• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

OLED to mainstream market???

This is a copy and paste from a HDTV guide I wrote a while back


---
The human eye is capable of retaining the presence of light even after the source has faded/moved away from the line of sight. It is the sole reason we perceive motion blur in the real world. The problem lies within our eye’s retina, which fails to dissipate the perceived light at the desired rate. Also, increased intensity and prolonged exposure leads to increased latency in decay. To complicate matters, not all individuals perceive light in the same manner, which is why some react to motion differently compared to others. Cameras on the other hand are immune to such effects thanks to the variable shutter speed and exposure. Too bad we humans lack such imperative features.
---

Virtually all LCDs are based on the driving mechanism known as [Active Matrix] (AM), which addresses the pixels (in a row) line by line from top to bottom. The active elements (pixels) maintain their value for a set period of time, which is known as hold-time. At 60Hz, each frame containing unique information is held and updated every 16.7ms. Hold-type blur occurs when the retina is tracking a moving object on a frame based display. Such displays can only display discrete still images while our eyes move in a continuous analogue fashion. This creates a conflict when watching motion video because the eye is continuously moving (tracking the moving object) even though each frame is stationary on the screen. Due to retinal persistence, the still frame will draw a blur onto the viewer’s moving retina.

---
Due to the nature of AM-LCD, only the new segments are updated while leaving the rest untouched. For example, if one were to display a red bouncing ball in a blue background, only the pixels displaying the red ball are addressed. The rest remain unaltered, which prolongs the retention even further.
---

To combat this problem, several manufacturers have developed and implemented a picture processing technique known as High-Level MCFI/MVFI (100-240Hz), which synthesizes new frames from existing frames to reduce the hold-time thus reducing the perception of motion blur of high-motion contents (50/60i/p). But the technology is far from perfect and it often causes image and motion artifacts that can be quite distracting.

---
PDPs do not suffer as much from such phenomenon because the hold- time is significantly shorter than LCD due to the use of driving mechanism known as Pulse Width Modulation (PWM). During the 0-16.7ms (60Hz) time frame, the PWM creates series of pulses that over time assemble itself as a single image [illustrative version]. Compiling an image in this manner means that every frame will begin as black and as each successive pulse is added, the image becomes brighter and brighter until the final full image is realized. The panel then resets to black and begins to compile a new frame. Of the 16.7ms it takes to compile a frame, only about 4-8ms (at the end of each frame time) of that time is high luminance. In this manner, we perceive an effective hold-time of ~4-8ms which is significantly shorter than the full 16.7ms hold time of LCD. This is also the source of perceived flicker in PDP.
---
 
Still, it should only be an issue on low frame/refreshrates, if they would make an oled display that accepted 200-300+ hz input (which it could easily handle) i doubt it would be noticable.

That will probably never happen, but would be nice.
 
You still would. Simply refreshing the screen at higher res won't solve the issue due to the reasons I've stated above.
 
It would, what was suggested above is just a hack to achieve the same effect.
 
The only cost effective methods are: Interpolation, Black Frame Insertion (BFI) and Very High Frame Rate.

VHFR is only open to the PC gaming community and the GPU has to push 480fps to maintain 2ms hold time.

Interpolation is useful for sports and soaps but totally useless for gaming. It also causes visible artifacts (image breakups) and stutters (jumps in motion).

BFI requires very bright pixels but its the only solution that would increase motion res without lag or image/motion artifacts.
 
I think the ideal is very high refresh/fps, then simply use software interpolation for video content.
And considering 120hz on the fastest current panels is _almost_ good enough, i think 200hz/fps on oled would do it, and at least for me thats achievable economically.

But then again, they will probably just slap standard 60hz input circuitry on most oled panels..
 
I suspect the early models will be based on BFI and refreshed at 120Hz thus providing 600 lines of motion resolution out of 1080 lines (1080p), which means PDP will have the upper hand for some time.
 
I think the ideal is very high refresh/fps, then simply use software interpolation for video content.
And considering 120hz on the fastest current panels is _almost_ good enough, i think 200hz/fps on oled would do it, and at least for me thats achievable economically.

But then again, they will probably just slap standard 60hz input circuitry on most oled panels..

Interpolation is definitely not the answer. It causes more problems than it solves.
 
Even if it cant remove motion blur. I've gamed on a TN display at 120hz and it was much sharper in motion. I figure that's what oled will bring. It's like night and day difference. Problem with TN is color shift its just horrible.
 
Even if it cant remove motion blur. I've gamed on a TN display at 120hz and it was much sharper in motion. I figure that's what oled will bring. It's like night and day difference. Problem with TN is color shift its just horrible.

If you're using a mouse then its not a problem.
 
