Unlike many other computer technology that follows the trend of getting cheaper and better, I get the impression that LCD panel technology is getting cheaper but worse. I would think that manufacturers would want to focus on improving IPS technology but I also understand that companies want to make a buck by offering their own solution. So what is next on the horizon for us consumers after existing panel technologies?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
What's next after IPS / *VA / TN panels?
- Thread starter djlenoir
- Start date
vick1000
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2007
- Messages
- 2,443
Don't forget "HD" compatable.....when PC monitors have beed HD long before there was such a thing.
Why not, they have equivalent or better response time compared to a CRT, and by the time OLEDs are really available they'll be packing displayport. Unless higher refresh rates reduce their longevity...
OLED can support just about any refresh they decide to use. The response time is was .01ms. That's a hundred times faster than current LCD.
Add in perfect viewing angles, perfect black, infinite contrast, zero backlight bleed (no backlight) and you essentially have the perfect display.
But they have to cross the longevity and mass production hurdles. Still years away. Still need to find a decent LCD to hold you over.
Add in perfect viewing angles, perfect black, infinite contrast, zero backlight bleed (no backlight) and you essentially have the perfect display.
But they have to cross the longevity and mass production hurdles. Still years away. Still need to find a decent LCD to hold you over.
As I understand it, the blue component of the diodes is the weak point. But they will overcome.
SED for monitors is unlikely, canon targets the TV market.. BUT a Sony spinoff is preparing professional FED (same as SED, only different emitters) video monitors for 2009.
The 19'' prototype supports 240fps. ^___^
http://www.fe-tech.co.jp/
The 19'' prototype supports 240fps. ^___^
http://www.fe-tech.co.jp/
I remember this being their weak point more than white. I forgot why, too. I can't wait for this technology to mature.
SED is a flat panel CRT. Instead of one big electron gun in the back you have a bunchaton of little ones each illuminating a small section of the screen. This lets the phospors be zapped often enough to avoid any sort of flicker while still allowing the sort of true blacks that are impossible with any sort of backlit display.
SED was always running late until it fell apart with a cash grab by the patent holders. Now Canon is trying to work around the patents. Don't hold your breath.
OLED blue problems have been overcome by several companies, so all someone has to do, is licence the tech.
We will see OLED long before SED/FED. But for computer monitors, I wouldn't expect OLED before 2011.
OLED blue problems have been overcome by several companies, so all someone has to do, is licence the tech.
We will see OLED long before SED/FED. But for computer monitors, I wouldn't expect OLED before 2011.
Interesting news about FED. I knew something was coming, but not when. Sony isn't a company to allow silly patents to get in its way either. I'll gladly wait for one of those FED screens 
The issue with OLED is not so much with longevity anymore. The blue component now lasts longer than the backlight in your TFT screen. The prime issue at this point is simply scaling. The displays just can't be made big enough. That's why the OLED TV Sony is selling at this point is of such a small size. Believe me, if they could churn out OLED displays at 20" and up at reasonable costs, they'd have flooded the market with them by now. But alas, it is still too difficult and expensive to scale OLEDs to these sizes.
The issue with OLED is not so much with longevity anymore. The blue component now lasts longer than the backlight in your TFT screen. The prime issue at this point is simply scaling. The displays just can't be made big enough. That's why the OLED TV Sony is selling at this point is of such a small size. Believe me, if they could churn out OLED displays at 20" and up at reasonable costs, they'd have flooded the market with them by now. But alas, it is still too difficult and expensive to scale OLEDs to these sizes.
Thats just normal ramp up. OLED should eventually be the least expensive technology. It is essentially laid down by a modified ink jet printer head. Doesn't need back lights or polarizers. It is all in the OLED goop. Nothing here is quite the Voodoo that SED/FED is.
But everything takes time to work out production issues and a few generations to get costs down.
But everything takes time to work out production issues and a few generations to get costs down.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Laser TV will be our salvation !
Its already a projection system so can also be used to make projectors too
It looks like the first TVs are going to be pretty big so they wont translate to the desktop for a while.
Still, they look to be awesome!
This video about Laser TV sums it up pretty well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS6wsJRGqnQ
Last I heard they will debut around December.
Its already a projection system so can also be used to make projectors too
It looks like the first TVs are going to be pretty big so they wont translate to the desktop for a while.
Still, they look to be awesome!
This video about Laser TV sums it up pretty well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS6wsJRGqnQ
Last I heard they will debut around December.
