Insta360: Limited to the first 50 purchases until December 30th! Get the best Insta360 X3 deal for a 10% discount, a free invisible selfie stick, and a 128GB SD card at bit.ly/TechAltar-Insta360X3
thank you for this video. if you search up how these panels work its hard to actually find good info. all google saysa is "lcds use a backlight" blablabla. i dont know what that means. but here you show exactly how these monitors work
True. And yet people think this products are expensive. But when we look at the making of this, we realise that they are priced less wrt cost that goes in r&d.
cpus/gpus only need to grow the die on the wafer. they dont have to pick up the dies from the wafer and then move them over to another substrate like in microled displays. plus a cpu only needs 1 die to function. in a microled tv each led is a die. a single 4k tv will require 24 million dies and you cannot have a single defective die or the display will have a dead pixel. Even with a 99.99% yield rate, you will be left with 100s of defective dies for a single tv. @@ivanjermakov
Blue LEDs are used for all Quantum dot displays, because blue has the highest frequency & energy among ( red or green or blue ), so its color can be stepped-down to red or green colors with quantum dots and little or no brightness loss. Also the creation of practical bright blue LEDs is relatively new (~1990) , and not only enabled the reading head for 25GB blu-ray players (previously we only have 4GB DVD pllayers), but also these quantum-dot displays.
@@jatoxo it is in terms of developing cheap mass production techniques. Solar panels are another examples. The main technologies were discovered/invented long time ago, but it took decades for the prices to become affordable
Minor Correction: natural state of an lcd pixel is clear, not dark. With no electric field, the crystals naturally twist the light, allowing light to pass through. With a field on, the crystals line up end to end and stop twisting the light, allowing the polarizer to block the light.
That depends on how you align the polarizors. How many of you flipped the polarisor in your calculator to get a clear on black display ? Some LCD watches are made the same way to make them look a bit different.
Only TN (twisted nematic) LCD that are used for entry level TV/displays are normally open ("on" with no electric field, "off" with), IPS-types and VA-types TFT LCDs that are used in most displays/TVs are normally closed ("off" with no voltage). That's why "dead" pixels tend to be bright on TNs and black on others.
Having spent a career in electronic image processing and display (see PictureTel, Polycom, HP), I find this to be a superb description of the current frontrunner technologies. It taught me several things in the most modern tech I did not know, and does it simply and clearly. Thank you for a very nice job!
Do micro LED displays use glass screens or plastic? One of the reasons I've always loved plasma displays is the glass screens. The optical properties of glass are unmatched.
Same, I only started learning about monitors after I got an OLED phone and it looked better than LCD and I was like hmm why is this a thing Crazy how the only actually good technology (microled) is so insanely expensive
You would think you just need to use typical methods you use for putting components on PCBs... and yeah, it is how they make them but if you consider size of the display. number of LEDs (8.3 million for 4K display! Or 3 times that if you choose to use separate R, G and B LEDs for higher brightness) and that you are directly looking at such PCB where each part glows for better visibility it then makes sense that cost for making such display would be high. Not to mention all the LEDs itself are pretty expensive. What we really need is to have something where each LED can be grown directly on the panel substrate - in this case it will be blue LED and quantum dot filters will be used to make it RGB... and actually it is most probably how it is made with MicroLEDs because even if inorganic LEDs do burn-in slower they are still exhibiting reduction of brightness and different colors experience it differently. You would not want your fancy MicroLED that costs million dollars to get yellow or pink or blueish, etc. over time.
@@xenird MicroLED also has compromises and flaws. It is only perfect when you don't see it. Besides as far as colors are concerned QD-OLED has almost the same colors and is very much like mobile OLEDs but does not have issues with MURA, dirty screen effect and doesn't burn in as much and certainly color doesn't change over time. The only thing MicroLED has over QD-OLED is being able to be super bright.. ...and otherwise you did see MicroLEDs! All these super bright billboards that you always wondered why they are legal when they blind all the drivers are using the same tech - MicroLED just have more tightly packed pixels and typically you don't see any effort to correct gamut of ads on these billboards so colors there look ridiculous and MicroLED TV will have gamut corrected. Otherwise issues you can see on these billboards are the same as MicroLED has - just being indoors tech MicroLED has less issues like these... and if anything technician will come to your mansion and will repair them for you :) Otherwise where it comes to actually good display technologies for home you had Pioneer Kuro plasmas - the TV you if you have today you can expect that people who visit you and see this thing will comment on it and ask you... why the hell does this TV looks so damn good??!! And no, it isn't limited to LCD users. Less so QD-OLED users (because WOLED is simply worse) but even then these plasmas were much better tuned for humans where it comes to light spectrum.
I love it when you analyse the trending innovations on actual tech. Not the gossip tech. I've been following you since 2018 and you never let me down with satisfying tech content. Thanks Marton!
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
I remember in 2012 in a big electronics store in Germany I saw a (in retrospective) tiny 12" oled screen on display for the first time. It was a screen by LG. The colors and black levels were out of this world at the time. It really got my 12 year old self excited for the future of tech. I was in that electronics store looking at this screen almost every two days 😅
I had a similar feeling when I saw a TFT display on a laptop for the first time in the 1990s. Before then the infamous Dual Scan LCDs needed "mouse trails" to keep track of where the pointer was when you moved the mouse.
I always wanted to know how LCD, OLED and LED displays worked and particularly how they evolved. A brilliant and very instructive video . Now my admiration for the innovators of these technologies has risen to greater heights. Thank you TechAltar for a really creative production.
I had two Samsung AMOLED phones in the past years, and one thing I've noticed is that there's actually a delay in turning the individual pixels ON or OFF. For example if you have a picture with black parts of the screen and you scroll this image around (like scrolling pictures on Facebook for example) you can actually notice how the parts of the screen that were black takes an extra moment to lit up, and the parts that were lit but now have black takes a moment before they are completely black. Not sure if this is a software issue or a hardware issue, but either way it's quite noticeable.
That's a common problem on OLED. iPhones have it, Samsungs have it. My first smartphone was a galaxy S1 (Back in 2009/2010) and it had the same problem, I now have a nothing Phone 2 and the problem is still there. It's less prominent when the screen is brighter,
@@czech8797 I don't think so. I've tested with both 60Hz and 120Hz and they behave exactly the same. I don't think the refresh rate changes the speed it takes for the LEDs to turn off and on, only to change the colors of the LEDs that are already on.
@@sekkuar btw we can see that it by manually moving a app or black element, otherwise when you see videos you cant see because it's running in high refresh rate
Not at all true lol. You and me are interested in this and like these type of stuff. But an average person couldn't care less other than the price and features that it offers.
@@PSYCHOV3N0MWell, no manufacturer has ever explained their technology to this degree and this way so we can't know until they start getting better at explaining their tech
This was so beautifully explained! I recently bought an LG OLED TV and before buying I read up a lot about QLED, MiniLED, WOLED, QD-OLED and all. But this video gave me a better understanding than what I had got after watching hours of videos on other tech channels. Well done and thank you!
3:30 Actually the backlight in early LCD TVs and monitors before the early 2010s all used small fluorescent tube bulbs that ran the whole width of the display with there being many of them across the whole display hight. Early backlit LCD monitors from the late 1980s only used a single tube to light the backlight spreader layer.
@@q1337 Yep! I had a few LCD displays from that era that used fluorescent backlights. If I remember correctly, laptops made the jump to LED backlights first, with the rest of the industry waiting until the price of LEDs dropped to be competitive with fluorescents.
@@fungo6631 And higher end monochrome LCDs used electroluminescent sheets, which are now on their way to become "the perfect display" with electroluminescent QDs. That's some amazing convergent evolution.
Yep, I have a late 1980s Casio LCD TV, it's about 2" diagonally and 2" deep to accomodate a CCFL tube and light spreader. It's dim and incredibly uneven. Flat CRTs were much better but no one bothered making them color, that'd need Indextron type tech which was too expensive for such a niche market.
Just wow....this video is a gem, explaining the difference very well, regardless of some minor technical mistakes. The technology blows my mind and watching this on my Samsung S23 ultra, I can attest that the display is mind-blowing bright. I have no problems watching in bright sunlight and the brightness adjusts very smoothly to the environment. It looks like they are moving quite fast through new technologies, I am very impressed.
One of the best and most concise and accurate presentations of older display tech all the way up to the bleeding edge latest stuff. VERY well done my friend! Subbed!
The best display tech already exists, it's called Cathode Ray Tube. No aliasing, no native resolution, perfect motion, infinite contrast (they are analog displays, not digital), variable refresh rates. The only weakness, they are heavy and bulky.
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
@@saricubra2867imagine how fucking fast the beam has to travel to give us a 16:9 v200hz display lol. Also curved and ultra wide displays are near impossible to create. It's pretty good, but with all the limitations I wouldn't call it perfect.
Amazing leaps and bounds in the display market since I was a kid. Back then...The biggest CRT was like 32 inches and weighed hundreds of pounds, cost thousands of dollars and might last a lifetime...especially if it was a Sony. The Samsung on my desk now is just as large, but weighs less than 20 lbs and was less than $300. I was surprised to find out that both Samsung and LG are Korean companies...not that there's anything wrong with that.
Sony thought the future was Field Emission Displays. p.s. Check out the Mitsubishi 37" 4-3 CRTs. I knew someone who had one. It took four men to get it upstairs !
@@MrDuncl Remember the old rear projection boxes...speaking of Mitsu. I loved busting them open and getting the big lenses...looking at one now. Sony really dropped the ball on consumer electronics...well, except for maybe Playstation, right?...their cellphones sucked, they quit tv's and stereos...I don't get it. Japanese was always better than just about everything...remember Nakamichi?
The popularity of Korean dramas and K-pop is undeniable, and both are known for their high production values. This includes stunning visuals, often featuring vibrant colors, intricate details, and fast-paced action sequences, so of course, companies like Samsung and LG face pressure to constantly innovate and offer the latest advancements to stay ahead of the curve. The demand for superior screens also extends beyond media consumption. The rise of gaming, virtual reality, and other forms of interactive entertainment also incentivize the development of better display technologies.
This is an ABSOLUTELY AMAZING VIDEO. I dont know why but i think for simplicity many youtubers dont go into detail in these topics. And i love learning about how each of these displays work
Crazy how back in the CRT days they were always trying to make their screens bigger, and now with microLED screens they are trying to make them smaller
I bought my first OLED a bit over 5 yrs ago. Just bought a 2nd last month. There's no comparison to an LCD to my eyes, atleast an LCD of similar price. MLA looks promising. But for now, WOled is it. No burn-in on my sets. And half the time they've been used as a PC mon.
