use CRT projectors like the Sony G90. I am still amazed when I see what they can do. They can sync to any horizontal frequency from 15khz up to 150khz and switch resolution so there is no scaling issues or lag. They can support refresh rates up to 150hz. They are capable of 50,000:1 contrast ratios, 3d, screen sizes upto 300". Their light source is a crt so they last the same 15,000-20,000 hours as a crt tv (so no bulb cost). Every type of content from analog film sources up to modern HD digital content looks good on one. You can't say that with any other display tech including OLED.

The new tech I am waiting for an excited about, even more than OLED, is Samsungs new LED displays. All the benefits of OLED but with the same brightness as LED backlit LCDs. And, best of all, modular screens so you can change the resolution and screen size. You can upgrade over time.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2019 9:48 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2013
Posts: 6720
Location: block
Classicgamer wrote:
I agree with that. Particularly the point about there being a broad range of factors that make displays perform better or worse. You also have to consider the purpose.

For PC gaming you'd consider brightness, refresh rate, input lag, motion blur, potential for burn in etc. OLED is not necessarily best in all categories.

And for home cinema contrast, balanced blacks, natural colors as well as a number of formats handling factors would probably the things to focus on more.

I know there are various parties when it comes to displays, some focus on motion over everything else, some on contrast and blacks, not so long ago lag was a major concern, I've met people obsessed with calibration, etc.
But neither of these aspects taken individually is so much more important above all others that one can base his judgement of displays in general almost exclusively on it, unless as you mention if it's a choice made for a specific dedicated purpose, conscious of the sacrifices.
I'm in the party that seeks the best possible balance, or if you prefer good all-rounder displays without significant flaws, and if possible that even stand out above average (keeping my expectations in line with what I know the tech type/level can achieve, and value for the money)
_________________
mycophobia wrote:
have tyou ever played dodponpatchi


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:21 am 


User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2017
Posts: 453
Location: Europistan
If you can give me one example of a normal (not 3500 bucks ASUS Predator FALD display or Sony OLED BVM) PC display that actually has deep blacks and contrast by the standards of a any decent TV (FALD/Plasma/other appropriate tech), so nothing extreme / impossibly high end readily available since absolutely forever in the TV space, I'd happily admit I'm wrong and probably buy that thing. Otherwise, we're having this conversation:

You: But look at how much it covers the P3 color space!
Me: 1000:1 contrast...

You: The anti-glare coating is so effective and so grain free!
Me: 1000:1 contrast...

You: The uniformity and color calibration is of the charts!
Me: 1000:1 contrast...

I admit that contrast/black level is super important to me, but that is why it's so frustrating that there are basically no displays catering to that and what seems like zero progress forever. I can only hope that one day we get a reasonably priced OLED, FALD, MicroLED, double-VA type display. I'd like to buy that.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 12:11 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2013
Posts: 6720
Location: block
ASDR wrote:
that actually has deep blacks and contrast by the standards of a any decent TV (FALD/Plasma/other appropriate tech), so nothing extreme / impossibly high

Quote:
I admit that contrast/black level is super important to me

The problem is that you say this, with that position nothing below is acceptable for you then, what can anyone say ? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I have no problem at all watching movies or playing games featuring dark contents on a good VA that produces about 3000:1 as long as it doesn't suffer from narrow angles/white glow (and there ARE some, for instance I have a Samsung S32F351 like that, it beats my Sony W6 VA TV easily in that aspect, and though I forgot the model name there was a similar one reaching 4000:1 while retaining the good angles) rather I'm more annoyed by the VA's inferior response and slightly unnatural colors vs. a good IPS, and the worst is when they crush blacks)

Even on the better IPSes contrast and blacks can be very well acceptable assuming there's nothing to ruin them, I've owned an HP 27xw (cheating since it's using a smoked coating!) and now a ViewSonic VX3211-mh, both produce way superior contrast and blacks vs the average of what we've been disappointed with for so many years. I've owned random LGs and experienced BenQ AHVA as well as Samsung PLS over a decade, and what you can find today is IPSes that perform much better than these.
Quote:
1000:1 contrast...

No, this is what was quoted for these older generations of IPSes whch in tests didn't even reach actual 1000:1, it was more in the area of 700:1 to 900:1 in the best cases.
What you can get with a selct few more recent IPSes today goes beyond 1200:1 (some quote 1500:1 but I have yet to seen one reviewed that reaches it in practice), that, along with proper coating and the least possible glow (I will continue to insist on the importance of these aspect precisely bc when they're bad they hurt both the viewing angles and contrast/blacks).
Even though I haven't measured it myself I my current ViewSonic produces this level and it's got neither awful antiglare nor massive glow, I believe the WQHD model performs similarly (maybe same panel series the AOC Q3279VWFD8)
Even if that doesn't sound much on paper it's about a threshold, for the user experience it makes a significant difference, the dark contents simply aren't milky anymore. It's probably the lower end of what can be considered decent, but at least you can have it.