Sadly, SED will probably never make it to market. It's been tied up in litigation, so the window of opportunity has pretty much closed for it. OLED is the most likely successor to LCD.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Not true, watch the video
What is not true? I did watch the video, they make it pretty clear Laser TV is a projector tech (what else could it be?). I know it is cool that it has Fricken Lasers and all, but in the end this is still a DLP chip that produces the image. They have had LED DLP for years and this is essentially identical, replacing the LEDs with Lasers, the fundamentals of projectors remain the same. The projector market is dying and this won't save it.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Yes, it has 3 lasers.
Given that it is called a Laser TV, I find this quite sensible.
Lasers can produce a fuller spectrum than current LEDs, flourescents and CRT tubes so it isnt old tech that is already available, it is a new type of TV and projector that has the widest colour gamut of them all.
As a TV it is a back projector but not like todays behemoths, these are very thin and much lighter.
They have tested displaying huge images with the laser emitters only cm's from the screen.
When you buy a TV you wont ask for a projector, you will ask for a laser TV, It has nothing to do with the projection market as a TV.
Onto the projector systems...
The projector market has low sales due to high initial cost for 1080p, image quality problems, low reliability and the ridiculous price of bulbs.
I can see the cost staying high to get some development money back but since the image quality will be first class, dont need new bulbs and they are extraordinarily reliable, I can see a resurgence.
Imagine a projector that always looks as good as new and never needs a bulb change!
As a full on projector, you couldnt ask for better, a small low power unit capable of giving the best image quality possible.
What will limit the resolution wont be the size of dots on a screen but how finely they focus the laser and how finely they make the laser move, the sky is almost the limit
It can reach incredible resolutions and incredible sizes with incredible quality.
Literally the holy grail !!
You get what you want, I'm having one of these.
Given that it is called a Laser TV, I find this quite sensible.
Lasers can produce a fuller spectrum than current LEDs, flourescents and CRT tubes so it isnt old tech that is already available, it is a new type of TV and projector that has the widest colour gamut of them all.
As a TV it is a back projector but not like todays behemoths, these are very thin and much lighter.
They have tested displaying huge images with the laser emitters only cm's from the screen.
When you buy a TV you wont ask for a projector, you will ask for a laser TV, It has nothing to do with the projection market as a TV.
Onto the projector systems...
The projector market has low sales due to high initial cost for 1080p, image quality problems, low reliability and the ridiculous price of bulbs.
I can see the cost staying high to get some development money back but since the image quality will be first class, dont need new bulbs and they are extraordinarily reliable, I can see a resurgence.
Imagine a projector that always looks as good as new and never needs a bulb change!
As a full on projector, you couldnt ask for better, a small low power unit capable of giving the best image quality possible.
What will limit the resolution wont be the size of dots on a screen but how finely they focus the laser and how finely they make the laser move, the sky is almost the limit
It can reach incredible resolutions and incredible sizes with incredible quality.
Literally the holy grail !!
You get what you want, I'm having one of these.
projector that has the widest colour gamut of them all.
Imagine a projector that always looks as good as new and never needs a bulb change!
As a full on projector, you couldnt ask for better, a small low power unit capable of giving the best image quality possible.
What will limit the resolution wont be the size of dots on a screen but how finely they focus the laser and how finely they make the laser move, the sky is almost the limit
It can reach incredible resolutions and incredible sizes with incredible quality.
Literally the holy grail !!
Uh Yeah,Are you sure 2 exclamation marks are enough? Everything you say laser brings (well reality based stuff anyway) is already here in LED/DLP and you don't have to pay the premium price anymore.
Laser is not doing the focusing. Laser light shining on DLP chip, focused by conventional lenses. Which in the end will have the same issues of traditional projection TVs. Sure you won't have to change a bulb. But the Lasers are still expensive and the premium will be more than a lifetime of bulb changes.
Like I mentioned before. Everything Laser offers has been done with LED DLP. Same exact thing. It didn't generate any sales boom. The only additional thing Laser has going for it "Laser" can be used in the marketing campaign. Oh also note the wider gamut nonsense in this LED/DLP review. In reality wider gamut is useless. Also note screen uniformity issues that plague rear projectors.
http://www.hometheatermag.com/rearprojectiontvs/807sam5687/
Go ahead an wait for Laser to offer something that you could have had 2 years ago in LED, or today in LED for much cheaper.
Either way. This is rear projection DLP TV, not a computer monitor. I have zero interest in a rear projector and seriously doubt sticking "Laser" on the box will save it.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
If you have zero interest in it then why are you trying so hard to discredit it.