11:36 Yeah see that isn't how it works, QDOLED is already top emission so putting an MLA layer on top, which as you just said refocuses the light outwards, would make no sense because all light from QDOLED is already being thrown out.
MLA actually will help. QD OLED have crazy view angles but its actually unnecessary for direct viewing on TV. So slightly limiting fild of view for higher peak brightness will be actually substantial. But im now thinking more about QDEL (Quantum Dot Electo Luminescent) displays from SHARP. So that and QD Micro LED will be only noticeable upgrade for QD-OLED TV owners😄
Finally I understand why white backgrounds on oled look green to me: the red, blue and green diodes are all maxed but we are more sensible to green light
Great video. I know one thing, I love my LG C2 OLED that I bought last April. Some bright Dolby Vision scenes still make me say wow after 9 months of watching it.
16:16 Yep. The problem is also, whoever gets to solve their problems first will probably kick the others out of the market. That means, no continuing development for the other technologies, because they don’t make the money any more to pay for it. Let’s just hope that the end result also checks some of the other boxes that are often secondary in a tech race, like sustainability and low toxicity.
SSD is better technology than HDD but it can't kick out HDD for decades. So HDD companies had plenty of time to catch up. Whoever comes to new display technology first only gives their competitor a hint not a kick.
@@Max_Jacoby You may be right about that. Let’s hope that. On the other hand, there were companies set up to make e-paper (aka e-ink, which Kindle devices use) much better, with colors, even better contrast and lighting, and I believe higher frequency of change. But that development has stalled, because tablets and mobile phones have such a big chunk of the market. There is no good prospect for making money with better e-paper. For a technology to justify development costs (ie. improvement costs, not just survival), its market niche needs to be large enough and significantly different from competing technologies. SSDs are superior to HDDs in almost every way, except for the cost per storage unit. And HDDs beat SSDs by a high enough margin on cost/storage so that people still want them. And decades of prior development and enough accumulated knowledge about how to improve HDDs probably also contribute to them getting better. But, on the other hand, what people really want are way cheaper SSDs. And as soon as that happens, there will be no reasons for anyone to invest money into improving HDDs further. With display technologies, it is a similar race. They have become similar enough so that one of them may become superior in every important aspect to the others. Maybe a competing technology will still be far better for, say, small or tiny high-resolution displays as the “winning” technology. That would be a niche that *might* make enough money and hold enough prospects to justify further development. But if the “winning” technology has a convincing roadmap to cover that niche as well, then interest and investments in the niche technology will dry up. We will see how it goes.
You've got $20,000 to spend on a TV, I hope. They can only ever bring the price down to something that still approaches 'insane' by even most enthusiast standards. It is inherently expensive technology, far moreso than regular OLED. Unfortunately we've gotten spoiled with the idea that technology will always just keep getting cheaper, when there's lots of stuff that cant(at least practically) and have gone out of business/production as a result. Kind of a survival bias in effect. I think MicroLED may well face that same fate at some point, because its advantages will shrink, and the price gap for the remaining advantages will remain absolutely enormous.
I think for now I'll hang on to my 2008 Pioneer Elite Plasma, which at the time was regarded by many as the best picture quality ever achieved. Still looks good to me.
I have a plasma and a LCD. The plasma is so pretty, but isn't so good for playing Xbox. So I play games on the LCD and watch sports on the plasma. Hockey is exceptionally good looking on the plasma
This was very good thank you. I've always had a general idea of how they work, but this was significantly more in depth and the CGI breakdowns were super helpful. Awesome new tech on the horizon.
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
The best video to share with friends, to explain in a precise and fast way how screens work. You just made my life easier, as I'm the "tech friend" in my group and I have to explain these things constantly.
Thank you, TechAltar. Your bridge building is the true illumination here! Pioneers such as yourself are the ones who made the construction of the Great Alexandrian library possible. Continue the great work my friend!
It would be cool if all 3 tech you mentioned reached perfection at the same time. Customers would win! But I rarely find myself wanting more than what I already have. If the tech never improves from now, I think we'd be just fine.
If you are buying it now, it's already obsolete. always the newer improved versions are ready to go, after interest fades, and sales slow, and more importantly patents expire. Patents make mfgs. and creators of the technology, more money than they make actually making a product. Since it gets licensed to all others. ie the CD and CD players and even logos, was Philips big income maker, from all other makers.
@@cengeb Patents really need to go in many areas and forms, it makes breakthroughs and new research slow and behind because there is no reasons to or it is impossible because of a patent blocking your way.
@@Wipeout186 Patents are the only reason why companies invet stuff, profit. they license the use and make money without having to even make the stuff. that's genius. Example the CD Philips invented it brought Sony into the mix (after Panasonic didn't want in, sony was 2nd choice, fact) Every maker of the discs, the players, even the jewel box it was packaged in was a Philips patent. Every mfg. using the logo even paid Philips a patent fee,copyright fee, royalty. . For the 17 years, then when it was expiring, that's why the SACD was introduced, new patents, but it didn't actually take off, like the original CD did, or DVD, which they also did, anything laser optical, Drug companies, same thing, patents bring in the money, more than making the actual stuff just by yourself. Once patent is off a drug compound, genericsf lood the market, company loses money, people benefit sometimes lower costs, but billions in research, won't be done if can't profit, Capitalism. So when display patents run out, they have to have something new to introduce, otherwise they won't survive. Patents does make new stuff being improved. If you invent something and can't profit from it, why would a company bother?
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
I was always wondering what's the difference between the different TVs. That was a very helpful video, thanks for explaining the differences so clearly!
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
As long as I can view crystal clear picture in 4k@120hz, I am happy. Love my LG CX(OLED). Bought it refurbed 3 years ago and this thing performs as well as I could ask. I use it almost daily for many hours. It asks for pixel refresher probably once every week. Thing runs like a top. 4k@120hz, vivid colours, low latency and I think the sound is decent also... I love it.
i wish you talked more about PenTile subpixel arrangement disadvantages compared to RGB as it remains one of the most problematic areas of OLED, which is especially important for laptop/monitor displays great video otherwise!
Not sure if it is the exact same arrangement but same issues in first generation QD-oled panels by Samsung (see G8 oled). Their second generation had a different "better" layout, see G9 oled@@pickleadaykeepsthedoctoraway
I dont think laptops/monitors OLEDs are using pentile from what I know. That seems to be more prominently seen in AMOLED/smaller OLED types. The problem with laptop/monitor OLED is that they're using WRGB, which is where the text legibility issues are coming from that you're probably thinking of. Using aligned RGB will fix this, but it will require a specific OLED manufacturing process to produce these displays and there needs to be enough displays sold for this market to justify designing and building that manufacturing process(for economy of scale reasons). In the meantime, there's gonna be some coming improvements to WRGB OLED that will specifically help this issue, even if it doesn't fix it totally.
Don't fear failure so much that you refuse to try new things. The saddest summary of life contains three descriptions: could have, might have, and should have.
It's worth noting that the earliest LCD displays in which a pixel was made from 3 vertical strips of red, green & blue were leveraged by Microsoft to produce a system called 'Cleartype'. Put simply, as long as you only intend to produce greyscale (as it common for text) then it's possible to introduce what is known as sub-pixel rendering. Since the strips repeat RGBRGBRGB and so on, you can (for example) switch the GB of one pixel on & the R of the pixel to the right of it to on. So instantly you can shift a pixel by 1/3 or 2/3. Sadly LCD screens no longer work that way BUT on platforms like the Gameboy Color, a few developers used this trick to produce much clearer text (hence the name Cleartype).
Such a good video. I kept trying to explain this to a friend after doing hundreds (if not thousands) of hours of research into this, but this video explains it so well
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
Ever since I first got my hands on the PS Vita I fell in love with OLED screens. It's great for stuff like the Vita or Steam Deck but I'm still paranoid about burn-in which has stopped me from pulling the trigger on getting an OLED screen for my primary monitor. Hearing about the advancements coming soon has me excited to finally be able to get my hands on a good OLED monitor with a much longer lifespan.
my first taste of OLED was in 2017 after buying a used Galaxy S4. then an S5, S6 Edge, etc., Now I'm typing this on a used 2018 Xperia XZ3. My first OLED outside of Samsung
@@alice_agogo It depends on the specs. Mine can almost do 1440p and it has better clarity than a 1080p display (smaller phosphors than pixels on a 1080p display), no aliasing.
Deep listening is miraculous for both listener and speaker.When someone receives us with open-hearted, non-judging, intensely interested listening, our spirits expand.
Sticking with my IPS monitor until the burn in problem is eliminated, for a monitor you have so many static things on screen that it becomes a big risk, I like that I don't have to care at all about burn in.
Samsung solved the burn-in problem with QD OLEDs. Since they are a lot brighter, they last longer and look way, WAY better than LG's panels. It brought back the CRT and Plasma warm (accurate warm colors) that i missed so much on TVs. It's safe to switch now to OLED, the only thing you should worry about is your wallet.
@@saricubra2867 Its not safe to switch at all, burn in is still a problem and as someone that has static things on the screen for an extended period of time the burn in will happen quick.
Phenomenal video! Only wish you would've talked about response times/motion clarity (near-instantaneous for OLEDs) a bit more but not too big of a deal
Response time of OLED is so fast its actually bad for low refresh rates like 60hz. It feels a lot less smooth to me on my Oled than on my LCD monitors. Always get the 120hz if you can.
This was a great summary of the confusing world of display technology. My current lcd tv only has something like 60 dimming zones, which works great for letterbox movies, but blooming is obvious in some scenes (star fields, full black backgrounds with moving bright objects etc.), so even if they get to a few thousand dimming zones, I would probably be very happy.
We have miniLED monitors currently with more than a thousand zones, so hopefully we'll see miniLED TVs within the next year or two with at least 1000 zones.
@@yasirarafat9279 Those aren't "bugs". Screen tearing doesn't really depend on the display itself. Ghosting is panel-dependent, but it shouldn't be an issue with high-quality miniLED panels. As for burn-in, they shouldn't burn in as easily as OLED displays.
Samsung mixing blue LEDs with Quantum Dots saved OLED tech. I never liked LG's OLED screens, they struggle with warm colors with a dull image, AMOLEDs are impractical and too expensive for mainstream use. Before QD OLEDs, every OLED in person looked worse than a high end pseudo 1440p CRT (also made by Samsung) that i own because of the warm colors, or the lack of brightness for usable BFI (black frame insertion).
This really made me think about why I like my old plasma TV so much, and was a little disappointed that the tech wasn't in there as a historical aside. Modern screens are good, but my old plasma TV seems to have an edge I can't put my finger on.
