I currently use a 27" Samsung C27F591, which is a SPVA PC monitor with around a 3000:1 static contrast ratio. I was looking for an upgrade, but I hate IPS glow and the low contrast of IPS panels. Do the new Nano IPS monitors from LG still exhibit IPS Glow and a low static contrast ratio? I haven't been able to find out much about these aspects of Nano IPS. I don't game on my PC but it is my primary display for media consumption like Movies, Netflix, Youtube, et cetera. Any information would be appreciated.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Nano IPS Monitors. IPS Glow? Contrast ratio
LG first claimed the tech would offer better contrast but haven't provided any figures, so most likely not.
They might have meant that if you use maximum brightness for hdr purposes, they offer higher contrast, but black level is the same old or else i bet they would have bragged all over about it.
They might have meant that if you use maximum brightness for hdr purposes, they offer higher contrast, but black level is the same old or else i bet they would have bragged all over about it.
What kind of upgrade exactly are you looking for, if you don't game? Bigger size?
I would just go for the cheap 75Hz 31.5" AOC Q3279VWF, that has contrast near to 5000:1. There is a lottery for BLB it seems, some don't have some have. LG 32GK850G has practically no BLB lottery so far, but it's expensive and the 144Hz / G-sync would go to waste for you.
https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/aoc-q3279vwf/
I would just go for the cheap 75Hz 31.5" AOC Q3279VWF, that has contrast near to 5000:1. There is a lottery for BLB it seems, some don't have some have. LG 32GK850G has practically no BLB lottery so far, but it's expensive and the 144Hz / G-sync would go to waste for you.
https://pcmonitors.info/reviews/aoc-q3279vwf/
euskalzabe
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,478
Quantum dots do improve contrast by absorbing more excess light, so 1500:1 contrast will soon become the new normal for IPS panels using this layer. If the panel uses full array local dimming, expect that contrast figure to increase dramatically. Give it a couple months and we'll soon start seeing reviews of all these Nano IPS panels from reputable youtube channels.
Do you have a source on the improved contrast claim? Knowing how QD-enhanced backlighting works, I would be skeptical of any improvement in contrast ratio, since it's still just light shining through an LCD. I would think manufacturers would be quick to include that in their marketing if it were true, but they don't.
There was a discussion over on AVSForum on a very similar topic in the last few days: the possibility of contrast improvement in quantum dot color filter (QDCF) displays, which Samsung were purportedly showing demos of behind closed doors at CES. QDCF moves the QD layer from the backlight to the liquid crystal layer, and changes the backlight from white to blue. The blue light excites the red and green subpixels in the QD layer to emit red/green light (blue is left clear so the backlight shines straight through for blue subpixels), resulting in what Nanosys (principal developer behind QD tech) is now terming a photo-emissive display. The net result compared to standard LCD (or QD-backlit LCD) is better viewing angles and greater efficiency for brighter displays. However, straight from the horse's mouth, QDCF by itself doesn't result in any improvement in contrast ratio. And if QDCF doesn't, I don't see how mere QD-enhanced backlighting would, either.
KazeoHin
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2011
- Messages
- 9,000
Why don't they make QD VA panels?
euskalzabe
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,478
Let me rephrase: QD is supposed to be better at filtering light than just the LCD panel, so "some" contrast improvement is expected with darker blacks, though not dramatic. There are Nano IPS LG panels (TVs) that achieve ~1500:1 contrast natively, so those could be used in smaller sizes, but of course, this benefit is not attributable to QD directly.
The main reason why many QD displays (as in, finalized, commercialized products) will probably have better contrast lies on the fact that they are starting to support FALD backlights, solving a big part of the problem. This also doesn't mean they'll be cheap or mainstream. Check for example, the upcoming LG 34WK95U. Most of these QD displays will be looking at DisplayHDR600 or similar specification, which will force them to a) use the quantum filter for 1billion colors and b) improve contrast to achieve the DisplayHDR label. I highly doubt there'll be many, if any, DisplayHDR400 QD displays. I'd expect DisplayHDR600 QD displays to cost around $600-900, while DisplayHDR1000 QD displays will go for $900+.