You buy what you want, I'll pass on information to those that are interested in it.
Most of the information you have supplied is invalid or doesnt apply.
You are only interested in how things are not how they will be.
Have you seen HDR? It saturates the current 8 bits per colour displays because they do not have the extended colour range to handle it.
A laser not only produces a (much) wider colour gamut but can also produce as many shades per colour as there are bits in any DAC with excellent linearity.
The future is a wider colour gamut and extended colour range to use it and laser is the best solution for both.
Add to that there is extremely low latency and lag, you do have the holy grail
!!!!
You buy what you want, I'll pass on information to those that are interested in it.
Most of the information you have supplied is invalid or doesnt apply.
You are only interested in how things are not how they will be.
Have you seen HDR? It saturates the current 8 bits per colour displays because they do not have the extended colour range to handle it.
A laser not only produces a (much) wider colour gamut but can also produce as many shades per colour as there are bits in any DAC with excellent linearity.
The future is a wider colour gamut and extended colour range to use it and laser is the best solution for both.
Add to that there is extremely low latency and lag, you do have the holy grail
!!!!
Rear-projection displays are nearing the end of their life-cycle. Sony has already announced they will be exiting the market, and it's only a matter of time before Samsung and JVC do the same. Don't get me wrong, I love RP displays (I own an SXRD and an older CRT RPTV). But, the market is moving away from RP toward flat panels exclusively. Go to any major retailer, and you'll notice that the flat displays outnumber the RP displays by a wide margin.
I am not discrediting it, just deflating your ridiculous and overinflated hype that invaded a thread about flat panel tech. This is clearly not flat panel tech, so why are you hyping it here?
What is invalid?
1: This is DLP rear projector. This will have all the standard rear projector issues of high screen variance, viewing angle issues. Focus issues...
2: Wide gamut may be the far future, but for today and todays movies, everything is geared for sRGB and wide gamut just produces incorrect colors.
3: LED-DLP already does everything you are ranting about. It replaces the color wheel, it eliminates the bulb, and, if you really want that, it is wide gamut. Oh and you can buy one today. I am sure it is nice rear projection TV if that is what you are looking for. Just like I am sure the "Laser" DLP will be a similar nice rear projection TV. Properly set up, displaying accurate colors you won't be able to tell a Laser DLP from LED DLP.
Swapping out the Red,Green,Blue LED pack for a Laser Red,Green,Blue set isn't going to change very much. Lasers aren't magic, it is just a Frickin' light source in this case.
What magical properties do you think lasers have over LEDs as a light source that will magically remake rear projectors. Wider gamut is a farce. LEDs have already produced very wide gamuts, it is not really an advantage and even if it was, a small increase in gamut beyond LEDs would be insignificant. What else?
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Quite simply you are wrong and plainly argumentative for no good reason..
I've given enough info for those that are interested to research more themselves.
You can stay in the dark ages if you want, no skin off my nose.
I've given enough info for those that are interested to research more themselves.
You can stay in the dark ages if you want, no skin off my nose.
Laser based displays could potentially make their way into the computer display market. The video (and wiki article) claims that displays will be equivalent in cost and thickness to current LCD/Plasma displays. I am not sure if a plasma panel exists that is targeted specifically as a computer display, but LCD panels currently dominate the computer display market and have a considerable portion of the television market. I could potentially see laser-based displays offered if the manufacturing costs could be dropped enough to make the technology competitive (specifically against OLED). From everything I have read, laser displays will have near perfect black levels, near zero latency, potential for very high resolutions and very wide color gamuts (I know that this is not universally considered a benefit). Couple that with claimed 25% power usage compared to todays LCD and Plasma televisions and zero degradation of picture quality over the life of the unit and it makes a compelling argument that it could be a viable competitor in the computer display market as well as television market. The technology may be the most appealing for very large displays. It will be interesting to see how this technology stacks up against OLED, which I think has a tremendous amount of potential to dominate the market the way LCD technology does today. I could not find information that discussed whether OLED displays diminish over their lifetime, but I would suspect that they do, so this may be one significant benefit of the laser technology. Personally, I have a hard time imagining that OLED will not be the future now though based on the research I have done. It is just attractive as a technology on so many levels and has way more potential for product placement in the market. I always love competition though, it is great for me (the consumer).
Unlike your "Laser TV rules!!!!" nonsense I have been clear and concise and describing actual facts. Please point out which issue you think I am wrong on. I am relating facts, It should be easy to show where they are wrong.
