Why OLED for PC use?

MistaSparkul said:
You gotta be kidding me. The guy who hates OLED with a passion....actually has the Alienware QD-OLED himself? wtf lol.
Click to expand...
Funny It's never about me. It's more about you stuck in a limited range with OLED. The AW still has its usage when it needs to be compared to the next 34" minLED.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gabe3
like this
kramnelis said:
You talk like you have only one room lol. Don't forget it's you stuck inside a cave with a 150nits OLED.
Click to expand...
After saying that you live in your mom's basement, and then asking if the room you're in is similar to a padded cell in a psychiatric hospital, you come back at me with this?
I am in shock. I am shattered. I am completely broken. Will I ever recover? Incredibly doubtful.
 
AwesomeOwl said:
After saying that you live in your mom's basement, and then asking if the room you're in is similar to a padded cell in a psychiatric hospital, you come back at me with this?
I am in shock. I am shattered. I am completely broken. Will I ever recover? Incredibly doubtful.
Click to expand...
You better keep pretending that you don't have OLED, you don't have a room, you are outside staring at the sun lol.
 
kramnelis said:
Funny It's never about me. It's more about you stuck in a limited range with OLED. The AW still has its usage when it needs to be compared to the next 34" minLED.
Click to expand...

I think you're mixing me up with the dozens of other people in this thread. I have a 32M2V so how am I stuck on limited range with OLED? lol
Whether it's a game with great native HDR support like Hogwart's Legacy or a great AutoHDR game like Lost Judgment, I am most certainly not stuck on OLED's limited range :ROFLMAO:
 

Attachments

  • 20230226_142857.jpg
    20230226_142857.jpg
    493.3 KB · Views: 0
  • 20230224_214638.jpg
    20230224_214638.jpg
    588.5 KB · Views: 0
kramnelis said:
Don't forget you envy OLED.
Click to expand...
I envy self-emissive. I'd prefer Micro LED and I've decided to wait for it or similar before moving on. OLED isn't for me.

Other than that, the rest of us in this thread can only apologise that we don't live up to your strange exacting standards and opinions on display technology.
 
MistaSparkul said:
I think you're mixing me up with the dozens of other people in this thread. I have a 32M2V so how am I stuck on limited range with OLED? lol
Click to expand...
You use 32M2v to see similar not if worse images than PG32UQX you could've seen 3 years ago. You stuck with OLED for 3 years to see worse images in the past.
 
kramnelis said:
The AW still has its usage when it needs to be compared to the next 34" minLED.
Click to expand...
I'm going to take this as you have an OLED purely so that you can sit there and compare it to other screens on your desk, form a twisted extreme opinion, then enjoy attacking people on the internet about it.
 
Senn said:
I envy self-emissive. I'd prefer Micro LED and I've decided to wait for it or similar before moving on. OLED isn't for me.

Other than that, the rest of us in this thread can only apologise that we don't live up to your strange exacting standards and opinions on display technology.
Click to expand...
Then you can wait for a decade.

Opinions doesn't matter. It won't have an impact on how the display technology goes.

Senn said:
I'm going to take this as you have an OLED purely so that you can sit there and compare it to other screens on your desk, form a twisted extreme opinion, then enjoy attacking people on the internet about it.
Click to expand...
It's never a twisted extreme opinion. It's a fact nobody can withstand a mere 200nits flickering OLED in a dim room. Try it if you can. You will have eyestrain easily. OLED flickers cannot be fixed. It' the OLED has worse range in HDR so it still cannot be a true HDR1000 monitor.
These won't make OLED suit for PC unless you have special needs.
 
Senn said:
Fine by me, nothing wrong with what I have.

Says the one spouting opinion for several pages of a thread.

I can think of someone not too far away who may have some special needs.
Click to expand...
People buy monitors to see better images. Eyes can see a lot more range. The better the range the better the images are. This is not special needs like you drawing CAD.
 
kramnelis said:
People buy monitors to see better images.
Click to expand...
Most monitor sales are from people wanting to get their work done.

kramnelis said:
Eyes can see a lot more range.
Click to expand...
True.

kramnelis said:
The better the range the better the images are.
Click to expand...
Only if the image was intended to be viewed in that range.

kramnelis said:
This is not special needs like you drawing CAD.
Click to expand...
It's not a special need at all. I just didn't want a screen that can burn in.
 
Senn said:
Most monitor sales are from people wanting to get their work done.
Click to expand...
It's simple to get the job done. You can use the cheapest office monitor to go through a movie. It gets the job done. It doesn't get the job done better.
Senn said:
Only if the image was intended to be viewed in that range.
Click to expand...
Just because most images have to comply with sRGB doesn't mean they are better images. They are only indented in a compromised way in so limited range. Games definitely don't look good in just sRGB. Eyes like high-range images just like eyes like high refresh rates.

