That's not evidence that they degrade after several months. Please cite an analysis of an OLED screen after several months of use.
HDR is a camera function.
The diamond grid that Samsung uses isn't required. That's just what they've chosen to use to solve whatever engineering problems they were faced with. Higher resolutions do, of course, cause the GPU to work harder and could negatively impact battery life, but that's not a characteristic of an OLED display.
It's about time Apple puts an OLED screen on an iPhone.
I don't really care that there may be some theoretical color drift. As I understand things, LG uses a white LED with overlying filters. It solves the issues with the green or blue OLED color issue and life span. LG produces a 65 inch 4k OLED display. I think they can produce a 4 to 6 inch OLED panel for the iPhone quite handily.
Apple is likely attempting to maximize their investment into LCD panels. But it's now time to move on. LG is making the panels for the watch. And if the panel's lifespan is good enough for the watch, it should be good enough for the iPhone which I suspect will be upgraded far sooner than the watch for most users anyhow.
OLED panels are superior to any LCD panel. My eyes tell me so. I understand that Apple wants to preserve its margins on the iPhone and going to OLED may not allow them to. That's a more legitimate reason than saying the LCD is better technology which it clearly is not.
When Apple moves its entire line of products to OLED, I will be much happier. As much as I adore LG displays, I will not purchase any device running a spyware OS.
Actually, it is only a green channel that has that resolution, while blue and red have 1828x1028 pixels.
iPhone 6/6s plus can be veiwed at 8.6 inches (20/20 vision) without seen individual subpixels, Note5 - at 9.4 inches, while for S6 and S6 Edge have 8.4 as the minimal distance at which subpixels are not seen.
So, in terms of resolution - it is not correct to talk about 2560x1440 without mentioning lower res red and blue channels.
Wide color gamut is a good thing and not a bad one...but only if color management is done properly. Of course, when you try to "map" sRGB images onto Adobe or some other wide gamut colorspace, by simply reassigning color values directly, then that will create oversaturated and unnatural colors.
No professional video people use OLED because of panel degredation. If OLED was so great than the pro's would use it for video work. They don't.
Au-contraire
"Sony offers a full line of professional OLED monitors that are ideal for critical evaluation in every aspect of the content creation market. The OLED monitors are distinguished by a range of unique features, including accurate black reproduction, wide dynamic range, excellent color accuracy, and pixel speeds many times faster than current LCD technologies — all critical performance requirements for reference monitoring."
"...These are used for editing, dallies review, graphics generation, and special effects, and for broadcast and cinematic production. The flagship BVM-E series includes wider gamut display and follows the Digital Cinema Initiative recommendations for imaging"
winning a political award is one thing. What the pro's use in the REAL WORLD is another.
Very few pros use OLED screens.
You're getting there. You've gone from" NO professional video people use OLED" to "very few pros use OLED screens". and in the span of just a few minutes. So what leads you to believe real pros don't use OLED?
I'm sorry that I don't keep tract of every single movie/TV studio on the planet.
All I know is the grand majority don't use OLED.
The exception confirms the rule.
Professional level OLED is far newer than LCD, so claiming "grand majority don't use OLED" may not be a stretch, but with that said how do you know? If nothing else your claim that OLED isn't good enough for professional videographers and cinematographers is unlikely to be true.
Pros: -Wide viewing angle (doesn't matter for mobile) -Low power (only true with dark theme. people still like reading with black on white, so it doesn't matter) -Higher resolution (doesn't matter for a few years, every pixel means more processing by the GPU and lower battery life)
Most people still use their phone in lit environments meaning that OLED is still dimmer than LCD with no improvement from the contrast ratio (because ambient light reflects off the dark part of the screen causing a non-zero background emission).
Seriously, why is oled still interesting? Maybe new form factors?
Curved display = worthless due to image skew near bent glass.
zero bezel display = very interesting. This would let you tile phones/displays for interesting interactive experiences. This would be one case where OLED could win.
foldable display = also very interesting, but it can be done at much lower cost with LCD...
I don't really care that there may be some theoretical color drift. As I understand things, LG uses a white LED with overlying filters. It solves the issues with the green or blue OLED color issue and life span. LG produces a 65 inch 4k OLED display. I think they can produce a 4 to 6 inch OLED panel for the iPhone quite handily.