I think we're still falling short of perfect display tech in several ways not mentioned. Firstly in the days of CRT tvs/monitors you could input any resolution you like and the electron gun would project it perfectly with no scaling, since we moved to LCD/Plasma/OLED displays we've had to upscale to the nearest resolution that divides perfectly into the native resolution or end up with an ugly aliased image. Secondly since both LCD/OLED displays employ a sample and hold rendering method our brain does not distinguish a clear gap between frames so motion clarity is still leaving much to be desired, Black Frame Insertion is definitely helping but at the cost of luminance. CRTs absolutely had their drawbacks and they were retired for good reason, but there are still things they do better than any modern display technology.
I mean technically there's still a lot more that theoretically could go into a 'perfect' display. Fully transparent, infinite refresh rate, wirelessly powered, physically configurable aspect ratios, 3d/holographic capabilities, etc. That said, I wouldn't say there's a 'lot' to be left desired in terms of motion clarity of OLED. The fact that sample and hold isn't literally perfect is not necessarily a bad thing as it's not inherently a good thing to be able to more clearly discern gaps between frames.
@@maynardburger Think of what they will have 100 years from now? Probably develop a pill you swallow, to develop an organic computer chip into your brain as you develop before you are born. Instant virtual reality at birth.
Your second issue isn’t really a knock on display technology, it’s a result of content with low frame rates. You can make the argument that the perfect content would have such a high frame rate that it would have indistinguishable frames. This content’s motion would display perfectly on OLED TVs without judder. Real life isn’t in 24fps and I think many would argue that a perfect display’s goal should be that it’s indistinguishable from real life. That said, I still have a hard time abandoning 24fps for films.
Do recommend! But more so in early 20's because later your brain is too mature and less eager to focus on silly things which LSD displays are best for displaying.
The blue LEDs certainly are that, Samsung used them on my fridge, and after about 10 years of continuous illumination they barely show at all. The red and green LEDs on some of my old stereo equipment are still going strong.
Really great and comprehensive video detailing the different display tech. I really like your metaphors and in depth technical explanations. I just miss that you take into account the problems with puls with modulation dimming (PWM). For many that is a major issue that causes severe eye strain and headaches. Especially Samsung OLEDS and mini LED’s are bad in this regard (and by extensions iPhone screens) I really miss this being taken seriously. For me PWM its an instant dealbreaker. Many people have no idea what causes their heath problems. I think tech channels should inform about this problem and thereby help push the industry to make safer tech.
Watching this excellent video about LCD vs OLED on my 2007 Panasonic Plasma TV, which remains in excellent condition and has almost no burn marks over the 17 years of its painful life based on many, many films and video games. :)
Salve, plasma defenders!! It is at this moment that LCD and Oled evangelists are horrified by the supposedly dead and buried fans of (always superior) plasma TVs! Yes, we are alive, just like our beloved TV sets.
It's honestly too bad the technology couldn't stay competitive. Still remember connecting the ps3 to the plasma and loading killzone 2 for the first time and just being blown away by how good it all looked
biggest scam of this market is in lcd they just change the cfl backlight to led backlight And they are selling it by saying that it is a LED TV Those who don't understand should understand that OLED is a real LED TV and rest of all TV is just LCD TV with LED backlight. So lcd tv= led backlight tv, samsung qled tv, and all qled tv, lg nenocell tv etc and acutal led tv = oled tv Basically we are confusing in panels = {IPS} which is lcd panel and enhanced version ips panels is = , QLED and Nanocell And in oled no panels
Also not to mention, MicroLEDs have the chance of being damaged more easily than others. I work with MicroLED video walls sometimes at work, and we need to prioritize keeping the LEDs themselves safe. If something hits the panel, we usually have to replace the them for the show. They're not cheap.
I just want someone to make CRT displays. It would be a super niche market, basically old school gaming hobbyists and legacy film and TV people. But it’s so hard to do stuff to get around the inherent differences in how old displays and new displays work. I’ve spent hundreds if not thousands trying to do it in a satisfying way, when if I had a really high quality, 1080i or 480p display then I could do a really nice custom setup that actually fits the theme of “I’m playing a Nintendo 64”
Turns out that led lined glass tubes are really bad for the environment... Who knew? But you can still get used crt TVs and monitors, so if you want one, get it while you can! Just understand how expensive it is to get rid of the things when the time comes. They aren't cheap to get rid of.
We still have our Panasonic CRT out on the 4 season porch, picking up over-the-air, serving a DVD player, and an old slow Roku. It's 21 years old now and still works fine at its native low rez. I hate to get rid of it just because it's old tech.
Great video. It's been hard to wrap my head around all the different display technologies, but after watching this video I think I finally get it. Exciting times ahead!
There are plenty of videos around on how CRT's work, the Slo Mo Guys have a couple of videos of CRT's in slow motion showing how they draw pictures on the screen. CRT's were the OG in dynamic contrast before OLED.
I guess it must be even brighter than a Samsung QD OLED while keeping the same amazing color accuracy. I watched the S90C with my own eyes and it looks warm and life-like just like my old Samsung Syncmaster 955DF (pseudo 4:3 1440p) CRT monitor that i have.
Was a little fast but pretty good in the end. Glad you went towards the Micro LED. would have been cool to know the back story, on how the fluorescent backlight was first. And then how Plasma was before OLED. Just natural steps towards our current market
I'd argue one thing that none of these display technologies is trying to solve, unfortunately, is motion clarity. Picture quality is absolutely important. But motion clarity and input response from CRTs SHOULD be also part of this holy grail. Input response is pretty good on OLEDs that support 120hz. Don't know if it matches the analog latency, but it's definitely good. LCDs seem to often fall short (probably because of the sheer amount of processing required to achieve similar quality to OLED). But motion clarity WITHOUT input latency cost is still a massive issue on all display technologies. I'd assume OLEDs with lower power consumption, higher refresh rates, and some kind of ULMB or BFI support AT those higher refresh rates will resolve this. Or if Samsung's LCD replacement technology is able to achieve similar results to OLED with none of the downsides of LCD that could also work. But I think not. The nature of using pixels in the first place creates a sample and hold effect. And if we can't address that while still having sub 16ms latency then I'd argue both issues (motion clarity and input latency) aren't resolved.
From the test ive seen oled is closer to having less ghosting than It should, the pixel response is so fast that sometimes you lose the smooth movement and start noticing something like steps between frames Its noticiable watching low frame content like anime or slow panning shoots in movies, even more if its a environment shoot from high Some oleds have a option in the software to improve this, Idk in other brands but LG calls It soap opera effect, for me is just a blurry mess so i dont use it, but im also a user with a 120hz mobile, monitor and tv so maybe im more nitpicky to this motion blur
You can't solve input lag with pixel-based displays. Ever. The lag is always going to be 1 frame length at a minimum. CRTs were literally driven by the signal that was input. If there was processing to be done, it could be done in realtime, because analog circuitry doesn't require memory buffers like digital ones do.
Mini-led are part of it but I wouldn't say they are that important... The whole Full array back light tech ( hardware and software) and local dimming is what really changed the game . As you can have a good LCD panel these days even without Mini LED... As long as you have good FALD. The thing Mini LED does give you tho is greater brightness and the ability to get that on smaller thinner devices..
They're the exact same technology, mini led is just a brand for the fald using tightly packed brighter and smaller led for the backlight and separate zones for the individual leds.
This is not serious, man you missed the plasma displays, i still have a bunch of them, still working, still better color than a lot of modern led displays. Perfect Blacks, amazing color palet, problem they are power thirsty, low res by today standards, and bulky. But still amazing colors. You cant go from CRT to LCD, but rather, CRT to PLASMA to LCD to LED, oled, qled, etc. The whole analisis is wrong from the start.AMOLED or WOLED are way more similar in funcionality to plasmas than to lcd. A missinformed analisis or a biassed one. There you have your dislike sir, not a good analisis at all.
Great video! Really interesting breakdown of modern display tech! Would be interested to see how we got to this point, like early LCD or even how and why Plasma failed to keep popularity in comparison
i have plasmas, and they have way better color than some modern led, and if you get a 1280x720 res one, they are superb. Cant believe he didnt even mention it, not a good analisis at all
Plasma used far more power than even CRTs. A friend bought one and it had three fans in the top to stop the insides from melting. On the plus side they did have much better contrast than any LCD at the time.
@@MrDuncl that is absurd, parts melting? A friend told you? i have 3 pionners, 3 sony, one panasonic all plasmas. I sold all my lcd, and led tvs, they cant compete in colors, resolution, yes, but not everything is resolution. The sonys are from 2002, not quite good, they have issues, pionner plasmas, are amazing, way better that the 50 inch smasung led my mother in law bought last year. You should get one, image color is amazing.
@@obturafotografia247 Maybe my choice of language was bad. However, I wasn't exaggerating about the three fans in the top of the Panasonic Plasma TV. I just looked at some power consumption figures from back when Plasmas were being sold and am seeing 400W compared to 120W for the same size LCD.
@@MrDunclyeah, plasmas run hot, especially if they get bright. It's called plasma for a reason. I still use a 60" pioneer Kuro from 2008, and at least in a dark room, it's pretty much as good as a 1920x1080 modern monitor, and a fair bit cheaper than one.
From my preceptive of owning almost all these screens in one form or another. I own a 32inch MicroLED Acer Predator monitor. Going from a regular IPS panel that was enormous quality increase. I have owned a iPad Pro M2 Mirco LED (which I sold) and now a M4 iPad OLED. The differences were not that astounding where I would recommend that jump just for a screen. The blacks are inky black but the colors on both absolutely pop. Apple has continued to use MiroLED for its MacBook 16inch line up I believe because a 16inch Dual panel OLED does not exist and compared to regular LCD panels it's an immense improvement. I believe this is the final stage of panel technology when do this. It solves the biggest issue and that is one of brightness.
This is never discussed and i have noticed the extreme ghosting in displays that are not TN lcd. I think companies trying to sell anything other than TN panels as a supposed "gaming" monitors are committing fraud because the ghosting of things moving across a black background is so atrocious that it's criminal. This effect is also easily noticeable on oled phone displays. And the refresh rate doesnt fix it.
