That's my point. Look at what I wrote.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
The Case Against OLED
- Thread starter luft262
- Start date
From other videos he had them calibrated in at 120 nits
I do not know what he did in this one. The question is cri independent of calibration? What is more important color volume or cri? What about the other metrics he mentioned in the video?
D
Deleted member 48726
Guest
I like the colours on the Pioneer best. Whatever that means when I watched the video on my 4K LED laptop.
Cri will depend on calibration.
if you want to compare screens properly, they all need to be calibrated for the same color space, gamma and brightness.
D
Deleted member 48726
Guest
D
Deleted member 48726
Guest
Yeah.
Just saw your reply. My confusion might stem due to the myth around burn in for amplifiers are you suggesting that TV needs to burn in to achieve its potential colour accuracy? OR is burn in when it burns out and degrades the image? Apologise lets go back to basics.
Screen size- massive at least 75 or 85 inch
Price - affordable I am happy with a cheaper Chinese version. Lol. Maybe Hisense as that is the cheaper brand in my region.
HDR - probably not but I will have to research this a little more to understand if it is needed in my use case.
Colour accuracy- i think yeh this would be important as I do watch many 4k youtube videos.
Defintely don't like super right
Dont need SMART or any SMART home integration
And no I wont be using for gaming.
You don't have to give me an actual recommendation but specs that I need to look out for or point me in the right direction. It would be appreciated.
The only positive could be better motion handling and reliability maybe.
Burn in degrades the display/image quallity.
for example.
Sadly, you aren't going to get all 3 of these at the same time.
for color accuracy take a look at what TVs Calman supports. On each manufactures page, click on the specifications tab, and you will see a Direct Display Control Support section. Generally speaking if it can be calibrated with Calman it will be an above average display.
Consumer Software
store.portrait.com
In the video editing community the LG's C series OLEDs are popular because they are pretty accurate (given they are consume devises) once calibrated.
The latest model in the series if the C3, and here is a breakdown of the prices.
42" - $900
48" - $1,050
55" - $1,500
65" - $1,600
77" - $2,600
83" - $4,300
Last edited:
Tell
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2024
- Messages
- 116
- Likes
- 138
My only real gripe against OLED is the extremely fast pixels. I've mostly gotten used to it now, but at first I was quite annoyed when watching movies or series, especially when it was filmed with little or no motion blur, with American Gods as the best example. Quite high contrast grading in that one and a bit sharpened as well, so HDR in 4K with no motion blur made it so overly "sharp" that I just stopped watching it.
Most TVs do have motion smoothness interpolation that you can use, but that instead makes it look like a soap opera, so instead I'd like to have a mode that "fades" between frames, emulating slower pixels, or an anti-imaging as in DACs. Because that's all motion blur is, antialiasing.
Most TVs do have motion smoothness interpolation that you can use, but that instead makes it look like a soap opera, so instead I'd like to have a mode that "fades" between frames, emulating slower pixels, or an anti-imaging as in DACs. Because that's all motion blur is, antialiasing.
Personally, I'd prefer cinematographers just stop violating the 180 degree rule.
You can shoot at any frame rate and not violate the 180 degree rule, you just need to adjust the shutter speed accordingly.
Last edited:
Soria Moria
Senior Member
The awful amount of motion blur sample-and-hold displays have have started giving me eye strain and headaches. I honestly prefer watching movies on CRT displays than any kind of fancy QD-OLED thing.
Tell
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2024
- Messages
- 116
- Likes
- 138
That's the a bit annoying thing with both of these, 24fps and 180 degrees shutter angle that we are so very much used are both compromises from waay back. 24fps was high enough framerate to make the motion fluid enough while not costing to much to film with, and 180 degrees gave a relatively lifelike motion blur while also letting enough light onto the sensor and also having the time for a complete blackout so the film could be moved to the next frame.
To get a proper real life capture with no temporal aliasing (aka the wagon wheel effect) and being able to track a motion with no apparent blur we would probably need upwards of 10kfps or maybe even higher, and a shutter angle of at least 720 degrees (so two frames or more), all according to Nyquist. Can't technically be done today of course (at least not playback), but probably will sometime in the future.
But me and most other people are so used to cinema being at 24fps and 180 shutter angle so going away from it will be really hard, or borderline impossible. Some directors have tried but failed quite hard. Probably not because of the frame rate though, but those films wasn't particularly good storywise, so maybe if someone like Denis Villeneuve made a 48fps+ movie it would get more traction?
Personally I prefer that sample-and-hold motion blur since I hate the flickering of a CRT or BFI that give me eye strain and headaches. But both are really equally "wrong" since the only way of solving that problem is simply by upping the framerate.