Ummm. What LG is doing is just using an OLED backlight and using LCD technology to filter the films. That is extremely energy inefficient compared to amoled.
If you are just going to replace the backlight, use quantum dots as they will last much longer.
<p style="color:rgb(0,0,0);margin-bottom:1.5em;margin-top:1.5em;">"Another of OLED’s problems concerns the pesky blue pixel. Because the OLED material used to make blue light deteriorates more quickly than red and green, its lifespan is shorter and over time the colour balance could be affected. </p>
<p style="color:rgb(0,0,0);margin-bottom:1.5em;margin-top:1.5em;">Samsung’s solution is to make the blue pixel twice the size of the other colours while LG’s WRGB system should side-step the problem, but it remains to be seen how this issue will play out in the long term."</p>
<p style="color:rgb(0,0,0);margin-bottom:1.5em;margin-top:1.5em;">Problem is all the tests are done on brand new AMOLED phones. I want them to test phones that are 6 months to 1 year old. The blue pixel death is obviously a problem. Or else Samsung would not make them TWICE as big. And even before they die completely it will mess up your color accuracy. Its not IF the pixels will die but when.</p>
I completely agree that the pixel life could be an issue, but I haven't seen any evidence that over the lifetime of a phone there is meaningful degradation.
I completely agree that the pixel life could be an issue, but I haven't seen any evidence that over the lifetime of a phone there is meaningful degradation.
Just look carefully at best buy's OLED displays. lol
Apple's iOS redesign would have had a much bigger pop if they went AMOLED for their displays. Color accuracy doesn't matter to me on mobile as much as beautiful eye candy.
My hope for the iPhone 7 Plus would be an AMOLED panel at 1440p, and the standard 7 to be a AMOLED panel at 1080p. Shrink the top and bottom bezels by a quarter inch if possible. Apple puts small batteries in their phones but get great battery life on the Plus, if battery life suffers with those panels, try to implement a larger battery to offset it.
Off topic but implement quick charging in both phones. Especially the Plus. Every single mid-tier and flagship Android model has quickcharge 2.0 or Type-C rapid charging (new Nexii). I know you can get an iPad charger for the 6 Plus for better performance, but why not just include that?
Apple's iOS redesign would have had a much bigger pop if they went AMOLED for their displays. Color accuracy doesn't matter to me on mobile as much as beautiful eye candy.
My hope for the iPhone 7 Plus would be an AMOLED panel at 1440p, and the standard 7 to be a AMOLED panel at 1080p. Shrink the top and bottom bezels by a quarter inch if possible. Apple puts small batteries in their phones but get great battery life on the Plus, if battery life suffers with those panels, try to implement a larger battery to offset it.
Off topic but implement quick charging in both phones. Especially the Plus. Every single mid-tier and flagship Android model has quickcharge 2.0 or Type-C rapid charging (new Nexii). I know you can get an iPad charger for the 6 Plus for better performance, but why not just include that?
Color accuracy matters, it matters a lot. And it possibly matters a lot more to Apple then what we know. It is properly in Apple's DNA to teach its users the importance of Color accuracy rather then cheat on it.
The problem with switching to OLED ( be it WOLED or AMOLED ) is how LCD technology keeps getting better. While WOLED may have solved the color accuracy and life expectancy, it is still more expensive then LCD. We pushed to post 800ppi on LCD already, we have tech in the pipeline to make it even thinner, and more power efficient, and it scales very well with the current Fab. The whole LCD ecosystem are competing and improving. The incentive to switch to OLED are less and less as we go. Unless we need something specific properties such as ultra compact size ( Apple Watch ) or Transparent OLED Glass, or flexible display.
2. Still many wasted panels because of defects(not good for the volume necessary for iPhone)
3. Blue pixels have an estimated life of only 5,000 hours. But color accuracy is effected way before pixel completely dies.
4. Much shorter life than LCD. It is organic material after all
5. Requires higher resolutions to achieve same sharpness as LCD screens (leads to CPU/battery drain)
6. Maximum brightness less than LCD
Expensive, more chance of supply shortage, shorter life, less color accuracy, higher resolution required, less bright.
Advantages of OLED
1. Great black levels and contrast levels
2. Thinner and more flexiable screens vs LCD
IMO, I'd rather had slightly worse black/contrast for a phone than having a phone that drains battery life, more expensive, or has color accuracy problems after a few months. Also brightness is extremely important for a phone since you use in sunlight alot. OLED has weaker brightness than LCD and can get easily washed out in the sun.