That was fanTASTIC! Thank you. I find the much older techniques of creating a moving picture fascinating, but these new goals are INSANE! Subscribed! ❤
I think that OLED's tendency to burn in is a little overstated. What you're generally seeing in those burn-in tests is a worst-case scenario: The TV is left on constantly, showing a relatively static image, like a news network's chiron. OLED sets go through image refresh cycles when they're powered off, to at least try to counteract the problem of image retention. If the set stays on all the time, that process never gets a chance to run. LCDs can have image retention problems, too. Granted it takes longer to show up on one, and it's usually reversible unlike actual OLED burn-in. But not always. I've seen plenty of LCDs with the ghosts of static images permanently stuck on them, including my own computer's monitor. In any case, even inorganic LEDs lose brightness over time, with the blue ones fading first. They tend to fail sooner and more frequently as the LED die is shrunk too, so I would expect micro LED sets to at least have some potential for burn-in and dead pixels just like the others.
The OLED's burn in issue is definitely not overstated. I have an iPhone 14 Pro and I have burn-in. However, it wasn't caused by the always-on display, but rather the icons of Waze (I use GPS for about 1 hour each day).
I was worried about burn in, because my dad's Samsung Note phones all started having severe burn in after just 1.5 years. The back-arrow from telegram and the Keyboard were visible everywhere. But then I got my Xiaomi note 10, and 5 years later, I can kinda start to see some random burn in... But it's not permanent. I've noticed right after purchase that every now and then the display would shift it's pixels by one pixel, in a circle, making static images not static anymore and blurring potential burn in lines.
For me, As long as OLED has the potential for burn in, I will just stick to LCD. I know that this is unpopular opinion, but I often leave a lot of static things on my screen and I can't afford the possibility of paying for new screen.
Sorry to hear that I have the lg c1 and play a lot of games so everything is always moving for me but I will say you could always go with a oled and see how you like it but Samsung for example most of their oled TVs have a fantastic 3 year burn in warranty that you could get! Hope that helps if not led is fine you could always do micro led tv as well
What a fantastic video! I thought I knew a lot more than I really did. I wasn't aware that W-OLED doesn't have true rgb LEDs. I also had no clue what quantum dot stands for. I kinda just blindly assumed it was a dumb marketing term.
Current QD tech is just a quantum dot treated film layer, true eQD, aka self-emissive QD, that is the real exciting prospect, it has the potential to completely surpass anything we have ever seen and will completely make all other displays obsolete, even the best late generation CRT monitors and Plasma Kuro and Neo displays, but like mLED, eQD is 15-20 years away, Tandem PHOLED is the best we can hope for through the next 10-15 years, they could combine MLA with QD treatment, imagine those MLA lenses treated with quantum-dots on a Tandem-PHOLED display, that would be incredible, especially if it had a true 8K dynamic resolution.
I wonder if the MiniLED technology could evolve to make the backlights at pixel level sizes, thus making the crab analogy in this video even more true when it comes to LCD displays. A MiniLED display such as this could in many ways rival the OLED technology itself, because of the high brightness and no burn-in of the LCD technology. If that happens, I would seriously consider the MiniLED technology moving forward. Well, as long as MicroLED displays or similar technologies at consumer prices are still not a thing by then.
MicroLEDs are better than LEDs when you can make backlights at the pixel level. Why would we bother to put color filters when we can make RGB subpixels individual LEDs at pixel size?
MicroLED displays still have the red, green and blue subpixels that are needed for each pixel as far as I know. However, a QD-MicroLED display could be possible if the backlights were pixel sized if I'm not mistaken. Correct me if I'm wrong.
@@GAG091186 QD Micro leds are just blue micro leds with QD color filters currently. Research is going on in developing QD LEDs or Electro luminescent QDs which are essentially true quantum dot LEDs but currently they have issues with stability and have short lifespan.
@@Almohebful No there are uses for having a LED + colour filter approach because it can be scaled easily, is less complex and reduces cost. It is easier to fabricate a Micro LED of one color and apply QD colour filter than fabricating LED for each separate colour at pixel level. What having LEDs of pixel level eliminates is the LCD layer. Technically it will be a Micro LED display.
I never knew there was such a thing as brightness efficiency in a tv. The idea of 5,000 tiny lenses per pixel to direct more light into your eyes is impressive engineering
Brilliant video with effective animations showing how it all works. We all face this tech literally every day but take it all for granted. The absolute wonder of how these things work blows my mind. Maximum respect to the clever people out there who make this happen. Power of Science 💪 So glad I discovered your channel. Please have my sub! Oh and: "LCDs and OLEDS are both kinda false crabs" I can't 😅
It`s truely a masterpiece, you perfectly mixed two different spheres of science to make a great analogy and described engineering theme with a biological evolutional parallel, I`m your fan from now on.
This whole carcinization analogy doesn't make any sense in this context; is it really that surprizing that people are trying to make a good display no matter their manufacturing methods? .. Carcinization is surprizing because it's not intuitive that crustaceans are somehow an optimal form, mainly because we're not that. But with displays we know exactly what we want to accomplish. Good video though, just drop the crab stuff.
2:00 it's not a current, it's applying an electric field. Though a current can be measured while the liquid crystal is polarizing, once the process is over there's no more power consumption - hence the ever lasting battery on old Casio watches. Liquid Crystals are molecules that can be polirized via an electric field - I heard a protein extracted from carrots was once used.
I got a WOLED LG monitor and I prefer the lower brightness because it never strains my eyes. I believe playing on the super bright lcd display of the Gameboy advance in the dark as a kid is what destroyed my vision.
Insta360: Limited to the first 50 purchases until December 30th! Get the best Insta360 X3 deal for a 10% discount, a free invisible selfie stick, and a 128GB SD card at bit.ly/TechAltar-Insta360X3
What do u think of inktjet printer oled displays?
man I've been seeing this camera on Fortnine pretty frequently.
its a sweet gear no doubt on that.
thank you for this video. if you search up how these panels work its hard to actually find good info. all google saysa is "lcds use a backlight" blablabla. i dont know what that means. but here you show exactly how these monitors work
Weird how you didn’t talk about pwm and how certain Chinese companies like oppo are using dc dimming to stop the effect.
Comparing MicroLED with OLED it's like comparing a lightyear starship with a tractor 😂
This makes you wonder how insane the machining and tooling of the industry must be to place millions of pixel so accurately
Not even comparable to tolerances in semiconductor manufacturing (10nm vs 100um, 10000x difference).
@@ivanjermakov Insane, they upscaled precision from 1um to 1000nm to 1000000pm. A whopping 1.0x10^0 increase in magnitude.
@@Gabtube252 haha, I had to read your comment twice
True. And yet people think this products are expensive. But when we look at the making of this, we realise that they are priced less wrt cost that goes in r&d.
cpus/gpus only need to grow the die on the wafer. they dont have to pick up the dies from the wafer and then move them over to another substrate like in microled displays. plus a cpu only needs 1 die to function. in a microled tv each led is a die. a single 4k tv will require 24 million dies and you cannot have a single defective die or the display will have a dead pixel. Even with a 99.99% yield rate, you will be left with 100s of defective dies for a single tv. @@ivanjermakov
Blue LEDs are used for all Quantum dot displays, because blue has the highest frequency & energy among ( red or green or blue ), so its color can be stepped-down to red or green colors with quantum dots and little or no brightness loss. Also the creation of practical bright blue LEDs is relatively new (~1990) , and not only enabled the reading head for 25GB blu-ray players (previously we only have 4GB DVD pllayers), but also these quantum-dot displays.
Get outta here physics nerd! Very good, man. Thanks for sharing your knowledge :)
1990 was over three decades ago. That's not relatively new in terms of technology....
@@jatoxo it is in terms of developing cheap mass production techniques. Solar panels are another examples. The main technologies were discovered/invented long time ago, but it took decades for the prices to become affordable
The Nobel prize for the invention of blue LEDs was well deserved
I thought blu-ray used a blue laser?
Minor Correction: natural state of an lcd pixel is clear, not dark. With no electric field, the crystals naturally twist the light, allowing light to pass through. With a field on, the crystals line up end to end and stop twisting the light, allowing the polarizer to block the light.
So does LCD need more battery to block the light?
i think it depends if it is a tn or ips display
That depends on how you align the polarizors. How many of you flipped the polarisor in your calculator to get a clear on black display ? Some LCD watches are made the same way to make them look a bit different.
Only TN (twisted nematic) LCD that are used for entry level TV/displays are normally open ("on" with no electric field, "off" with), IPS-types and VA-types TFT LCDs that are used in most displays/TVs are normally closed ("off" with no voltage). That's why "dead" pixels tend to be bright on TNs and black on others.
@@EricChiEric What is that tn lcd display?
Having spent a career in electronic image processing and display (see PictureTel, Polycom, HP), I find this to be a superb description of the current frontrunner technologies. It taught me several things in the most modern tech I did not know, and does it simply and clearly. Thank you for a very nice job!
Do micro LED displays use glass screens or plastic? One of the reasons I've always loved plasma displays is the glass screens. The optical properties of glass are unmatched.
MicroLED is what I've always assumed normal pixels were like. I had no idea it was actually so complicated
Same, I only started learning about monitors after I got an OLED phone and it looked better than LCD and I was like hmm why is this a thing
Crazy how the only actually good technology (microled) is so insanely expensive
You would think you just need to use typical methods you use for putting components on PCBs... and yeah, it is how they make them but if you consider size of the display. number of LEDs (8.3 million for 4K display! Or 3 times that if you choose to use separate R, G and B LEDs for higher brightness) and that you are directly looking at such PCB where each part glows for better visibility it then makes sense that cost for making such display would be high. Not to mention all the LEDs itself are pretty expensive.
What we really need is to have something where each LED can be grown directly on the panel substrate - in this case it will be blue LED and quantum dot filters will be used to make it RGB... and actually it is most probably how it is made with MicroLEDs because even if inorganic LEDs do burn-in slower they are still exhibiting reduction of brightness and different colors experience it differently. You would not want your fancy MicroLED that costs million dollars to get yellow or pink or blueish, etc. over time.
You're exactly right! That's why I was always amazed by how cheap color displays had become.
@@xenird MicroLED also has compromises and flaws. It is only perfect when you don't see it. Besides as far as colors are concerned QD-OLED has almost the same colors and is very much like mobile OLEDs but does not have issues with MURA, dirty screen effect and doesn't burn in as much and certainly color doesn't change over time. The only thing MicroLED has over QD-OLED is being able to be super bright..
