How is OLED "better" than LCD?

[Will Keir]

Just wondering about the OLEDs taking over the market. Is it that much better than an LCD. What defines it as better?

- Resolution
- Black Levels
- Color
- Bit Depth

 

[Mitch Gross]

The way that an OLED functions is to apply a voltage in order to get a pixel to illuminate. When there is no voltage, the pixel is truly black. For an LCD, illumination is provided by a backlight (fluorescent or LED) panel, which shines through the liquid crystal to illuminate pixels. The backlight is always on, so to create "black" the crystal tries to go opaque, but it never truly does stop all of the light, so the result is a glow and blacks which are more gray then black.

OLEDs have true, accurate blacks. This means that they have better contrast and more accurate colors.

Another reason for better colors is the self-illuminating nature of OLED. The individual pixels balance red, green and blue to illuminate at precise color variations. Fr an LCD,the crystal does this as well but is also at the mercy of the available color spectrum provided by the backlight. If this backlight is weak on certain colors and overly strong on other color frequencies, the result is a less accurate color reproduction.

Disclosure: My company manufacturers a monitor/recorder which utilizes a high quality OLED HD panel.

 

[Milano Questa]

It's like plasma, but better. And sexier.

 

[jake blackstone]

For an LCD, illumination is provided by a backlight (fluorescent or LED) panel, which shines through the liquid crystal to illuminate pixels. The backlight is always on

Isn't that's why companies like Dolby utilize local dimming LCD backlighting for precise reason to have true blacks with the LCD tech?

 

[Subhadip Sen]

Yes, it is that much better and Mitch has covered exactly why. Pure blacks, superior luminance uniformity and colour consistency, wider colour gamuts, etc - all achieved due to the fact that each subpixel lights up individually. But really, the immediate draw is the absolute blacks. However, the current trade off is resolution - there are no 4K OLED panels commercially available that I am aware of - and of course cost. Though LG demoed a UHD OLED TV last week.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Other trade-offs with current OLED displays are also some mosquito noise (similar to what we see on plasma displays), occasional streaking and some flickering. Some of the voltage regulation techniques used in OLED displays right now can stabilize and even eliminate most of that noise, but at the expense of detail or measured resolution in that they can produce solarization or posterization effects in noisy areas of your image. Sony had some flickering issues on their 24" OLED monitors, but I think these issues have been mostly resolved. UHD OLED is coming and most consumer OLED TVs at 50" and larger hitting the market in the coming year or two will offer up UHD resolution. The 55" Samsung OLED (1080p) is phenomenal and so is its price tag -- you can buy the 70" Sharp 4K Quattron as well as a decent 65" LED for another room for the same money. That will change. It's really looking like OLED is the near future for the majority of display device technology.

 

[Noel R.]

I'm actually more excited about OLED technology than I am 4K, but having both will be the best of both worlds. As I see newer TV technologies focusing on resolution, I'm surprised at the lack of attention to pushing use of a wider color gamut. With the wider gamut available on OLEDs it would be great to take advantage of that rather than being stuck on REC. 709.

 

[David Skidmore]

I'm actually more excited about OLED technology than I am 4K, but having both will be the best of both worlds. As I see newer TV technologies focusing on resolution, I'm surprised at the lack of attention to pushing use of a wider color gamut. With the wider gamut available on OLEDs it would be great to take advantage of that rather than being stuck on REC. 709.

It's unfortunate that it's all about resolution and nothing about color. I bet once OLED starts to take hold it'll become a bigger deal. They just need to figure out the manufacturing process.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

Just wondering about the OLEDs taking over the market. Is it that much better than an LCD. What defines it as better?

- Resolution
- Black Levels
- Color
- Bit Depth

1) Dynamic range > black levels

True blacks, explained by Mitch.

What this also brings is more visible detail in them.

Transmissive display (LCD) renders shadows by blocking light. This fact combined with the light properties of the layers causes a cutoff in the shadows.

Plasmas are much better. Oleds go deep.