IMO, OLED is great for a TV. But not ready for phones yet.
Since you are well off, seriously go buy a late model samsung device and see how much OLED really works on a phone. It really makes the iPhone's screen dated. I can see it in just a few minutes playing with them in the store, imagine if you get to live with it for an extended period of time? Would you be able to go back to a screen that cannot display black?
I have seen a late mode samsung device in a lit work space. It was hard to tell that the blacks were much deeper than the LCD (due to ambient light) but it was easy to tell that the reds were kind of orange.
Comments
http://www.cnet.com/news/hdr-for-cameras-vs-hdr-for-tvs-whats-the-difference/
I don't know that any TV manufacturer is using it yet nor that there's much if any HDR content so it's pretty much a moot point AFAIK.
I don't really care that there may be some theoretical color drift. As I understand things, LG uses a white LED with overlying filters. It solves the issues with the green or blue OLED color issue and life span. LG produces a 65 inch 4k OLED display. I think they can produce a 4 to 6 inch OLED panel for the iPhone quite handily.
Apple is likely attempting to maximize their investment into LCD panels. But it's now time to move on. LG is making the panels for the watch. And if the panel's lifespan is good enough for the watch, it should be good enough for the iPhone which I suspect will be upgraded far sooner than the watch for most users anyhow.
OLED panels are superior to any LCD panel. My eyes tell me so. I understand that Apple wants to preserve its margins on the iPhone and going to OLED may not allow them to. That's a more legitimate reason than saying the LCD is better technology which it clearly is not.
When Apple moves its entire line of products to OLED, I will be much happier. As much as I adore LG displays, I will not purchase any device running a spyware OS.
Highest Screen Resolution (2560x1440),
Actually, it is only a green channel that has that resolution, while blue and red have 1828x1028 pixels.
iPhone 6/6s plus can be veiwed at 8.6 inches (20/20 vision) without seen individual subpixels, Note5 - at 9.4 inches, while for S6 and S6 Edge have 8.4 as the minimal distance at which subpixels are not seen.
So, in terms of resolution - it is not correct to talk about 2560x1440 without mentioning lower res red and blue channels.
the color room is too big they are oversaturated.
Wide color gamut is a good thing and not a bad one...but only if color management is done properly. Of course, when you try to "map" sRGB images onto Adobe or some other wide gamut colorspace, by simply reassigning color values directly, then that will create oversaturated and unnatural colors.
"Sony offers a full line of professional OLED monitors that are ideal for critical evaluation in every aspect of the content creation market. The OLED monitors are distinguished by a range of unique features, including accurate black reproduction, wide dynamic range, excellent color accuracy, and pixel speeds many times faster than current LCD technologies — all critical performance requirements for reference monitoring."
"...These are used for editing, dallies review, graphics generation, and special effects, and for broadcast and cinematic production. The flagship BVM-E series includes wider gamut display and follows the Digital Cinema Initiative recommendations for imaging"
http://blog.sony.com/press/sony-oled-trimaster-el-series-professional-monitoring-technology-honored-with-scientific-and-technical-academy-award/
It will likely go the way of plasma.
Reasons:
-Image streaking (refresh rate)
-Blue pixel decay
-Pentile pixel layout
-Artificial saturation
-low steady-state brightness
-slow refresh rate (compared to lcd)
Pros:
-Wide viewing angle (doesn't matter for mobile)
-Low power (only true with dark theme. people still like reading with black on white, so it doesn't matter)
-Higher resolution (doesn't matter for a few years, every pixel means more processing by the GPU and lower battery life)
Most people still use their phone in lit environments meaning that OLED is still dimmer than LCD with no improvement from the contrast ratio (because ambient light reflects off the dark part of the screen causing a non-zero background emission).
Seriously, why is oled still interesting? Maybe new form factors?
Curved display = worthless due to image skew near bent glass.
zero bezel display = very interesting. This would let you tile phones/displays for interesting interactive experiences. This would be one case where OLED could win.
foldable display = also very interesting, but it can be done at much lower cost with LCD...
Quantum dots however...
Ummm. What LG is doing is just using an OLED backlight and using LCD technology to filter the films. That is extremely energy inefficient compared to amoled.