...and otherwise you did see MicroLEDs! All these super bright billboards that you always wondered why they are legal when they blind all the drivers are using the same tech - MicroLED just have more tightly packed pixels and typically you don't see any effort to correct gamut of ads on these billboards so colors there look ridiculous and MicroLED TV will have gamut corrected. Otherwise issues you can see on these billboards are the same as MicroLED has - just being indoors tech MicroLED has less issues like these... and if anything technician will come to your mansion and will repair them for you :)
Otherwise where it comes to actually good display technologies for home you had Pioneer Kuro plasmas - the TV you if you have today you can expect that people who visit you and see this thing will comment on it and ask you... why the hell does this TV looks so damn good??!! And no, it isn't limited to LCD users. Less so QD-OLED users (because WOLED is simply worse) but even then these plasmas were much better tuned for humans where it comes to light spectrum.
This is nothing. led displays are cheap and rubbish. lcd is even worse, but it has no burn in effect. crts are the peak
I love it when you analyse the trending innovations on actual tech. Not the gossip tech. I've been following you since 2018 and you never let me down with satisfying tech content. Thanks Marton!
Concur. I prefer this type of his videos. He’s one of the best tech analysts in n RUclips
Yup, TechAltar is good at making vids
Same here
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
I gotta say you cracked the algorithm code for nerdy techie videos while doing 0% clickbait + 100% good story telling
I remember in 2012 in a big electronics store in Germany I saw a (in retrospective) tiny 12" oled screen on display for the first time. It was a screen by LG. The colors and black levels were out of this world at the time. It really got my 12 year old self excited for the future of tech. I was in that electronics store looking at this screen almost every two days 😅
I had a similar feeling when I saw a TFT display on a laptop for the first time in the 1990s. Before then the infamous Dual Scan LCDs needed "mouse trails" to keep track of where the pointer was when you moved the mouse.
Sony was late to market even though they unveiled the first OLED consumer prototype
Definetly you never watched a CRT in the dark, it's the same as a OLED but with perfect motion, no aliasing and doesn't have a native resolution.
@@saricubra2867 not really. Crt has no deep blacks
@@alice_agogo it does have deep blacks like an OLED, the electron gun doesn't hit the phosphors for black areas therefore no light.
I always wanted to know how LCD, OLED and LED displays worked and particularly how they evolved. A brilliant and very instructive video . Now my admiration for the innovators of these technologies has risen to greater heights. Thank you TechAltar for a really creative production.
I had two Samsung AMOLED phones in the past years, and one thing I've noticed is that there's actually a delay in turning the individual pixels ON or OFF.
For example if you have a picture with black parts of the screen and you scroll this image around (like scrolling pictures on Facebook for example) you can actually notice how the parts of the screen that were black takes an extra moment to lit up, and the parts that were lit but now have black takes a moment before they are completely black.
Not sure if this is a software issue or a hardware issue, but either way it's quite noticeable.
That's a common problem on OLED. iPhones have it, Samsungs have it. My first smartphone was a galaxy S1 (Back in 2009/2010) and it had the same problem, I now have a nothing Phone 2 and the problem is still there. It's less prominent when the screen is brighter,
I have a Xiaomi with AMOLED screen and I have never noticed that issue.
It's all about refresh rate or heartz
@@czech8797 I don't think so. I've tested with both 60Hz and 120Hz and they behave exactly the same.
I don't think the refresh rate changes the speed it takes for the LEDs to turn off and on, only to change the colors of the LEDs that are already on.
@@sekkuar btw we can see that it by manually moving a app or black element, otherwise when you see videos you cant see because it's running in high refresh rate
If the manufacturers were this good at explaining their tech more would be interested =)
OR maybe most AVERAGE consumers don't care to learn because they're either too lazy or too ignorant.
Don't blame the manufacturers.
🤣🤣🤣
It's not that they are bad, they just don't care to explain anything. They care only about marketable bullshit.
Not at all true lol. You and me are interested in this and like these type of stuff. But an average person couldn't care less other than the price and features that it offers.
@@PSYCHOV3N0MWell, no manufacturer has ever explained their technology to this degree and this way so we can't know until they start getting better at explaining their tech
@@PSYCHOV3N0M No.. its the manufacturers.. .can't agree on standards. etc.. can't market.
This was so beautifully explained! I recently bought an LG OLED TV and before buying I read up a lot about QLED, MiniLED, WOLED, QD-OLED and all. But this video gave me a better understanding than what I had got after watching hours of videos on other tech channels. Well done and thank you!
3:30
Actually the backlight in early LCD TVs and monitors before the early 2010s all used small fluorescent tube bulbs that ran the whole width of the display with there being many of them across the whole display hight. Early backlit LCD monitors from the late 1980s only used a single tube to light the backlight spreader layer.
i have a 2010ish LG monitor TV that takes a bit to fully warm up next to my more modern 2017ish Asus thats turns on instantly, is that the reason why?
Lower end monochrome LCDs used LEDs as well on smaller sizes.
@@q1337 Yep! I had a few LCD displays from that era that used fluorescent backlights. If I remember correctly, laptops made the jump to LED backlights first, with the rest of the industry waiting until the price of LEDs dropped to be competitive with fluorescents.
@@fungo6631 And higher end monochrome LCDs used electroluminescent sheets, which are now on their way to become "the perfect display" with electroluminescent QDs. That's some amazing convergent evolution.
Yep, I have a late 1980s Casio LCD TV, it's about 2" diagonally and 2" deep to accomodate a CCFL tube and light spreader. It's dim and incredibly uneven. Flat CRTs were much better but no one bothered making them color, that'd need Indextron type tech which was too expensive for such a niche market.
I heard "crap" instead of "crab"
Lol
Just wow....this video is a gem, explaining the difference very well, regardless of some minor technical mistakes. The technology blows my mind and watching this on my Samsung S23 ultra, I can attest that the display is mind-blowing bright. I have no problems watching in bright sunlight and the brightness adjusts very smoothly to the environment.
It looks like they are moving quite fast through new technologies, I am very impressed.
One of the best and most concise and accurate presentations of older display tech all the way up to the bleeding edge latest stuff. VERY well done my friend! Subbed!
I second that. That's really well done. Subscribed as well.
Same. Good job!
The best display tech already exists, it's called Cathode Ray Tube. No aliasing, no native resolution, perfect motion, infinite contrast (they are analog displays, not digital), variable refresh rates. The only weakness, they are heavy and bulky.
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
@@saricubra2867imagine how fucking fast the beam has to travel to give us a 16:9 v200hz display lol. Also curved and ultra wide displays are near impossible to create. It's pretty good, but with all the limitations I wouldn't call it perfect.
Amazing leaps and bounds in the display market since I was a kid.
Back then...The biggest CRT was like 32 inches and weighed hundreds of pounds, cost thousands of dollars and might last a lifetime...especially if it was a Sony.
The Samsung on my desk now is just as large, but weighs less than 20 lbs and was less than $300.
I was surprised to find out that both Samsung and LG are Korean companies...not that there's anything wrong with that.
Sony thought the future was Field Emission Displays. p.s. Check out the Mitsubishi 37" 4-3 CRTs. I knew someone who had one. It took four men to get it upstairs !
@@MrDuncl Remember the old rear projection boxes...speaking of Mitsu.
I loved busting them open and getting the big lenses...looking at one now.
Sony really dropped the ball on consumer electronics...well, except for maybe Playstation, right?...their cellphones sucked, they quit tv's and stereos...I don't get it.
Japanese was always better than just about everything...remember Nakamichi?
The popularity of Korean dramas and K-pop is undeniable, and both are known for their high production values. This includes stunning visuals, often featuring vibrant colors, intricate details, and fast-paced action sequences, so of course, companies like Samsung and LG face pressure to constantly innovate and offer the latest advancements to stay ahead of the curve.
The demand for superior screens also extends beyond media consumption. The rise of gaming, virtual reality, and other forms of interactive entertainment also incentivize the development of better display technologies.
We had 40 inch CRT's, the largest we ever made
This is an ABSOLUTELY AMAZING VIDEO. I dont know why but i think for simplicity many youtubers dont go into detail in these topics. And i love learning about how each of these displays work
Crazy how back in the CRT days they were always trying to make their screens bigger, and now with microLED screens they are trying to make them smaller
This is definitely a classic TechAltar video. Such an accessible but (for the layperson) comprehensive overview. Many thanks, as always.
I bought my first OLED a bit over 5 yrs ago. Just bought a 2nd last month. There's no comparison to an LCD to my eyes, atleast an LCD of similar price. MLA looks promising. But for now, WOled is it. No burn-in on my sets. And half the time they've been used as a PC mon.
I never knew there are so many crab-like not crab creatures that evolutionally converged. So that's my takeaway from this tech video 😀
11:36 Yeah see that isn't how it works, QDOLED is already top emission so putting an MLA layer on top, which as you just said refocuses the light outwards, would make no sense because all light from QDOLED is already being thrown out.
Micro Lens Array you meant, LG VS Samsung.
emission, shattered light you meant ?
It's the prisme, the pixel, you get all colors troughs the lens array
MLA actually will help. QD OLED have crazy view angles but its actually unnecessary for direct viewing on TV. So slightly limiting fild of view for higher peak brightness will be actually substantial. But im now thinking more about QDEL (Quantum Dot Electo Luminescent) displays from SHARP. So that and QD Micro LED will be only noticeable upgrade for QD-OLED TV owners😄
Finally I understand why white backgrounds on oled look green to me: the red, blue and green diodes are all maxed but we are more sensible to green light
Great video. I know one thing, I love my LG C2 OLED that I bought last April. Some bright Dolby Vision scenes still make me say wow after 9 months of watching it.
16:16 Yep. The problem is also, whoever gets to solve their problems first will probably kick the others out of the market. That means, no continuing development for the other technologies, because they don’t make the money any more to pay for it.
Let’s just hope that the end result also checks some of the other boxes that are often secondary in a tech race, like sustainability and low toxicity.
SSD is better technology than HDD but it can't kick out HDD for decades. So HDD companies had plenty of time to catch up. Whoever comes to new display technology first only gives their competitor a hint not a kick.
@@Max_Jacoby You may be right about that. Let’s hope that.
On the other hand, there were companies set up to make e-paper (aka e-ink, which Kindle devices use) much better, with colors, even better contrast and lighting, and I believe higher frequency of change. But that development has stalled, because tablets and mobile phones have such a big chunk of the market. There is no good prospect for making money with better e-paper.
For a technology to justify development costs (ie. improvement costs, not just survival), its market niche needs to be large enough and significantly different from competing technologies. SSDs are superior to HDDs in almost every way, except for the cost per storage unit. And HDDs beat SSDs by a high enough margin on cost/storage so that people still want them. And decades of prior development and enough accumulated knowledge about how to improve HDDs probably also contribute to them getting better. But, on the other hand, what people really want are way cheaper SSDs. And as soon as that happens, there will be no reasons for anyone to invest money into improving HDDs further.
