I'm not a display professional, but I have spent time in their professional societies.
The Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers - SMPTE and Kodak developed a lot of science around color reproduction and brightness. The Society for Information Display - SID is where innovation and measurement happens today. It is all tied to vision science, with their own medical and psychology professionals.
Fortunately there is enough money in the display industry to support research, development, manufacturing, and measurement!
There are many parallels between our audio world and the moving image reproduction world. The eye has a tremendous dynamic range and retinal and brain processing to rival the ear. Like audio, the intent in a movie theater or at home is to manage accuracy end to end moderated by the artist intent! You see similar tools used in photography.
On set you will often see very expensive test charts from
https://dsclabs.com/, just like photographers use
https://www.xrite.com/categories/calibration-profiling/colorchecker-targets. The camera is calibrated. In the editing suite, and especially the color correction suite, the reference monitors and projectors/screens are calibrated, the room background lighting is controlled and the wall behind the screen is a neutral grey.
Just like audio in the edit, color correction, and mastering, the director and producer make many artistic decisions about color and brightness with consideration of the consumer viewing environment.
Just like audio, our acuity in the voice range has parallels to our eye acuity for skin tones. Kodak managed that chemically, your digital camera does it today with proprietary algorithms.
Because of my involvement with the SID chapter I met the Canadian developers of HDR displays for photography and video before they were bought by Dolby, and many of our area display professionals went from Sharp Labs to Dolby. Dolby does perceptual research on picture.
So just like audio, the display, the room, and calibration is a good approach to your viewing if you want to experience the very expensively made director's intent!
RTings does a good job at testing in a way that is accessible to prosumers. The tristimulus response, color space found in nature, color space that is perceivable beyond colors found in nature, the continual advancements in expanding the color space of displays, brightness (and longevity) of the tristimulus phosphors/emitters/lasers is always a challenge and always advancing.
MicroLED are fantastic and fantastically expensive. They are also heavy and power hungry. Many of the Apple stores have them, and if you have to ask the price, you can't afford it. If you can find a Dolby laser theater, and their 3D technology, they are great. One of our local art film theaters has gone crazy for 70MM film projection and owns many film prints so occasionally draws directors, like Tarantino, for special showings of his films. They get a premium admission price for classic films on 70mm.
I have a background in photonics, so I'm a fan of quantum dots, but they cannot overcome the imperfections of the LCD shutter, even with local dimming. If you want to get into laser projection, with in many cases a great gamut, there are screens that selectively reflect only the tristimulus and not all (white) light. Occasionally there is talk of RGB+YCM so you have a hexagon in x,y color space, but no one is capturing that on set. The interaction of color, similar to our psychoacoustic masking, is a fascinating subject and you can still get made-in-his-lifetime Josef Albers prints for not too much money.
To size, I don't have a dedicated theater room but I have a lot of art. So I went small - 48" in the corner. It is a well rated mid-price LCD, calibrated. I won't buy a Chinese brand, too much cyber risk to spend time to address. In our local SID chapter, we, of course, discussed the human factor - spouse acceptance factor. For that, make your large screen a window, or a window streaming anyplace in the world, or if you are Bill Gates, make it a painting.
Funny story, I heard a talk by Bran Ferren. He talked about how the DP would rent very expensive digital movie cameras, outfit them with all the add-ons for follow focus and shading, tracks and dolly, rent ridiculously exotic lens sets, and calibrate the camera. The last step was throwing a piece of nylon stocking in front to the lens to soften the picture because no one wants to see skin pores blown up to crater size on a large screen in a movie theater. His point was artistic intent.
The other funny story comes from school. I took just one optics course because my EE was adjacent to the best optics school in the country, and I had a pretty famous professor for that class too. For the full optics major, one class brought in an expert to speak from Kodak. Their entire job at Kodak was to study how skin tone was reproduced in print and on screen. It changes over years. Sometimes oranger, greener, or bluer, and it varies across ethnicity. It is a big thing in fashion and it follows artistic intent, not accuracy.
So all said, I'm a prosumer who uses objective scientific reviews to attain accurate in-home reproduction of the artistic intent within the cost I am willing to pay. I'm fortunate to have some relevant engineering background. There is a lot of engineering expertise deeper than mine on ASR and it is always a pleasure to have their contributions.
https://www.smpte.org/
https://www.sid.org/ - their conferences and display week trade show are always interesting like the AES
https://nab.org/ their trade show is where to see all the cameras
https://hpaonline.com/ - the Hollywood Production alliance covers production and post for the moving image it is a good group for entering the industry