I think the ideal is very high refresh/fps, then simply use software interpolation for video content.
And considering 120hz on the fastest current panels is _almost_ good enough, i think 200hz/fps on oled would do it, and at least for me thats achievable economically.

But then again, they will probably just slap standard 60hz input circuitry on most oled panels..

This is what I fear.

120Hz TN panels are so good for gaming the difference between them and CRT is almost neglible... if OLED can do the same then I would easily settle for a 120Hz OLED.
 
There's no reason not to. So the chances are there will be 120Hz OLED monitors .
 
This is what I fear.

120Hz TN panels are so good for gaming the difference between them and CRT is almost neglible... if OLED can do the same then I would easily settle for a 120Hz OLED.

I don't think its negligible. I'd say 120hz alone is an "appreciable" blur reduction from 60hz though, and additionally adds many more frames of motion tracking when sent high fps (which makes the motion feel smoother and perhaps more accurate outside of any blur considerations). Most people say 120hz is about "half as much blur" (and ips 120hz slightly less). Lightboost (lightboost2) is nvidia only and only on monitors with the right hardware. The new 1ms backlight strobing "lightboost2" monitors with a gtx 680 "hacked" (via script/ini) to enable backlight strobing outside of 3d mode, so that you can play in 2d mode with it strobing, reduce sample and hold blur (along with the very low response times) to a 94% blur reduction. People are reporting crt-like clarity.

See this thread:
ASUS/BENQ LightBoost owners!! Zero motion blur setting!

For me its not just about scoring/accuracy... I find smeared out high detail textures and depth via bumpmapping, nameplates, etc.. and all of the scene basically blurring extremely annoying during FoV movement. I know what an fw900 looks like and lcds , even "1/2 as much blur" or "nearly so "(ips) of 120hz non-lightboost lcds is nothing compared to full readability of texture, text and full scene clarity during FoV movemement. Even 70% would be blurring and not truly readable. These blur reductions rather than essentially full clarity are more like soften blur effects that stick closer to the shadow mask of an object so to speak, but that still makes for a fuzzy/blurry, unreadable detail mess during FoV movement. If crt-like , essentially full scene motion clarity is available on a gaming lcd I will definitely be upgrading to it sometime in the future, and I think it makes the 50% +/- blur reduction of non-lightboost2 TN vs ips argument moot as far as I'm concerned. Blurry lcds vs clear is no contest imo.

Many are so used to LCD they don't even notice the blur. I'm getting "Huh? What blur?" from a lot of people.

Reminds me of the "Allegory of the Cave".
Some are so used to wearing their slushy goggles they don't know what its like to see clearly.

The ways I've seen people "workaround" , "attempt to ignore" , or pretend to be oblivious to it are flick-FoV movement from A-to-B in an attempt to "blink" past the FoV arc motion that smears every time, otherwise they just try to ignore and not pay attention during the FoV movement, trying not to register vision during it at all... or you let your locked on eye focus strain at the textures and texture-depth via bump mapping that smear out during each FoV movement, since your eyes always try to focus away blur (I know mine do). Its most annoying on the highest detail extreme textured games.

The 120hz 1m lightboost2 strobing backlight version would be clear like the crt image, but with perhaps a single unblurred afterimage ghost at times. The original content (scene/objects/textures) is reportedly unsmeared very like a crt. The blur representations are much worse when they affect a whole scene full of complex objects and very high detail textures and depth via bump mapping being blurred, rather than a single simple cell shaded car.
As for 120hz, the consensus is that it still blurs.. just not as much. I'm finding the most modern, extremely high resolution texture mapped games , + bumpmapping depth and shaders blur even more obvious and eye wrenching than before since the blur on fast FoV movement washes out that extremely high detail+3d depth my eyes "have a lock on" every time. It strains my eyes and is much more obnoxious to me than more than simpler textured/older games.

Most people seem to agree with this representation of 60hz/120hz *LCD/ CRT blur in games.

lcd-blur.jpg


So it appears to me that 120hz vs the limitation of LCD pixel response times and retinal retention blur would still not be enough to retain the focus on texture detail (much like fine text scrawled on a surface which gets smudged out) and bump map depth.

Its like you have goggles filled with some liquid-gel and every time you turn quickly, your eyes see all fine detail lost in a blurring. 120hz might replace your goggles with a fluid which has double the viscosity, blurring near half as much.. but its still a lousy prescription compared to clear sight imo.
 
This is what I fear.

120Hz TN panels are so good for gaming the difference between them and CRT is almost neglible... if OLED can do the same then I would easily settle for a 120Hz OLED.

Perhaps, 5 years from now, but there won't be a big rush to OLED monitors.

It will be TV, and they won't have 120Hz inputs anymore than current TVs do.
 
Back
Top