With display technologies, it is a similar race. They have become similar enough so that one of them may become superior in every important aspect to the others. Maybe a competing technology will still be far better for, say, small or tiny high-resolution displays as the “winning” technology. That would be a niche that *might* make enough money and hold enough prospects to justify further development. But if the “winning” technology has a convincing roadmap to cover that niche as well, then interest and investments in the niche technology will dry up.
We will see how it goes.
Not really, the video explained that even tho new technology ("LED") has been out, people are still buying LCD displays and by a huge margin.
RIP Plasma
That's why Samsung is selling displays to other smartphone/tv brands
Wow these explanations and accompanying graphics were super insightful!
If MicroLED can solve the seam issue and bring down the price…then I’m all in.
Exactly! I’m very excited for those monitors coming out in probably 10 years at least haha
The price of uLED will never come close to that of LCD displays. They will remain the highest end displays indefinitely.
You've got $20,000 to spend on a TV, I hope. They can only ever bring the price down to something that still approaches 'insane' by even most enthusiast standards. It is inherently expensive technology, far moreso than regular OLED. Unfortunately we've gotten spoiled with the idea that technology will always just keep getting cheaper, when there's lots of stuff that cant(at least practically) and have gone out of business/production as a result. Kind of a survival bias in effect. I think MicroLED may well face that same fate at some point, because its advantages will shrink, and the price gap for the remaining advantages will remain absolutely enormous.
OLED is way better than micro led though.
I think for now I'll hang on to my 2008 Pioneer Elite Plasma, which at the time was regarded by many as the best picture quality ever achieved. Still looks good to me.
Did anyone try hexagons yet?
Hexagons are the Bestagons!
solar, friggin, roadways!
now i have to search whats going on with all Crab things ..
Carcinosisation?
@@bobolobocus333 Yes i never knew about that ..
Anyone remember Plasma TVs?
i have a Panasonic plasma.. end an oled lg
How about CRTs 😂
I’m old enough that I remember our first color TV. Since my chair was closest I was the “ remote control “
@@tyrport i was the remote control for my grandfather's black and white cabinet TV 😂
I have a plasma and a LCD. The plasma is so pretty, but isn't so good for playing Xbox. So I play games on the LCD and watch sports on the plasma. Hockey is exceptionally good looking on the plasma
A mistake in the beginning: LCD was not to replace CRT. It was to replace Plasmas, which previously replaced CRT.
Plasma only existed in TVs. Other screens never used plasma so it's not fair to say plasma had replaced CRT.
They really both existed at the same time, even as monochrome computer monitors, especially in laptops.
Thanks to Nakamura for blue led
Not enough recognition for his work (and how he got it right)
Forget TVs, I'm getting a pet crab. It's the ultimate display-built-in backlight, incredible blacks, and very low maintenance. Win-win!
This was very good thank you. I've always had a general idea of how they work, but this was significantly more in depth and the CGI breakdowns were super helpful. Awesome new tech on the horizon.
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
I feel way smarter now thanks to this video. Thank you for making it.
The best video to share with friends, to explain in a precise and fast way how screens work. You just made my life easier, as I'm the "tech friend" in my group and I have to explain these things constantly.
Thank you, TechAltar. Your bridge building is the true illumination here! Pioneers such as yourself are the ones who made the construction of the Great Alexandrian library possible. Continue the great work my friend!
This was excellent. I still can't grasp how they're able to perfectly control each tiny pixel at light speed!
Tiny high resolution displays are really exciting to me. The one's in Apple's VR headset sound super cool.
It would be cool if all 3 tech you mentioned reached perfection at the same time. Customers would win! But I rarely find myself wanting more than what I already have. If the tech never improves from now, I think we'd be just fine.
If you are buying it now, it's already obsolete. always the newer improved versions are ready to go, after interest fades, and sales slow, and more importantly patents expire. Patents make mfgs. and creators of the technology, more money than they make actually making a product. Since it gets licensed to all others. ie the CD and CD players and even logos, was Philips big income maker, from all other makers.
@@cengeb i used to croled on my groled if you know what i mean
@@cengeb Patents really need to go in many areas and forms, it makes breakthroughs and new research slow and behind because there is no reasons to or it is impossible because of a patent blocking your way.
@@Wipeout186 Patents are the only reason why companies invet stuff, profit. they license the use and make money without having to even make the stuff. that's genius. Example the CD Philips invented it brought Sony into the mix (after Panasonic didn't want in, sony was 2nd choice, fact) Every maker of the discs, the players, even the jewel box it was packaged in was a Philips patent. Every mfg. using the logo even paid Philips a patent fee,copyright fee, royalty. . For the 17 years, then when it was expiring, that's why the SACD was introduced, new patents, but it didn't actually take off, like the original CD did, or DVD, which they also did, anything laser optical, Drug companies, same thing, patents bring in the money, more than making the actual stuff just by yourself. Once patent is off a drug compound, genericsf lood the market, company loses money, people benefit sometimes lower costs, but billions in research, won't be done if can't profit, Capitalism. So when display patents run out, they have to have something new to introduce, otherwise they won't survive. Patents does make new stuff being improved. If you invent something and can't profit from it, why would a company bother?
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
I was always wondering what's the difference between the different TVs. That was a very helpful video, thanks for explaining the differences so clearly!
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
That was fanTASTIC! Thank you. I find the much older techniques of creating a moving picture fascinating, but these new goals are INSANE! Subscribed!
As long as I can view crystal clear picture in 4k@120hz, I am happy. Love my LG CX(OLED). Bought it refurbed 3 years ago and this thing performs as well as I could ask. I use it almost daily for many hours. It asks for pixel refresher probably once every week. Thing runs like a top. 4k@120hz, vivid colours, low latency and I think the sound is decent also... I love it.
0:01 Ah yes, I'm proud to be a member of the LGTV community.
SLAY
i wish you talked more about PenTile subpixel arrangement disadvantages compared to RGB as it remains one of the most problematic areas of OLED, which is especially important for laptop/monitor displays
great video otherwise!
Not sure if it is the exact same arrangement but same issues in first generation QD-oled panels by Samsung (see G8 oled). Their second generation had a different "better" layout, see G9 oled@@pickleadaykeepsthedoctoraway
It's a problem with Windows.
F*ck Microsoft
I dont think laptops/monitors OLEDs are using pentile from what I know. That seems to be more prominently seen in AMOLED/smaller OLED types. The problem with laptop/monitor OLED is that they're using WRGB, which is where the text legibility issues are coming from that you're probably thinking of. Using aligned RGB will fix this, but it will require a specific OLED manufacturing process to produce these displays and there needs to be enough displays sold for this market to justify designing and building that manufacturing process(for economy of scale reasons). In the meantime, there's gonna be some coming improvements to WRGB OLED that will specifically help this issue, even if it doesn't fix it totally.
Don't fear failure so much that you refuse to try new things. The saddest summary of life contains three descriptions: could have, might have, and should have.
It's worth noting that the earliest LCD displays in which a pixel was made from 3 vertical strips of red, green & blue were leveraged by Microsoft to produce a system called 'Cleartype'.
Put simply, as long as you only intend to produce greyscale (as it common for text) then it's possible to introduce what is known as sub-pixel rendering.
Since the strips repeat RGBRGBRGB and so on, you can (for example) switch the GB of one pixel on & the R of the pixel to the right of it to on. So instantly you can shift a pixel by 1/3 or 2/3.
Sadly LCD screens no longer work that way BUT on platforms like the Gameboy Color, a few developers used this trick to produce much clearer text (hence the name Cleartype).
Can't wait for the MicroLED+MLA+Quantum Dots, it must be much easier than making individual RGB pixels.
I wanna learn more about Sharps QDEL. 😃
Truly one of the best and most detailed in-depth tech videos I’ve ever seen. I learned so much about how screens work!
Such a good video. I kept trying to explain this to a friend after doing hundreds (if not thousands) of hours of research into this, but this video explains it so well
Crustaceans and other animals did not evolve. Among the millions of fossils dug up from the earth, there is not a single intermediate fossil that proves evolution. Several hundreds of millions of years ago, crabs and other animals were in their current form. The theory of evolution is a dogma without any scientific proof. The reasons for defending the theory of evolution are ideological, not scientific. Scientists have discovered that all organs, which evolutionists call obsolete organs, perform important functions. Mutations believed to trigger evolution have been shown to be completely harmful. That is, mutations do not give advantages to living things. On the contrary, it harms. Evolutionists pointed to fossils of the coelacanth fish as evidence of the transition from water to land. However, a living specimen of this fish was found and it was found that the coelacanth fish is currently a fish that lives on the bottom of the ocean. Finally, I would like to mention that evolutionists can't explain how a living organism arose from inanimate matter. Living things did not appear through evolution, but through the Cambrian explosion. This proves the creation. Almighty Allah created all living things. Praise be to Allah Almighty, the Lord of the Worlds!
Ever since I first got my hands on the PS Vita I fell in love with OLED screens. It's great for stuff like the Vita or Steam Deck but I'm still paranoid about burn-in which has stopped me from pulling the trigger on getting an OLED screen for my primary monitor. Hearing about the advancements coming soon has me excited to finally be able to get my hands on a good OLED monitor with a much longer lifespan.
my first taste of OLED was in 2017 after buying a used Galaxy S4. then an S5, S6 Edge, etc., Now I'm typing this on a used 2018 Xperia XZ3. My first OLED outside of Samsung
I already have something better than an OLED, it's a high end CRT monitor.
@@saricubra2867 I still have a aoc crt monitor from around 2007. Is that considered high end?
@@alice_agogo It depends on the specs. Mine can almost do 1440p and it has better clarity than a 1080p display (smaller phosphors than pixels on a 1080p display), no aliasing.
Deep listening is miraculous for both listener and speaker.When someone receives us with open-hearted, non-judging, intensely interested listening, our spirits expand.
Sticking with my IPS monitor until the burn in problem is eliminated, for a monitor you have so many static things on screen that it becomes a big risk, I like that I don't have to care at all about burn in.
Samsung solved the burn-in problem with QD OLEDs. Since they are a lot brighter, they last longer and look way, WAY better than LG's panels.
It brought back the CRT and Plasma warm (accurate warm colors) that i missed so much on TVs. It's safe to switch now to OLED, the only thing you should worry about is your wallet.
@@saricubra2867 Its not safe to switch at all, burn in is still a problem and as someone that has static things on the screen for an extended period of time the burn in will happen quick.
I personally found the comparison with the crab to be both funny but also really good!
Phenomenal video!