With a more capable monitor you can make the image look better at a higher range, you can still see sRGB if you want. But with a worse monitor like OLED, you don't have the option to see a higher range. You get HDR dimmer than SDR instead.
 
kramnelis said:
It's simple to get the job done. You can use the cheapest office monitor to go through a movie. It gets the job done. It doesn't get the job done better.
Click to expand...
I'm talking about work done by people, not watching a movie on a monitor and describing it as the monitor's job. Stop strawmanning, jeez.

kramnelis said:
Just because most images have to comply with sRGB doesn't mean they are better images. They are only indented in a compromised way in so limited range. Games definitely don't look good in just sRGB. Eyes like high-range images just like eyes like high refresh rates.
Click to expand...
Someone earlier mentioned the concept of skin tones being completely off if you stretch sRGB out to a wider gamut. I'd rather have what you consider "not good enough" than that.

Fake range isn't better. It's putting lipstick on a pig.

kramnelis said:
With a more capable monitor you can make the image look better at a higher range
Click to expand...
Subjective opinion. This is in no way objective technical fact.
 
Senn said:
I'm talking about work done by people, not watching a movie on a monitor and describing it as the monitor's job. Stop strawmanning, jeez.

Someone earlier mentioned the concept of skin tones being completely off if you stretch sRGB out to a wider gamut. I'd rather have what you consider "not good enough" than that.

Fake range isn't better. It's putting lipstick on a pig.

Subjective opinion. This is in no way objective technical fact.
Click to expand...
Only the good HDR monitor has the ability to extend range properly.

If sRGB looks like pig. You'd rather put lipstick on it.

It's all the reason why OLED is so limited to display sRGB without any other better options.
 
kramnelis said:
Only the good HDR monitor has the ability to extend range properly.
Click to expand...
I don't want to extend the range. I only want to see heightened range if the original source is HDR, which I do almost every day.

kramnelis said:
If sRGB looks like pig. You'd rather put lipstick on it.
Click to expand...
Nope, not me. sRGB is just fine viewed in the range it should be.

kramnelis said:
It's all the reason why OLED is so limited to display sRGB without any other better options.
Click to expand...
Then use something else, sell any OLED you have and stop attacking the choice of others.
 
Senn said:
I don't want to extend the range. I only want to see heightened range if the original source is HDR, which I do almost every day.


Nope, not me. sRGB is just fine viewed in the range it should be.


Then use something else, sell any OLED you have and stop attacking the choice of others.
Click to expand...
I don't know pig images looks fine to you. It's your choice to see limited range anyway if you want to get stuck in limited sRGB that looks like pig as your described.

But it's never about preference in terms of display tech. There are better images and these are not sRGB. And you need a better monitor to display higher range. You won't be able to do it on OLED.
 
kramnelis said:
I don't know pig images looks fine to you. It's your choice to see limited range anyway if you want to get stuck in limited sRGB that looks like pig as your described.
Click to expand...
What's so wrong about viewing sRGB images in actual sRGB instead of fake oversaturated crap? You make no sense.

kramnelis said:
But it's never about preference in terms of display tech. There are better images and these are not sRGB. And you need a better monitor to display higher range. You won't be able to do it on OLED.
Click to expand...
What people buy, especially those on this forum, is determined by preference. Some prefer OLED, others hate it with such passion they become idiots on this forum.

Is there "better" than sRGB? Yes.
Is sRGB artificially stretched out to wide gamut and luminance "better"? No it isn't.

Forcing that opinion onto others that it is, while trying to claim it's undeniable fact, is pure idiocy.
 
Senn said:
What's so wrong about viewing sRGB images in actual sRGB instead of fake oversaturated crap? You make no sense.
Click to expand...
Why don't you just buy a cheap office monitor to view sRGB? The image will look the same since office monitors can have very accurate sRGB as well.

People buy more capable monitors at a higher range so they can have a choice to transform content into HDR levels. If you buy an OLED then you don't have a choice. Most people don't even watch accurate sRGB but they prefer vivid images instead. High-range images always look better to the eyes than low-range images. This is how our eyes work. This is why HDR exists. This is also why all monitors try to get more contrast and color in the first place.

Senn said:
What people buy, especially those on this forum, is determined by preference. Some prefer OLED, others hate it with such passion they become idiots on this forum.

Is there "better" than sRGB? Yes.
Is sRGB artificially stretched out to wide gamut and luminance "better"? No it isn't.

Forcing that opinion onto others that it is, while trying to claim it's undeniable fact, is pure idiocy.
Click to expand...
This is not an opinion. You choose whatever you like. But a better monitor with more range can make you see better. OLED is not a better monitor. You just need to check how the market goes. People will choose the FALD monitor with more range. It's you going to be idiots believing OLED will be popular.
 
Last edited:
kramnelis said:
People buy more capable monitors at a higher range so they can have a choice to transform content into HDR levels.
Click to expand...
People buy more capable monitors to view HDR content in HDR, not simply to stretch sRGB beyond what it should be.

kramnelis said:
If you buy an OLED then you don't have a choice.
Click to expand...
...which I'm not going to do. As I keep saying.

kramnelis said:
This is not an opinion.
Click to expand...
The idea that stretching sRGB out to something it shouldn't be is better... is opinion.
There is no objective fact that says doing this is better.
If you think it's better, great! Don't try to ram it down everyone else's throat that this is what should be done.
You're no better than a religious preacher with this stuff and it's damn weird.
 
