Soria Moria
Senior Member
There are thankfully 480 Hz OLED monitors now however it won't do anything for movies and such sadly.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
The Case Against OLED
- Thread starter luft262
- Start date
Tell
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2024
- Messages
- 147
- Likes
- 193
No that'll take a while.
Though I would be good for us that wants OLED quality but emulated slower pixels for a less stuttery feeling, a 20 frame fade between frames in a 24fps movie would probably give a less stuttery movie experience. And for you the prefer motion blurless you could very much get a CRT feel with 1 frame lit and 19 black, so quite an extreme BFI. Only downside would be a quite dark image.
Ever heard of soap-opera effect?
I have created 4K 60fps footage, using frame interpolation with Ai. it is not pretty!
just play a 4K 60fps you can shoot with a mobile phone on a large screen. It is clean, bright, sharp video, but it also looks like you shot it with a phone or camcorder.
As to new Sony TVs, I have seen the A95 OLED, it is certainly bright! and that was, IMO, OLED shortcomings. Samsung S95 OLED is also bright, and I preferred the picture. For now, I am still happy with my Samsung Q95C. It is very bright and noise free. I like my HDRs not clipping & impactful.
Sure, but I don't think it's quite the same when a TV fakes frames vs real 60fps, I didn't have a problem with 48fps on the hobbit movies.
I'd rather take 4k/60fps vs 8k/24. It's only with VR that I above all want higher resolutions
Tell
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2024
- Messages
- 147
- Likes
- 193
Frame interpolation will almost always look bad, especially when the source framerate is low (They Shall Not Grow Old is a "good" example of this, totally unwatchable imo).
One of the reasons why filming on a phone often looks bad is because of that 180 degree shutter that was discussed a bit further back, mobilphones generally shoot with something closer to a 1 degree shutter, or say 1/2000s in shutterspeed term, ie it don't have any motion blur. So instead film with a shutterspeed of 1/120s or maybe a bit slower and it'll look a bit less phoney bad.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 20,936
- Likes
- 38,030
Yeah, we need that 8k/120 hz format. Then you will get highly detailed views of films made with anamorphic lenses. This to blur everything other than the center to give it that artistic film look. 
Here is a 4K 60fps made using Topaz VAi.
To me and on my screen, the fluidity of the picture is no different to a 24fps original, using TVs own DSP.
Try it for yourselves:
drive.proton.me
Here is another, This one starts off well, but wait till it gets to actors scene, notice the movements.:
drive.proton.me
-----------------
This one is a redux I have done to Kingdom of Heaven. this one is 24fps:
drive.proton.me
To me and on my screen, the fluidity of the picture is no different to a 24fps original, using TVs own DSP.
Try it for yourselves:
Proton Drive
Securely store, share, and access your important files and photos. Anytime, anywhere.
Proton Drive
Securely store, share, and access your important files and photos. Anytime, anywhere.
This one is a redux I have done to Kingdom of Heaven. this one is 24fps:
Proton Drive
Securely store, share, and access your important files and photos. Anytime, anywhere.
Last edited:
Soria Moria
Senior Member
Here's a real movie scene in real non-upscaled 60 fps:
How to Turn Off Motion Smoothing on Your TV
If you're experiencing the soap opera effect on your TV, or if your picture simply doesn't seem to look natural, here's how to disable motion smoothing.
My point exactly! thank you.
To me, it looks as though a Pro has shot this using his camcorder.
Also, I am not sure, if the 60fps wasn't done artificially. It is an advert for minitool.
60fps Gemini Man was never released.
Last edited:
Hehe, this looks so silly.
I mean, I love 60fps for sports and concerts and stuff like that... but films (and tv series) are intrinsically fake, and 24fps (plus crushed blacks or faded colors, etc) helps hide that.
Ditto
My family watches primarily in an open concept living area where there is a lot of light leak. Oled is the best option. I don't exactly agree with your assumptions - but I am glad you shared them 
. Home theaters are less in the moment IMO.
. Home theaters are less in the moment IMO.
please explain.My family watches primarily in an open concept living area where there is a lot of light leak. Oled is the best option. I don't exactly agree with your assumptions - but I am glad you shared them
Yeah, we need that 8k/120 hz format. Then you will get highly detailed views of films made with anamorphic lenses. This to blur everything other than the center to give it that artistic film look.