If you want to keep saying I am wrong, show some examples of this wrongness. I have no problem being wrong, I just need more than fanboy hype to convince me. They were conveniently numbered 1,2,3 above, so it should be easy to correct.
You have completely and totally failed to describe any factual way in which laser DLP tvs are better than LED-DLP tvs. They essentially have the same capabilities. You can buy one today if that is what you want.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
To answer post #31
1) DLP has its issues and Laser TV addresses many of those including light uniformity, blurring and viewing angle.
I mentioned a few of laser TVs advantages earlier, here are some more.
a) Laser TVs do away with the DLP colour wheel and therefore dont suffer from the "rainbow effect" and "screen door effect".
b) DLP projectors remove much of the screen door effect by blurring the image slightly.A laser projector can have a much sharper image without such screen aberrations.
c) The light stream is continuous so is brighter while using less power and gives a smoother image.
d) There are no separating lines in between each pixel so each pixel occupies a larger area and doesnt waste the light as heat. This gives a brighter and more continuous image, more akin to a photograph.
e) There is a laser for each colour so there is no loss of light from light filters. Just this one feature increases light efficiency threefold over LCD and current DLP type projection systems.
f) Due to much higher light efficiency + lasers can be made as powerful as required, high efficiency back projection screens are no longer required. This means screens can be used that dont suffer from viewing angle problems.
This also allows the use of screens that have good light uniformity too.
g) The lasers are easily calibrated to use more power (give more light) nearer the screen edges without impacting any other part of the display so light uniformity is not the issue it is with other projection systems.
2) Wider Gamut displays are Desperately needed as Blu Ray movies can and do make use of the technology already, it is called "deep colour".
a) The HDMI 1.3 spec already includes support for deep colour (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1975596,00.asp)
There is nothing holding back the use of wider gamut lighting and extended colour bit ranges except the display manufacturers.
b) Deep colour uses 12 bits per colour so requires a higher gamut backlight to generate new colour shades allowing 4096 grades per colour vs the current 256.
This translates to a 68 billion colour palette !
c) Such a large palette requires as large a colour gamut as possible and the technology with the widest gamut is the laser and will therefore look the best.
3) LEDs do not have as wide a colour gamut as laser, they are less efficient, generate more heat, arent as reliable and there will be far more variance in light uniformity as a single light source isnt used.
It has already been demonstrated that laser TV looks better than any other TV technology, I will get you some confirmation of this if you need it.
The above is pretty damning evidence that Laser is the best display technology and thats only part of the story.
Theres more if you need it
edit: fixed typo
1) DLP has its issues and Laser TV addresses many of those including light uniformity, blurring and viewing angle.
I mentioned a few of laser TVs advantages earlier, here are some more.
a) Laser TVs do away with the DLP colour wheel and therefore dont suffer from the "rainbow effect" and "screen door effect".
b) DLP projectors remove much of the screen door effect by blurring the image slightly.A laser projector can have a much sharper image without such screen aberrations.
c) The light stream is continuous so is brighter while using less power and gives a smoother image.
d) There are no separating lines in between each pixel so each pixel occupies a larger area and doesnt waste the light as heat. This gives a brighter and more continuous image, more akin to a photograph.
e) There is a laser for each colour so there is no loss of light from light filters. Just this one feature increases light efficiency threefold over LCD and current DLP type projection systems.
f) Due to much higher light efficiency + lasers can be made as powerful as required, high efficiency back projection screens are no longer required. This means screens can be used that dont suffer from viewing angle problems.
This also allows the use of screens that have good light uniformity too.
g) The lasers are easily calibrated to use more power (give more light) nearer the screen edges without impacting any other part of the display so light uniformity is not the issue it is with other projection systems.
2) Wider Gamut displays are Desperately needed as Blu Ray movies can and do make use of the technology already, it is called "deep colour".
a) The HDMI 1.3 spec already includes support for deep colour (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1975596,00.asp)
There is nothing holding back the use of wider gamut lighting and extended colour bit ranges except the display manufacturers.
b) Deep colour uses 12 bits per colour so requires a higher gamut backlight to generate new colour shades allowing 4096 grades per colour vs the current 256.
This translates to a 68 billion colour palette !
c) Such a large palette requires as large a colour gamut as possible and the technology with the widest gamut is the laser and will therefore look the best.
3) LEDs do not have as wide a colour gamut as laser, they are less efficient, generate more heat, arent as reliable and there will be far more variance in light uniformity as a single light source isnt used.