If you are just going to replace the backlight, use quantum dots as they will last much longer.
OLED is the next Plasma.
Interesting. I haven't heard of that until now.
I completely agree that the pixel life could be an issue, but I haven't seen any evidence that over the lifetime of a phone there is meaningful degradation.
I completely agree that the pixel life could be an issue, but I haven't seen any evidence that over the lifetime of a phone there is meaningful degradation.
Just look carefully at best buy's OLED displays. lol
Apple's iOS redesign would have had a much bigger pop if they went AMOLED for their displays. Color accuracy doesn't matter to me on mobile as much as beautiful eye candy.
My hope for the iPhone 7 Plus would be an AMOLED panel at 1440p, and the standard 7 to be a AMOLED panel at 1080p. Shrink the top and bottom bezels by a quarter inch if possible. Apple puts small batteries in their phones but get great battery life on the Plus, if battery life suffers with those panels, try to implement a larger battery to offset it.
Off topic but implement quick charging in both phones. Especially the Plus. Every single mid-tier and flagship Android model has quickcharge 2.0 or Type-C rapid charging (new Nexii). I know you can get an iPad charger for the 6 Plus for better performance, but why not just include that?
Apple's iOS redesign would have had a much bigger pop if they went AMOLED for their displays. Color accuracy doesn't matter to me on mobile as much as beautiful eye candy.
My hope for the iPhone 7 Plus would be an AMOLED panel at 1440p, and the standard 7 to be a AMOLED panel at 1080p. Shrink the top and bottom bezels by a quarter inch if possible. Apple puts small batteries in their phones but get great battery life on the Plus, if battery life suffers with those panels, try to implement a larger battery to offset it.
Off topic but implement quick charging in both phones. Especially the Plus. Every single mid-tier and flagship Android model has quickcharge 2.0 or Type-C rapid charging (new Nexii). I know you can get an iPad charger for the 6 Plus for better performance, but why not just include that?
Color accuracy matters, it matters a lot. And it possibly matters a lot more to Apple then what we know. It is properly in Apple's DNA to teach its users the importance of Color accuracy rather then cheat on it.
The problem with switching to OLED ( be it WOLED or AMOLED ) is how LCD technology keeps getting better. While WOLED may have solved the color accuracy and life expectancy, it is still more expensive then LCD. We pushed to post 800ppi on LCD already, we have tech in the pipeline to make it even thinner, and more power efficient, and it scales very well with the current Fab. The whole LCD ecosystem are competing and improving. The incentive to switch to OLED are less and less as we go. Unless we need something specific properties such as ultra compact size ( Apple Watch ) or Transparent OLED Glass, or flexible display.
Disadvantages of OLED
1. Very expensive to produce
2. Still many wasted panels because of defects(not good for the volume necessary for iPhone)
3. Blue pixels have an estimated life of only 5,000 hours. But color accuracy is effected way before pixel completely dies.
4. Much shorter life than LCD. It is organic material after all
5. Requires higher resolutions to achieve same sharpness as LCD screens (leads to CPU/battery drain)
6. Maximum brightness less than LCD
Expensive, more chance of supply shortage, shorter life, less color accuracy, higher resolution required, less bright.
Advantages of OLED
1. Great black levels and contrast levels
2. Thinner and more flexiable screens vs LCD
IMO, I'd rather had slightly worse black/contrast for a phone than having a phone that drains battery life, more expensive, or has color accuracy problems after a few months. Also brightness is extremely important for a phone since you use in sunlight alot. OLED has weaker brightness than LCD and can get easily washed out in the sun.
IMO, OLED is great for a TV. But not ready for phones yet.
Since you are well off, seriously go buy a late model samsung device and see how much OLED really works on a phone. It really makes the iPhone's screen dated. I can see it in just a few minutes playing with them in the store, imagine if you get to live with it for an extended period of time? Would you be able to go back to a screen that cannot display black?
I have seen a late mode samsung device in a lit work space. It was hard to tell that the blacks were much deeper than the LCD (due to ambient light) but it was easy to tell that the reds were kind of orange.
You don't display black. You shut it off. Hence why Apple has LuxVue, the micro LED display company.
Theoretically you could do Micro LED that is as good if not even better then OLED. But it would be very expensive; comparatively speaking.