Only wish you would've talked about response times/motion clarity (near-instantaneous for OLEDs) a bit more but not too big of a deal
he does briefly mention it in the introduction of OLEDs
Response time of OLED is so fast its actually bad for low refresh rates like 60hz. It feels a lot less smooth to me on my Oled than on my LCD monitors. Always get the 120hz if you can.
@@hmilles Now that you mention it, yeah motion clarity in general wasn't really mentioned. So refresh rates, response times and input latency
@@cc0767my solution for this in games at 30 or 60 is to turn on motion blur in games. I know it get a bad rep, but it actually helps a lot.
as far as I know there isn't a display technology that can match OLED when it comes to response times
This was a great summary of the confusing world of display technology. My current lcd tv only has something like 60 dimming zones, which works great for letterbox movies, but blooming is obvious in some scenes (star fields, full black backgrounds with moving bright objects etc.), so even if they get to a few thousand dimming zones, I would probably be very happy.
We have miniLED monitors currently with more than a thousand zones, so hopefully we'll see miniLED TVs within the next year or two with at least 1000 zones.
@@Slavolko when you use it for a long time, does it encounter bugs such as burn-in, ghosting, and screen tearing?
@@yasirarafat9279 Those aren't "bugs". Screen tearing doesn't really depend on the display itself. Ghosting is panel-dependent, but it shouldn't be an issue with high-quality miniLED panels. As for burn-in, they shouldn't burn in as easily as OLED displays.
It's interesting just how fast the display technology has evolved, especially LED tech, since the blue LED was invented only 30 years ago.
Samsung mixing blue LEDs with Quantum Dots saved OLED tech.
I never liked LG's OLED screens, they struggle with warm colors with a dull image, AMOLEDs are impractical and too expensive for mainstream use.
Before QD OLEDs, every OLED in person looked worse than a high end pseudo 1440p CRT (also made by Samsung) that i own because of the warm colors, or the lack of brightness for usable BFI (black frame insertion).
This really made me think about why I like my old plasma TV so much, and was a little disappointed that the tech wasn't in there as a historical aside. Modern screens are good, but my old plasma TV seems to have an edge I can't put my finger on.
I think we're still falling short of perfect display tech in several ways not mentioned. Firstly in the days of CRT tvs/monitors you could input any resolution you like and the electron gun would project it perfectly with no scaling, since we moved to LCD/Plasma/OLED displays we've had to upscale to the nearest resolution that divides perfectly into the native resolution or end up with an ugly aliased image.
Secondly since both LCD/OLED displays employ a sample and hold rendering method our brain does not distinguish a clear gap between frames so motion clarity is still leaving much to be desired, Black Frame Insertion is definitely helping but at the cost of luminance.
CRTs absolutely had their drawbacks and they were retired for good reason, but there are still things they do better than any modern display technology.
I mean technically there's still a lot more that theoretically could go into a 'perfect' display. Fully transparent, infinite refresh rate, wirelessly powered, physically configurable aspect ratios, 3d/holographic capabilities, etc. That said, I wouldn't say there's a 'lot' to be left desired in terms of motion clarity of OLED. The fact that sample and hold isn't literally perfect is not necessarily a bad thing as it's not inherently a good thing to be able to more clearly discern gaps between frames.
@@maynardburger Think of what they will have 100 years from now? Probably develop a pill you swallow, to develop an organic computer chip into your brain as you develop before you are born. Instant virtual reality at birth.
the down side of adding the black frames though is also more flicker also direct fade from frame to frame is bascilly 'free' temepral antialsiing
Your second issue isn’t really a knock on display technology, it’s a result of content with low frame rates. You can make the argument that the perfect content would have such a high frame rate that it would have indistinguishable frames. This content’s motion would display perfectly on OLED TVs without judder. Real life isn’t in 24fps and I think many would argue that a perfect display’s goal should be that it’s indistinguishable from real life. That said, I still have a hard time abandoning 24fps for films.
The best explainer on display tech I've come across. I find myself leaving "the best on x" comments on this channel a lot
Glad to hear! :)
Personally, I would try LSD. It gives great visual displays.
My comment is criminally underrated 😭🤣
Very vibrant and also very hard to control.
Do recommend! But more so in early 20's because later your brain is too mature and less eager to focus on silly things which LSD displays are best for displaying.
I rather get a CRT!
The blue LEDs certainly are that, Samsung used them on my fridge, and after about 10 years of continuous illumination they barely show at all. The red and green LEDs on some of my old stereo equipment are still going strong.
Really great and comprehensive video detailing the different display tech. I really like your metaphors and in depth technical explanations. I just miss that you take into account the problems with puls with modulation dimming (PWM). For many that is a major issue that causes severe eye strain and headaches. Especially Samsung OLEDS and mini LED’s are bad in this regard (and by extensions iPhone screens) I really miss this being taken seriously. For me PWM its an instant dealbreaker. Many people have no idea what causes their heath problems. I think tech channels should inform about this problem and thereby help push the industry to make safer tech.
This. Hell, even with Steam Deck barely anyone talks about the fact that both screen options suck hard because of that.
Watching this excellent video about LCD vs OLED on my 2007 Panasonic Plasma TV, which remains in excellent condition and has almost no burn marks over the 17 years of its painful life based on many, many films and video games. :)
LOL my TV is a 2008.
Massive Panasonic plasma fan. Got a 2009 model and the picture quality is still fantastic
me too! all hail the Plasma supremacy
Salve, plasma defenders!!
It is at this moment that LCD and Oled evangelists are horrified by the supposedly dead and buried fans of (always superior) plasma TVs! Yes, we are alive, just like our beloved TV sets.
It's honestly too bad the technology couldn't stay competitive. Still remember connecting the ps3 to the plasma and loading killzone 2 for the first time and just being blown away by how good it all looked
biggest scam of this market is in lcd they just change the cfl backlight to led backlight And they are selling it by saying that it is a LED TV
Those who don't understand should understand that OLED is a real LED TV and rest of all TV is just LCD TV with LED backlight.
So lcd tv= led backlight tv, samsung qled tv, and all qled tv, lg nenocell tv etc
and acutal led tv = oled tv
Basically we are confusing in panels = {IPS} which is lcd panel and enhanced version ips panels is = , QLED and Nanocell
And in oled no panels
Thanks! Clear video explaining all the commercial buzz words.
Also not to mention, MicroLEDs have the chance of being damaged more easily than others.
I work with MicroLED video walls sometimes at work, and we need to prioritize keeping the LEDs themselves safe. If something hits the panel, we usually have to replace the them for the show. They're not cheap.
I just want someone to make CRT displays.
It would be a super niche market, basically old school gaming hobbyists and legacy film and TV people. But it’s so hard to do stuff to get around the inherent differences in how old displays and new displays work. I’ve spent hundreds if not thousands trying to do it in a satisfying way, when if I had a really high quality, 1080i or 480p display then I could do a really nice custom setup that actually fits the theme of “I’m playing a Nintendo 64”
You can't, use of heavy metals that're required for CRT's is banned pretty much everywhere.
Turns out that led lined glass tubes are really bad for the environment... Who knew?
But you can still get used crt TVs and monitors, so if you want one, get it while you can! Just understand how expensive it is to get rid of the things when the time comes. They aren't cheap to get rid of.
We still have our Panasonic CRT out on the 4 season porch, picking up over-the-air, serving a DVD player, and an old slow Roku. It's 21 years old now and still works fine at its native low rez. I hate to get rid of it just because it's old tech.
@@MLWJ1993 Not for CRT's
@@CaedenV They are only bad for the environment with improper care
Great video. It's been hard to wrap my head around all the different display technologies, but after watching this video I think I finally get it. Exciting times ahead!
I'd love to learn how these displays compare to the technology behind older CRT TV sets.
There are plenty of videos around on how CRT's work, the Slo Mo Guys have a couple of videos of CRT's in slow motion showing how they draw pictures on the screen. CRT's were the OG in dynamic contrast before OLED.
@@Alabaster335plasma existed between the two
CRT's are best
I really wish to see MicroLED in stores. I have seen one of those panels in action and its amazing.
I guess it must be even brighter than a Samsung QD OLED while keeping the same amazing color accuracy.
I watched the S90C with my own eyes and it looks warm and life-like just like my old Samsung Syncmaster 955DF (pseudo 4:3 1440p) CRT monitor that i have.
Was a little fast but pretty good in the end. Glad you went towards the Micro LED. would have been cool to know the back story, on how the fluorescent backlight was first. And then how Plasma was before OLED. Just natural steps towards our current market
I'd argue one thing that none of these display technologies is trying to solve, unfortunately, is motion clarity. Picture quality is absolutely important. But motion clarity and input response from CRTs SHOULD be also part of this holy grail. Input response is pretty good on OLEDs that support 120hz. Don't know if it matches the analog latency, but it's definitely good. LCDs seem to often fall short (probably because of the sheer amount of processing required to achieve similar quality to OLED). But motion clarity WITHOUT input latency cost is still a massive issue on all display technologies. I'd assume OLEDs with lower power consumption, higher refresh rates, and some kind of ULMB or BFI support AT those higher refresh rates will resolve this. Or if Samsung's LCD replacement technology is able to achieve similar results to OLED with none of the downsides of LCD that could also work. But I think not. The nature of using pixels in the first place creates a sample and hold effect. And if we can't address that while still having sub 16ms latency then I'd argue both issues (motion clarity and input latency) aren't resolved.
From the test ive seen oled is closer to having less ghosting than It should, the pixel response is so fast that sometimes you lose the smooth movement and start noticing something like steps between frames
Its noticiable watching low frame content like anime or slow panning shoots in movies, even more if its a environment shoot from high
Some oleds have a option in the software to improve this, Idk in other brands but LG calls It soap opera effect, for me is just a blurry mess so i dont use it, but im also a user with a 120hz mobile, monitor and tv so maybe im more nitpicky to this motion blur
I'd argue that you haven't researched what micro LEDs are seeing they are literally at least 100x faster than oleds are.
You can't solve input lag with pixel-based displays. Ever. The lag is always going to be 1 frame length at a minimum. CRTs were literally driven by the signal that was input. If there was processing to be done, it could be done in realtime, because analog circuitry doesn't require memory buffers like digital ones do.
@@timramich You cant resolve input lag period
@@G0A7 Yeah, that's exactly what I said.
Mini-led are part of it but I wouldn't say they are that important... The whole Full array back light tech ( hardware and software) and local dimming is what really changed the game . As you can have a good LCD panel these days even without Mini LED... As long as you have good FALD. The thing Mini LED does give you tho is greater brightness and the ability to get that on smaller thinner devices..