Anyway as Classicgamer and I said you pick what corresponds to your needs and budget, conscious of the respective types of panels and how they can perform under what conditions.
I'll be redundant again but it doesn't make sense to judge the worth of a display over a single area of performance. What's the point of giving either contrast or response or calibrated colors whatever so much weight over everything else ?
What if you have superior contrast and blacks but the lag is awful, or the coating murderous, the response slow af w/ unbalanced overdrive? or whatever of the many things that can go wrong? can you call that great contrast/blacks displays really good then ?
For me it's a clear no, most major factors are important, more or less depending on the type-for-purpose panel tech you choose, but not with considerable weighting differences. For me you definitely minimize the importance of other aspects too much, whih blurs your judgement.

EDIT: to insert an analogy, headphones. what are the best headphones objectively? the ones that excell at bass? or highs? or both but the mids are recessed? etc etc, nope, we all know the ideal headphones should be competent at everything. Naturally that doesn't make it the best performer in areas taken individually, you don't pick the same headphones if you listen essentially to techno, acoustic, opera etc.

Now - again - it's fine, not everyone has the same expectations/needs for displays, I could tell a hundred stories on the topic, and you're definitely not the first 'contrat addict' I've met over all these years. But it's among the preference judgements, related to one's personal experience and needs, for me it's not rational like taking every aspect in consideration is, which is what reviewers do after all, all of them AFAIK.
('xept AV websites still tend to focus on what matters for movies of course, and some gaming focused on what matters to them, but that' logical in the context of dedicated purpose)

Sorry I can't think differently, I always have to consider all aspects whith as much info/data/experience I can get, and try to reach a fair objective conclusion, I can't go and state 'everything but high-contrast displays sucks' or 'everything sample-and-hold is crap' or 'nothing but plasma' or 'nothing but CRT' etc. because I also can't help but place everything in its context too.

Quote:
that is why it's so frustrating that there are basically no displays catering to that and what seems like zero progress forever. I can only hope that one day we get a reasonably priced OLED, FALD, MicroLED, double-VA type display. I'd like to buy that.

There is progress, baby steps, but again your fixation over that aspect is what makes you so frustrated, don't mistake my position because I hope you understand that in my own fashion I am a very demanding customer too, maybe more than you considering my quite populated standards, and that makes me share your impatience over the slowness of technical progress and prices/availability.
(its the reason why I like to seek affordable displays rather than expensive high-end material, because I know the limits of the various panel techs I get more satisfation from a $200~300 monitor that performs as well if not better than another twice that price)


BACK TO THE 48" OLED TOPIC (sorry we couldn't stop hijacking the thread :oops: )
I've read on AVcesar it's planned for Q4 2019 and should price around AUD 1,500 which would be slightly under EUR 1,000
_________________
mycophobia wrote:
have tyou ever played dodponpatchi


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:39 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 08 Mar 2015
Posts: 3571
Location: Québec City
Xyga wrote:
I've read on AVcesar it's planned for Q4 2019 and should price around AUD 1,500 which would be slightly under EUR 1,000

Oh, interesting! Q4 2019 is earlier than I expected, I like the sound of that


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:21 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 05 Mar 2018
Posts: 805
I have to agree with ASDR here - I hate LCDs period

when they first came out, I recognized them as obviously inferior to CRTs and stuck with a CRT until I got a plasma

I will stick with plasma until OLED, or some other self-emissive display technology becomes viable


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 3:55 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2017
Posts: 453
Location: Europistan
900:1, 1350:1, all more or less the same. All those LCDs look more or less the same. I've looked at dozens in stores and ordered like half a dozen to evaluate at home like 2 years ago, none of them were even 'acceptable' by very modest TV standards of black level and contrast. There's been near zero progress and I don't think there will be any. If it was possible to make an LCD with less light leakage, we would've had one by now. Seemingly the only way to give good contrast to an LCD is to add some sort of backlight regulating tech to it. This is readily available in the TV world, but a completely exotic concept for PC monitors. I'm not asking for the impossible and I don't have insanely high standards, what I consider 'good enough' is available on TVs for a very long time.

I'm also not obsessed with contrast, you're just indifferent to it :D Specs are not a qualifying characteristic but a disqualifying one. It makes all the sense in the world to judge a display on one aspect alone if it's a bad one. If a display has 100ms input lag it is simply unsuitable for gaming *no matter what the other specs are*. You can have the greatest screen in the world, at 9" it won't cut it for movie watching. A display with a 1000:1 contrast is simply washed out looking no matter what and grossly behind the times in 2019. It can have the greatest coating, viewing angle and response time, it'll always look washed out. And all PC displays (except for OLED BVMs and that ASUS Predator thing and other exotic tecg...) have pretty much that contrast. Great for Excel, bad for Dark Souls.

I like FALD LCDs, OLEDs are great, Plasmas were awesome, MicroLEDs look incredibly promising, that stacked VA display tech we've seen at CES is potentially great as well. But plain LCD with static backlight? I'll eat my hat (and pull out my wallet) if you can show me even one of those that doesn't look washed out by the standards of any decent TV from the last decade. In the meantime I won't watch movies on PC LCDs like I don't master records on Apple Earbuds.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 5:14 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 05 Nov 2013
Posts: 6720
Location: block
ASDR wrote:
900:1, 1350:1, all more or less the same. All those LCDs look more or less the same.

No they they don't, you're just insensitive to variations if they're not massive and don't understand the benefit combined good points produce together.
Between an IPS that struggles to reach 900:1, has a shitty coating, lots of glow, and one that can produce 1350:1 with a clean coating and barely any glow/good angles, it's enough to make the difference between crap and acceptable.
I've already said that but you're either stubborn or dense as hell, or you're trolling to make me repeat. Kinda the same thing.

ASDR wrote:
I've looked at dozens in stores and ordered like half a dozen to evaluate at home like 2 years ago, none of them were even 'acceptable' by very modest TV standards of black level and contrast. There's been near zero progress and I don't think there will be any. If it was possible to make an LCD with less light leakage, we would've had one by now. Seemingly the only way to give good contrast to an LCD is to add some sort of backlight regulating tech to it. This is readily available in the TV world, but a completely exotic concept for PC monitors. I'm not asking for the impossible and I don't have insanely high standards, what I consider 'good enough' is available on TVs for a very long time.

ASDR wrote:
I'm also not obsessed with contrast, you're just indifferent to it :D

No I'm not indifferent to contrast, you didn't get a f* thing I said. But yes you really are seeing how much importance you give it. You're unable to get what it means to have more than one level of expectations according to context tech/price.

ASDR wrote:
Specs are not a qualifying characteristic but a disqualifying one. It makes all the sense in the world to judge a display on one aspect alone if it's a bad one. If a display has 100ms input lag it is simply unsuitable for gaming *no matter what the other specs are*. You can have the greatest screen in the world, at 9" it won't cut it for movie watching.

Of course taking ridiculous examples that disqualify a display, you're being silly because that's not the point I've exposed, mine was about combined positives.

ASDR wrote:
A display with a 1000:1 contrast is simply washed out looking no matter what and grossly behind the times in 2019. It can have the greatest coating, viewing angle and response time, it'll always look washed out. And all PC displays (except for OLED BVMs and that ASUS Predator thing and other exotic tecg...) have pretty much that contrast. Great for Excel, bad for Dark Souls.

No they don't, go get your eyes checked, also maybe dedicate more time reading reviews carefully before wasting grands in a retail store at random, which is absurd bc with the rarity of the better models you're likely to end up with only mediocre ones, even if you bought the whole store.

ASDR wrote:
I'll eat my hat (and pull out my wallet) if you can show me even one of those that doesn't look washed out by the standards of any decent TV from the last decade

We'd spend a year doing that nothing would change the way you think anyway, you have no sense of measure on that topic.

ASDR wrote:
I like FALD LCDs, OLEDs are great, Plasmas were awesome, MicroLEDs look incredibly promising, that stacked VA display tech we've seen at CES is potentially great as well

Yeah of course I like them too, you thought not or that I didn't care? then you weren't able to understand what I've explained.
I like all displays that tick the many boxes I expect them to, whatever the tech and according to what I can expect of it and what they achieve is worth the money. But why am I again saying something you can't understand the rationale of ?




maxtherabbit wrote:
I have to agree with ASDR here - I hate LCDs period

when they first came out, I recognized them as obviously inferior to CRTs and stuck with a CRT until I got a plasma

I will stick with plasma until OLED, or some other self-emissive display technology becomes viable

But that's fine, no problem with that! so I only sincerely wish you two stick to crt/plasma/oled exclusively anyway and be happy.

Is it useful though to hammer mindless negativity against LCDs like ASDR did while his radical opinion on those is already set in stone anyway ?
Could it be there's such a thing as displays bigotery? :lol:

I have CRTs and LCDs and satisfied for now, just waiting for the OLED or whatever potential alt tech I think will fit my requirements too.

Can't say I'm not interested in that 48", 1000€ is still a bit expensive for me atm though, I hope for the price it'll feature the same recent upgrades its bigger brothers received, or that at least they will keep making more models with that panel.
_________________
mycophobia wrote:
have tyou ever played dodponpatchi


Last edited by Xyga on Sun Mar 17, 2019 5:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Smaller (48") OLED TV coming soon
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2019 5:28 pm 


User avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 11778
Location: Germany
speaking of contrast: did anybody try a 240p source through an OSSC paired with any of the SDR to HDR conversion programs that newer TVs seem to offer?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 71 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Space Pilot 3K template by Jakob Persson
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group