Unlike DisplayHDR400, for both DisplayHDR 600 and 1000 specifications they'll need both the QD and the better contrast regulations, so in essence, for a consumer, a QD display = better contrast ratio.
I'm not sure what you mean by "better at filtering light than just the LCD panel." The QD-enhanced backlight layer and LC layer do different jobs; the former makes light - it doesn't block it, which is what is implied when you say it has an effect on contrast. The LC layer is the only thing that has an effect on contrast, as long as the backlight produces light uniformly across its surface (i.e., all regular, non-FALD LED or CCFL-backlit LCD displays).
Don't you mean the only reason? FALD improves contrast regardless of whether QD is used or not. And unless you're only talking about monitors - where QD isn't that commonplace yet - most existing QD-enhanced backlight displays haven't been FALD displays. I'm referring here to the SUHD and QLED TVs Samsung has been selling for the past couple of years. The balance may shift in the next year or two, but as of right now most "QD displays" aren't using FALD, and since QDs by themselves don't do anything to improve contrast, they're no better in that regard than regular non-QD displays.
Later
n00b
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 60
First of all, quantum dots don't filter light, they convert it to specific wavelengths. Therefore they improve color contrast of a display but I doubt they have any effect on contrast ratio. Contrast is not just contrast ratio but a wider concept.
It's wrong to talk about quantum dot color filters also, they should be called quantum dot color converters instead. By the way, to my understanding efforts to use QDCCs in place of traditional color filters have been been pretty much ditched. There's just no easy way to prevent quantum dots converting ambient stray light falling on the screen. That would obviously ruin the picture so such a display would look good in darkness only.
I'm aware "color filter" doesn't really fit, technically. I'm just calling it that because that's what people have been calling it for a while. Not sure there's an "official" name for it yet, but the Nanosys CEO is calling them color converters as well, so that works for me.
Don't be so sure about that. Watch the Nanosys CEO talk about the details of the QDCC tech they've been working on in this interview:
Note he says they were showing demos behind closed-doors at CES, and that products were expected to be announced later this year at IFA (2:32 in the video). Also read John Archer's impressions of what may very well be the same QDCC display the Nanosys guy is referring to.
euskalzabe
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,478
Ah, then I've surely been misled by marketing BS on this issue. I knew QD converts light so you can get a bigger spectrum of colors, but I though it was also involved in contrast. Guess not. Then our only hope is FALD in monitors for now, until OLED goes down to regular monitor sizes or Microled becomes mainstream.
Hope they come with some glossy screens. I understand most people dont care about image quality to the degree that they want a clear, vibrant image only a glossy coating will give, but at least give us one or two glossy screens. For crying out loud, the whole TV industry uses glossy coatings, so why cant we get a few glossy monitors?
Later
n00b
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2015
- Messages
- 60
Well, I guess most monitors are sold to brightly lit office rooms and in those conditions matte is better.
Thanks, this was a good interview as after 11 mins and a half the CEO was talking about changes needed in LCD modules and their fabrication. It's not as simple as to just replace color filters with quantum dots. It seems progress has been made but still, I remain skeptical, the changes required may not make manufacturing more expensive, but when combined with high-density FALD backlighting and yet another polarizer, everything just starts to feel too complicated when compared to fact that, at the same show, Asus was showcasing a portable OLED monitor that should become available in spring, manufactured using simple and inexpensive printing technology.
Thanks, this was a good interview as after 11 mins and a half the CEO was talking about changes needed in LCD modules and their fabrication. It's not as simple as to just replace color filters with quantum dots. It seems progress has been made but still, I remain skeptical, the changes required may not make manufacturing more expensive, but when combined with high-density FALD backlighting and yet another polarizer, everything just starts to feel too complicated when compared to fact that, at the same show, Asus was showcasing a portable OLED monitor that should become available in spring, manufactured using simple and inexpensive printing technology.
companies seem to think there is no market for them i guess. seems like the pc market is mostly tn or ips/pls these days