2) Low level color accuracy

With LCD technology layers on top of the backlight also cause greater color variations/errors in the shadows.

Plasmas being emissive technology do better.
Oleds do best.

3) Uniformity

LCDs are dependent on backlight uniformity.

Plasmas and OLEDs aren't.

4) Motion rendition

LCDs smear motion. Molecules in liquid crystals are inert. You don't see the real motion blur that a camera makes, you see what a display smeared on top of it. This is less of an issue for most. For some it is a big deal.

Plasmas have a fraction of that pixel blurring and theirs is near a limit of visibility.
OLEDs have a fraction of plasmas.


5) Gamut

Superior.
RGB LEDs come close but at the cost of all of the above.

"Oleds are too saturated" is nonsense.

 

[Will Keir]

I'm close to pulling the trigger on this one with the huge price discount. Just wondering if there's something in 4k I should be waiting on. For CC applications I use a 30" Cinema display without calibration. A color grading monitor as been a missing component of my home office editing bay in the remote mountains for sometime.

My needs are as follows:

1) Color accurate monitor for grading applications.
2) Directors monitor out in the field (hopefully powered by AB batteries). Possibly a popular rental item as well?
3) Possible focus pulling off this monitor on sets? Our 5" or 7" RED monitor (standard with Stage 3 upgrade) doesn't quite give the accuracy I would like.

So I'm close, it's a big investment, there's about tweleve days left. Is this monitor just too outrageous of a deal to pass on? Will it fit my needs perfect? Even overkill?

Yes, it is that much better and Mitch has covered exactly why. Pure blacks, superior luminance uniformity and colour consistency, wider colour gamuts, etc - all achieved due to the fact that each subpixel lights up individually. But really, the immediate draw is the absolute blacks. However, the current trade off is resolution - there are no 4K OLED panels commercially available that I am aware of - and of course cost. Though LG demoed a UHD OLED TV last week.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

The 55" Samsung OLED (1080p) is phenomenal and so is its price tag -- you can buy the 70" Sharp 4K Quattron as well as a decent 65" LED for another room for the same money. That will change. It's really looking like OLED is the near future for the majority of display device technology.

Samsung is pretty nice. Its motion resolution appearance is sub par on main setup and needs fiddling with the motion settings.
The price of a curved display with a glossy surface is that reflections are stretched into horizontal streaks on the panel, and if they are brighter it can be pretty frustrating.

There's also a slight ABL going on. Nothing I cared about, but calibration folks will probably roll eyes. Especially with additional "cell brightness" control.

 

[Paul Russell]

I'll be buying up the last remaining large screen Panasonic plasmas as they go on clearance sale year. The reasons are above. OLED will take a couple of years to catch up at consumer level pricing.

 

[Christopher*Seguine]

It is much easier/cheaper to manufacture OLED panels, specially in large sizes, on the order of 50% cost savings or so.
Plus no backlight, so thinner, flexible, etc.
That is what is driving business interest, not necessarily quality improvements.

Once the the early adopters pay for the R&D costs, expect panel pricing to drop dramatically.

So why aren't these flooding the market, and why dont you want to be an early adopter?

The O in OLED stands for Organic, what happens to all organic material? It decays.

Currently about 5% brightness loss every 500 hours and the color shifts that go along with that.
Areas of the screen decay in non-uniform patterns, so over time your screen can get nice and splotchy.

Either 1. you stick some sensors in there and track the decay and boost voltage to try and compensate.
Or 2. you develop better chemistry to limit the decay.

Wait for the better chemistry.


LG's 77" 3840x2400 OLED - seems they don't mind exhibiting it with the splotches.

 

[David Kuhn]

OLED has the potential for greatness... but implementation is important. My last phone (droad razr maxx) was OLED but the screen was junk, but that's not the norm from what I've seen. I think once durability and cost issues are sorted out you'll see it quickly move into the TV market.

I figure one more generation of LCD (4k)... then the early adopters will have beat the bugs (and the new car premium) out of OLED TV's.