Senn said:
People buy more capable monitors to view HDR content in HDR, not simply to stretch sRGB beyond what it should be.
Click to expand...
Talking like this only reveals that you don't know how people use monitors. Many people like to stretch sRGB a little bit. They don't see accurate sRGB. It's look dull and lifeless anyway. Instead they prefer HDR and want to see as much HDR as possible.
Senn said:
The idea that stretching sRGB out to something it shouldn't be is better... is opinion.

There is no objective fact that says doing this is better.
If you think it's better, great! Don't try to ram it down everyone else's throat that this is what should be done.
You're no better than a religious preacher with this stuff and it's damn weird.
Click to expand...
It's more like this is your opinion instead lol.

I already said high range images can easily look better to the eyes. It's very simple. Funny there is even Windows AutoHDR to stretch SDR into HDR. And only good HDR monitors can have good results with AutoHDR.

This is not what should be done. This is what is already done. You deny these simple truths you don't understand you will never have a chance to see better.
 
kramnelis said:
Instead they prefer HDR and want to see as much HDR as possible.
Click to expand...
It isn't HDR. Artificial stretching is never real HDR from a true HDR source. It's faked. There's a technical fact for you.

kramnelis said:
It's more like this is your opinion instead lol.
Click to expand...
You're right, it is! You're finally getting it. I prefer not to stretch colour spaces, you want to stretch them.

OPINIONS.

Now please stop saying everyone else's opinion is so wrong.

You go and do what you want. I'm not going to force my way on you like you try on everyone else.

kramnelis said:
You deny these simple truths you don't understand
Click to expand...
Definitely sounding religious now.
 
Senn said:
It isn't HDR. Artificial stretching is never real HDR from a true HDR source. It's faked. There's a technical fact for you.

You're right, it is! You're finally getting it. I prefer not to stretch colour spaces, you want to stretch them.

OPINIONS.

Now please stop saying everyone else's opinion is so wrong.

You go and do what you want. I'm not going to force my way on you like you try on everyone else.

Definitely sounding religious now.
Click to expand...
Funny the technical fact is all the color are codes. When you stretch it there will be more colors. sRGB is just a compromised intention compared to high range HDR. With a better monitor you can have the option to see better range compared to having an OLED with no option at all.

You never get it. You have never seen better. It's you go and do whatever you please. There are always better images out there lol.
 
kramnelis said:
Funny the technical fact is all the color are codes. When you stretch it there will be more colors. sRGB is just a compromised intention compared to high range HDR. With a better monitor you can have the option to see better range compared to having an OLED with no option at all.

You never get it. You have never seen better. It's you go and do whatever you please. There are always better images out there lol.
Click to expand...
...lol, k.
 
Senn said:
...lol, k.
Click to expand...

Better show me what you got. You got nothing to show. You deny these simple truth in the first place lol.

Eyes like high range as it can be more realistic. sRGB is only a compromised intention compared to realistic range of HDR. Funny a limited range can only look more fake than extended range. Only high range image can reach realism. This is what all the the monitors try to do.
 
kramnelis said:
Better show me what you got. You got nothing to show. You deny these simple truth in the first place lol.

Eyes like high range as it can be more realistic. sRGB is only a compromised intention compared to realistic range of HDR. Funny a limited range can only look more fake than extended range. Only high range image can reach realism. This is what all the the monitors try to do.
Click to expand...
If I or anyone else says or shows anything (which has already happened countless times on this thread), whether it's objective evidence or subjective opinion, you'll deny it, say your way is "better", scream that no one "understands" and start the whole cyclic strawman arguing from the beginning. I've never seen someone repeat the same pointless unimportant nonsense on a forum in my life.
 
Senn said:
If I or anyone else says or shows anything (which has already happened countless times on this thread), whether it's objective evidence or subjective opinion, you'll deny it, say your way is "better", scream that no one "understands" and start the whole cyclic strawman arguing from the beginning. I've never seen someone repeat the same pointless unimportant nonsense on a forum in my life.
Click to expand...

He reminds me of someone on this very forum who was adamant that CRT was the best display tech and everything else is trash whether its LCD/OLED/etc. and if you used anything other than CRT you aren't "seeing better images" because everything would just be a blurry mess and not CRT clear. Boy would I love to see those two go at it lol.
 
kramnelis said:
Many people like to stretch sRGB a little bit. They don't see accurate sRGB. It's look dull and lifeless anyway. Instead they prefer HDR and want to see as much HDR as possible.
Click to expand...
sRGB displayed in the wrong color space is not HDR. It's simply displaying the content with incorrect colors. If you like people's skin to look like it suffers from a sunburn, then maybe you would prefer it. I prefer not to see artificial sunburns, and I don't understand why you're arguing against this obvious point that sRGB should be displayed in its correct gamut. If distorted colors look better to you for some peculiar reason, then enjoy, but arguing that this is the way to look at this content is ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Senn
like this
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top