They're the exact same technology, mini led is just a brand for the fald using tightly packed brighter and smaller led for the backlight and separate zones for the individual leds.
i hate that this video doesnt mention anything about motion performance
Oled has higher refresh rate and deeper feeling while seeing display
@@nitin007-zh3cz motion blur on Qled is better.
CRT is the best display tech of all time if you care about that. Isn't even close.
@@saricubra2867 CRT's are still the best display ever made. sadly no one wants to make a 4k crt
Honestly the covergent evolution crab analogy was genius. Taught me something new even outside the main topic. Brilliant video thank you so much!
i knew it will comeback sooner or later
would be great to see a video about SED TV's. Surface-conduction electron-emitter displays
SED and FED
my old school got to test insta360 befor it was public
This is not serious, man you missed the plasma displays, i still have a bunch of them, still working, still better color than a lot of modern led displays. Perfect Blacks, amazing color palet, problem they are power thirsty, low res by today standards, and bulky. But still amazing colors. You cant go from CRT to LCD, but rather, CRT to PLASMA to LCD to LED, oled, qled, etc. The whole analisis is wrong from the start.AMOLED or WOLED are way more similar in funcionality to plasmas than to lcd. A missinformed analisis or a biassed one. There you have your dislike sir, not a good analisis at all.
You serious? You can’t even spell analysis and you’re putting a dislike on a well-researched and useful video? Just go away.
Great video! Really interesting breakdown of modern display tech! Would be interested to see how we got to this point, like early LCD or even how and why Plasma failed to keep popularity in comparison
i have plasmas, and they have way better color than some modern led, and if you get a 1280x720 res one, they are superb. Cant believe he didnt even mention it, not a good analisis at all
Plasma used far more power than even CRTs. A friend bought one and it had three fans in the top to stop the insides from melting. On the plus side they did have much better contrast than any LCD at the time.
@@MrDuncl that is absurd, parts melting? A friend told you? i have 3 pionners, 3 sony, one panasonic all plasmas. I sold all my lcd, and led tvs, they cant compete in colors, resolution, yes, but not everything is resolution. The sonys are from 2002, not quite good, they have issues, pionner plasmas, are amazing, way better that the 50 inch smasung led my mother in law bought last year. You should get one, image color is amazing.
@@obturafotografia247 Maybe my choice of language was bad. However, I wasn't exaggerating about the three fans in the top of the Panasonic Plasma TV. I just looked at some power consumption figures from back when Plasmas were being sold and am seeing 400W compared to 120W for the same size LCD.
@@MrDunclyeah, plasmas run hot, especially if they get bright. It's called plasma for a reason. I still use a 60" pioneer Kuro from 2008, and at least in a dark room, it's pretty much as good as a 1920x1080 modern monitor, and a fair bit cheaper than one.
From my preceptive of owning almost all these screens in one form or another. I own a 32inch MicroLED Acer Predator monitor. Going from a regular IPS panel that was enormous quality increase. I have owned a iPad Pro M2 Mirco LED (which I sold) and now a M4 iPad OLED. The differences were not that astounding where I would recommend that jump just for a screen. The blacks are inky black but the colors on both absolutely pop. Apple has continued to use MiroLED for its MacBook 16inch line up I believe because a 16inch Dual panel OLED does not exist and compared to regular LCD panels it's an immense improvement. I believe this is the final stage of panel technology when do this. It solves the biggest issue and that is one of brightness.
Pixel shift delay (response time) is also important for gaming for a non-ghosting image. They should consider this also.
This is never discussed and i have noticed the extreme ghosting in displays that are not TN lcd. I think companies trying to sell anything other than TN panels as a supposed "gaming" monitors are committing fraud because the ghosting of things moving across a black background is so atrocious that it's criminal. This effect is also easily noticeable on oled phone displays. And the refresh rate doesnt fix it.
11:47 he’s hiring innovations? Ok lol
That was fanTASTIC! Thank you. I find the much older techniques of creating a moving picture fascinating, but these new goals are INSANE! Subscribed! ❤
I think that OLED's tendency to burn in is a little overstated. What you're generally seeing in those burn-in tests is a worst-case scenario: The TV is left on constantly, showing a relatively static image, like a news network's chiron. OLED sets go through image refresh cycles when they're powered off, to at least try to counteract the problem of image retention. If the set stays on all the time, that process never gets a chance to run.
LCDs can have image retention problems, too. Granted it takes longer to show up on one, and it's usually reversible unlike actual OLED burn-in. But not always. I've seen plenty of LCDs with the ghosts of static images permanently stuck on them, including my own computer's monitor.
In any case, even inorganic LEDs lose brightness over time, with the blue ones fading first. They tend to fail sooner and more frequently as the LED die is shrunk too, so I would expect micro LED sets to at least have some potential for burn-in and dead pixels just like the others.
The OLED's burn in issue is definitely not overstated. I have an iPhone 14 Pro and I have burn-in. However, it wasn't caused by the always-on display, but rather the icons of Waze (I use GPS for about 1 hour each day).
I was worried about burn in, because my dad's Samsung Note phones all started having severe burn in after just 1.5 years. The back-arrow from telegram and the Keyboard were visible everywhere.
But then I got my Xiaomi note 10, and 5 years later, I can kinda start to see some random burn in... But it's not permanent. I've noticed right after purchase that every now and then the display would shift it's pixels by one pixel, in a circle, making static images not static anymore and blurring potential burn in lines.
Nah, in 2 years my s20 fe burned in. It uses oiled. My cheap a21s I bought years ago still looks fine.
@@mrlightwriter WOLED and QD - OLED are less prone to burn in than standard RGB OLED used in phones.
@@Ishpreetb264 Wasn't aware of that. Good to know!
This really is such a fantastic video. I’ve not seen a better primer on display tech anywhere else.
I'm still in awe with the old CRT color television.
For me, As long as OLED has the potential for burn in, I will just stick to LCD. I know that this is unpopular opinion, but I often leave a lot of static things on my screen and I can't afford the possibility of paying for new screen.
Sorry to hear that I have the lg c1 and play a lot of games so everything is always moving for me but I will say you could always go with a oled and see how you like it but Samsung for example most of their oled TVs have a fantastic 3 year burn in warranty that you could get! Hope that helps if not led is fine you could always do micro led tv as well
MiniLED would fit for a lot of handheld PCs. Steam Deck 2 should use MiniLED instead of OLED used by the Steam Deck OLED.
@Broskisnowski yeah. I'm planning to buy another phone later, 5G is not worth it, only made 4G even better than mmWave/sub 6 GHz.
That's why you get a warranty, all that gets taken care of👍
I think that's why mobile screens are slowing using OLED's. Because you can replace a mobile screen not a monitor screen by paying some money.
What a fantastic video! I thought I knew a lot more than I really did. I wasn't aware that W-OLED doesn't have true rgb LEDs. I also had no clue what quantum dot stands for. I kinda just blindly assumed it was a dumb marketing term.
QLED is a dumb marketing term.
Nanocell is a dumb marketing term.
Liquid Retina Display is a dumb marketing term.
Quantum Dots isn't.
Current QD tech is just a quantum dot treated film layer, true eQD, aka self-emissive QD, that is the real exciting prospect, it has the potential to completely surpass anything we have ever seen and will completely make all other displays obsolete, even the best late generation CRT monitors and Plasma Kuro and Neo displays, but like mLED, eQD is 15-20 years away, Tandem PHOLED is the best we can hope for through the next 10-15 years, they could combine MLA with QD treatment, imagine those MLA lenses treated with quantum-dots on a Tandem-PHOLED display, that would be incredible, especially if it had a true 8K dynamic resolution.
I wonder if the MiniLED technology could evolve to make the backlights at pixel level sizes, thus making the crab analogy in this video even more true when it comes to LCD displays. A MiniLED display such as this could in many ways rival the OLED technology itself, because of the high brightness and no burn-in of the LCD technology. If that happens, I would seriously consider the MiniLED technology moving forward. Well, as long as MicroLED displays or similar technologies at consumer prices are still not a thing by then.
If it has become pixel size then there is no need for a LCD layer. At that point it would be a Micro LED display.
MicroLEDs are better than LEDs when you can make backlights at the pixel level. Why would we bother to put color filters when we can make RGB subpixels individual LEDs at pixel size?
MicroLED displays still have the red, green and blue subpixels that are needed for each pixel as far as I know. However, a QD-MicroLED display could be possible if the backlights were pixel sized if I'm not mistaken. Correct me if I'm wrong.
@@GAG091186 QD Micro leds are just blue micro leds with QD color filters currently. Research is going on in developing QD LEDs or Electro luminescent QDs which are essentially true quantum dot LEDs but currently they have issues with stability and have short lifespan.
@@Almohebful No there are uses for having a LED + colour filter approach because it can be scaled easily, is less complex and reduces cost. It is easier to fabricate a Micro LED of one color and apply QD colour filter than fabricating LED for each separate colour at pixel level. What having LEDs of pixel level eliminates is the LCD layer. Technically it will be a Micro LED display.
In almost 20 minutes about displays you managed not to mention PWM. Amazing
I never knew there was such a thing as brightness efficiency in a tv. The idea of 5,000 tiny lenses per pixel to direct more light into your eyes is impressive engineering
Brilliant video with effective animations showing how it all works. We all face this tech literally every day but take it all for granted. The absolute wonder of how these things work blows my mind. Maximum respect to the clever people out there who make this happen. Power of Science 💪
So glad I discovered your channel. Please have my sub!
Oh and: "LCDs and OLEDS are both kinda false crabs"
I can't 😅
It`s truely a masterpiece, you perfectly mixed two different spheres of science to make a great analogy and described engineering theme with a biological evolutional parallel, I`m your fan from now on.
This whole carcinization analogy doesn't make any sense in this context; is it really that surprizing that people are trying to make a good display no matter their manufacturing methods? ..
Carcinization is surprizing because it's not intuitive that crustaceans are somehow an optimal form, mainly because we're not that. But with displays we know exactly what we want to accomplish.
Good video though, just drop the crab stuff.
"it's not intuitive that crustaceans are somehow an optimal form, mainly because we're not that"
yet.
2:00 it's not a current, it's applying an electric field. Though a current can be measured while the liquid crystal is polarizing, once the process is over there's no more power consumption - hence the ever lasting battery on old Casio watches. Liquid Crystals are molecules that can be polirized via an electric field - I heard a protein extracted from carrots was once used.
I got a WOLED LG monitor and I prefer the lower brightness because it never strains my eyes. I believe playing on the super bright lcd display of the Gameboy advance in the dark as a kid is what destroyed my vision.