It has already been demonstrated that laser TV looks better than any other TV technology, I will get you some confirmation of this if you need it.
The above is pretty damning evidence that Laser is the best display technology and thats only part of the story.
Theres more if you need it
edit: fixed typo
SanitysEdge
n00b
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2005
- Messages
- 8
My cell phone (LG VX8300) has a little OLED ~1 inch diag 96x96 pixel display on it. It looks incredibly grainy and suffers from burn in however the viewing angles on it, as far as I can see, are nearly perfect. Nearly perfect because the light grays look a little like cyan when looking face on but if you tilt it to the side it looks fine, but the effect is barely noticeable and may be a byproduct of burn in. Also, when the glare on it is just right the unlit pixels (or the entire screen when its off) reflect a deep shade of purple. The VX8300 was developed around mid 2006 I think, so they have had some time to develop the technology more, it may be better now.
Laser is DLP. Picture uniformity, blurring and viewing angle are not affected by the lightsource. They are inherent rear projection issues.
LED also removes the color wheel and rainbow effect. SDE is a different issue and is related to the pixel structure of the DLP chip, neither light source has any effect on that.
Already repeating? SDE has nothing to do with light source, it isn't reduced by "blurring". A lot of current sets use Wobulation chipset that shifts the a half resolution chip pixel into double duty with overlap. That smooths the image. Non wobulated sets have very sharp and distinct pixels. Changing the light source will not effect this.
That is just nonsense. The light is not continuous for either LED, nor Laser. It is pulsed rapidly, this is why you can replace the color wheel. You conclusion about this somehow resulting in a smoother image makes no sense at all.
Another complete nonsense statement. The lines between pixels depends on the DLP chip fill factor and whether it is wobulated or not. Light source will have no effect.
Again. I was comparing to LED DLP which does exactly the same thing.
Dubious. First a rear projector is an odd technology requiring a screen to display what is hitting from behind. It is a compromise of transmittance and providing a surface to focus on. I suspect there will always be viewing angle issues as there clearly are in Mitsubishi's demos:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=19&entry_id=23268
WTF? Where do you get this stuff? It seems like your are picturing a bunch of tiny lasers aimed at the screen. It is a light source that gets pushed through a bunch of focusing lenses and bounces off a DLP chip before it hits the screen. The light source won't be calibrated to be brighter on the edges.
Ugh. So many mistakes.
First: bit depth has NOTHING to do with color gamut.
Second: Blu Ray spec is not in wide color gamut but standard ATSC color space and at essentially 8 bit depth. Deep color is just about meaningless without a "Deep color" source and Blu ray is Not, and frankly nothing else is either.
You have no wide gamut source, your have no higher than 8 bit depth source, so these technologies in a display are currently USELESS. Actually wide gamut is quite detrimental unless they provide a standard gamut setting. Remember this quote from an LED TV review a few posts back. If you like wacky distorted oversaturated colors, laser may be you. But check out one of the LED sets and put it on "Wide" color mode, you may find it has enough oversaturation for your taste.
The above is pretty damning evidence that Laser is the best display technology and thats only part of the story.
Theres more if you need it
The above makes it pretty clear you have barely any idea about: how DLP sets work, Blu Ray specification, color gamut/depth issues.
Out of all of this emerges that Laser may have a slightly wider gamut than LED, which is already wider than necessary, so that is a dubious advantage at best. Everything else that Laser does, LED already does and third generation LED sets are available for affordable prices. If lasers are such a high powered and bright solution, wake me when they have front projectors.
I look forward to some reviews when this tech eventually ships, but I would not expect anything more than an incremental improvement on LED-DLPs. This will not be in computer monitors and is not a flat panel, hence not really on topic. Why don't you just start another thread praising laser TVs.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Theres so much wrong with what you have posted, I despair.
Have it your way
This Blu Ray player might persuade you of some of it.
https://www.avwow.com/p/panasonic-blu-ray-disc-player-1080p-24p-output-dmp-bd30eg-k/
"The DMP-BD30 is also compatible with HDMI V.1.3 /Deep Colour function for superbly smooth gradation and 4,096-step gradation"
Have it your way
This Blu Ray player might persuade you of some of it.
https://www.avwow.com/p/panasonic-blu-ray-disc-player-1080p-24p-output-dmp-bd30eg-k/
"The DMP-BD30 is also compatible with HDMI V.1.3 /Deep Colour function for superbly smooth gradation and 4,096-step gradation"