Completely agree. High res has gotten a bit silly. Do we really need resolutions we cant see or hear in normal environments where they would be experienced?
There are a lot of windows without treatments. Lots of light.
So it is a bright room, right?
If I get you correctly:
- Then the brighter the room, the brighter the screen you need, and very dark scenes, will struggle to display correctly. This is the opposite of what OLEDs are good for.
OLEDs with their pure blacks, and not so bright max. brightness are ideal for dark rooms.
However, the two TVs I mentioned before, the Sony A95 and the Samsung S95 are both OLEDs and can hit over 1000 nits!
They are getting better and better at it, but as yet, QLEDs have the upper hand on max. brightness. Their blacks and blooming, is not as good as OLEDs, but for bright rooms ......
Glad to see the mini-led panels beginning to get some well deserved respect.
I've avoided OLED's for my last few sets mainly due to their continued problems with possible burn-in.
If the claims in this video are accurate, in many ways the mini-led panels are now becoming the set to own. In
Sonys lineup the new model 9 is positioned as their TOTL set.
Personally I've been in love with my Samsung QN85QN90B mini-led set since I got it a year ago.
It's black levels are inky black and it's brightness level incredible, fully adequate for bright room viewing of HDR material.
I only have 2 items which I don't find at SOTA levels, it's problem with blooming, and the anti-reflection
screen coating (which was ditched on the 2023 90C models.
I'll make a outside guess that within the next couple years mini-led designs will surpass OLED as the SOTA panel
designs of most manufacturers.
YMMV
Is this thread/discussion about TVs or PC-Monitors?
Each of these types of display panels used to serve different purposes; until HDMI managed to bridge that chasm.
In the case of OLED PC-monitors; there are a few different use-cases, at the "high end": One serves the gamers' fps appetite... Another use-case has become for the consumption of HD video content.
[I don't think the bitcoin-miners and AI-integrators care as much about their PC-monitors, as they may for their "high end" GPUs and CPUs.]
Do these new class of OLED PC-monitors take care of video rendering/upscaling (w/dedicated processors)?
Or
Do the streamers (OLED@4K+) rely on the built-in graphics of their CPU or are they using a dedicated add-on GPU card?
And what about the problem with burn-in, which may affect an OLED PC-monitor more readily than an OLED TV?
Each of these types of display panels used to serve different purposes; until HDMI managed to bridge that chasm.
In the case of OLED PC-monitors; there are a few different use-cases, at the "high end": One serves the gamers' fps appetite... Another use-case has become for the consumption of HD video content.
[I don't think the bitcoin-miners and AI-integrators care as much about their PC-monitors, as they may for their "high end" GPUs and CPUs.]
Do these new class of OLED PC-monitors take care of video rendering/upscaling (w/dedicated processors)?
Or
Do the streamers (OLED@4K+) rely on the built-in graphics of their CPU or are they using a dedicated add-on GPU card?
And what about the problem with burn-in, which may affect an OLED PC-monitor more readily than an OLED TV?
Is this thread/discussion about TVs or PC-Monitors?
Each of these types of display panels used to serve different purposes; until HDMI managed to bridge that chasm.
In the case of OLED PC-monitors; there are a few different use-cases, at the "high end": One serves the gamers' fps appetite... Another use-case has become for the consumption of HD video content.
[I don't think the bitcoin-miners and AI-integrators care as much about their PC-monitors, as they may for their "high end" GPUs and CPUs.]
Do these new class of OLED PC-monitors take care of video rendering/upscaling (w/dedicated processors)?
Or
Do the streamers (OLED@4K+) rely on the built-in graphics of their CPU or are they using a dedicated add-on GPU card?
And what about the problem with burn-in, which may affect an OLED PC-monitor more readily than an OLED TV?
when it comes to STOA tech, The high end of the market isn't geared toward content consumers, but towards creators.
Eizo ColorEdge CG3146 31" ~$33,000
Sony BVM-HX310 31" ~30,000
Flanders Scientific XMP310 31.5" ~$11,000
Last edited:
