Apple CEO pans OLED displays but stops short of ruling out iPhone with larger screen - Page 2

Insulting users in your second post isn't the best thing to do.

But an insult that was well deserved.  Fillie's arrogance bit him in the butt.  

Originally Posted by Noliving 
But an insult that was well deserved.  Fillie's arrogance bit him in the butt.  

The best way to counter arrogance is being right where they're wrong. Arbitrary justification or no.

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

Insulting users in your second post isn't the best thing to do.

Insulting somebody's very first post in a forum, unless they're making some egregious insult or trolling, is even worse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fillie 


Of course the gist of your point is all pro OLED. If you read my post, I was not arguing against it. Maybe you should check dictionary on the word grammar.

From your 'original' quote:
You are the one using wrong terms. I already explained what was wrong but of course you ignore it and say your point is all correct.

CMYK is process printing colours -Cyan Magenta Yellow and black hence my explanation before, there is no 'K' in additive colour or even subtractive colour. It is a printing term

Secondly, your analogy to printing on paper is incorrect.

Printing, either as basic process or over printing, absorbs light and bounces at different wavelengths depending on what is absorbed. Obviously 100% = black.
(As a side note: a lot of the time 100K alone will not create a deep black so 40% cyan is typically used to make it richer without causing tearing to paper)

Anyway, LCDs use various backlights like CCFL, WLED and another called RGB-LED which does away with the extra layer of colour films. Either way, the resultant image is created using additive colour.

So LCD does not:
- mishmash colour spaces
- render RGB from CMYK
- do the same as printing

Oh boy, where to start here. Printing on (white) paper as an analogy for LCD screens rendering colors is perfectly apt - you take a point of maximum values as your constant (the backlight or the paper), then subtract from that constant into your desired color by filtering with chemicals that absorb (not emit) certain colors. That is exact opposite of displays that make their own light making their colors, and that is exact physical opposite of 'additive color' as you describe.

And to my original point, that is a problem with LCD monitors rendering an RGB colorspace. There is interpolation processing going on there to take an additive value and convert it into a proxy subtracted from the backlight - and one of the reasons firmware updates can make an LCD monitor's color rendering better.

Matter of fact, one thing I learned from this little exchange reading up on the subject is that TN displays can't even physically display true 24-bit color, they dither 6-bit RGB channels into a faux 24-bit gamut. There's tons more back-end fakery with LCD monitors processing images than I thought.

So again back to my original point, LCD's subtracting colors with additive colorspaces developed for CRT's some time ago (NTSC is old as dirt) have to do some tricks to make that work - in other words they mishmash colorspaces to physically function. I stand by my original contention.

And just for the record I don't hate LCD's, they are great display technology. IPS panel in my 13" rMBP I ordered yesterday I am sure will be quite spectacular when it arrives. But all tech has strengths and weaknesses.

I have questions about OLEDs. Are they really better than LED lit LCDs? Well, logically, the fact that OLEDs don't require a backlight is very interesting. The fact that colors are not created by the display by subtracting from the colors inevitably provided by the backlight is also very appealing to me. But, I got to admit that IPhone displays are sweet. However, I think that has more to do with the fact that they have a ppi of 326 vs. my Galaxy S3’s 306. Also, I do have to admit that my screen does look way too green when I watch movies and I don’t think it is due to the images themselves. I think it happens because of the Pen Tile that Samsung uses rather than the RGB that Apple and most other phones use. I think that and RGB OLED screen should be better than an RGB LCD. But I want to be sure of it.

I forgot to say that although my friend’s IPhone 5’s screen is really cool, there is something off on it. Something about my Galaxy S3 seems superior and it’s not its clarity or sharpness. I think it’s its OLED screen. The screen on my Galaxy seems to be very even-balanced whereas the IPhone’s seems off at times.

This thread about OLED's vs. LCD's has been both interesting and informative, and motivated me to actually take a look at various devices. I work in mobile tech, and have access to a library containing basically every relevant device. So, I compared displays last Friday. Contenders? Galaxy Nexus (OLED), Nexus 4 (LCD), Lumia 920 (OLED), and iPhone 5 (LCD).

I compared websites on the devices. My "favorite" common one is CNN, because of the reds they use in their branding. The winner? Windows Phone 8 on the Lumia believe it or not. The Nexus 4 and iPhone 5 are tied for a close second. The distant loser is the Galaxy Nexus. Whatever the display pipeline in a Galaxy Nexus, it leaves a blue tinge on things. But the same OS on the Nexus 4 looks more-or-less as good as an iPhone 5, which is to say exceptional to my subjective perception.

But to my surprise, Microsoft/Nokia seems to have done their homework. The Lumia 920 has an accurate gamut and enjoys the contrast and pop inherent to its OLED display. I am not sure about a Galaxy SIII (or a Note II), so I will check those out on Monday.