Quote from: Guttierez on June 02, 2019, 20:01:28
I have never actually heard of OLED as backlight in TVs though, are you thinking of QLEDs?  I have only ever seen OLED used as the emitter and colorer.

AFAIK LG's OLED TVs use OLED as backlight, it was quoted as reason for why LG's TV panels are stable but phone panels are crap, they're radically different technology.

Quote from: Skylancer727 on June 02, 2019, 13:01:13
OLED=crap, permanent burn-in, much higher cost, higher blue light, etc...
LCD/LED=best, cheaper, stable, burn-in immune, perfected over decades, etc.. etc..

Not entirely true. OLED can theoretically be cheaper than LCDs as they have less parts to manufacture. Assuming they have a good supplier it does end up cheaper.

Higher blue light is also untrue. OLED peaks at 453nm while many LCDs actually use blue LEDs for the backlight as they are cheaper than pure white while the LCD can shift the warmth.

Also full aray backlights are far more expensive than OLED. My monitor cost $2K and it's LCD. Samsung's QLED also costs more than LG's OLED displays. Also, burn in isn't perfect, it's just highly unlikely with all the things it does to prevent it. My Wii U gamepad had burn in and that was an LCD and I do have LCDs that had burn in. Not to mention LCDs have far more issues with stuck/ dead pixels, the backlight going bad, and the color saturation being lower. Hell I have yet to have an LCD last 4 years yet. The last one died with the backlight dying. They are definitely not perfect.
[/quote]

No, you are the one who is wrong! Modern LCDs do not have burn-in, that is almost impossible. The early generation LCDs may have stuck pixels that do not change colours or are stuck on one colour from time to time if displaying a static image for a long time. But even then, usually a reset/power-on-off cycling will solve the problems. You never ever find that problem with LCD panels today. Dead pixels or permanently stuck ones are different, they are a defect, not due to wear and tear.

Also you are contradicting yourself. A good supplier will never be cheap, like Samsung/LG. Its the less high quality OLED suppliers that will cut corners that will lead to issues in terms of longevity and burn-in susceptibility.

For example, Samsung, as the pioneer in OLED tech, never used in-display optical fingerprint scanners under their OLEDs, which are commonly used by other phone manufacturers (as pioneered by Vivo and now most Chinese manufacturers use this method). This is because they use a camera to take an image of the fingerprint though the OLED panel. They thus require the finger to be placed precisely over the outline/overlay of the finger. This requires the OLED pixels (green usually) to show a static image of the fingerprint outline a lot of the time and then to light up at max brightness to provide enough light to illuminate & capture the image.

Samsung clearly did not want to implement this due to possible OLED burn in issues. They only implemented Qualcomm's ultra-sonic sensor which did not require the OLED outline of the finger. That tells you a lot about OLED burn-in issues.

Its also rubbish to say that "LCDs use blue LEDs". Backlighting must be white, so how can they use only blue or predominantly blue LEDs? Google and you will understand that there are 2 main ways in which LEDs give out white light. (1) Using a blue LED with a phosphor coating to convert blue light to white light by a process called fluorescence. (2)  Combining red, blue and green LEDs to produce white light. White light is produced by varying the intensities of the individual red, blue and green chips.

The blue LED light is either opaque in the process since it is the fluorescence that gives out the visible light; or the blue light is no more than the other lights in the spectrum that are combined with it.

There is a lot of falsehoods in a lot of the comments. LCDs require backlighting. The first gen LCDs used essentially fluorescent tubes which aged fast and lost brightness easily, not to mention losing colour accuracy in the process.

Modern LCDs use LEDs as backlighting (hence LED LCDs or just LED panels) because they have very long life and almost never lose their brightness. They can have anything from 30,000 to 120,000 hrs of burn time without noticeable loss of brightness. They also almost never fail, unless you are just unlucky. I know because I have never had any LED product die on me yet (which means all my home lightbulbs, 2 x monitor, 2 x TV or 2 x laptop screen).

The primary issue is that blue OLED sub-pixels on the other hand, emit naked blue light which is unfiltered.

As for pricing for QLED TVs, you're generalizing regarding geographical market pricing. Also you're not understand how QLED TVs are made. Its typically a marketing term but they ADD an EXTRA layer of light emission/filtration between the LCD and LED backlighting to give extra higher quality filtered white light for higher contrast etc. That is why they are more expensive than LED. Not that LED is expensive. It is such mature tech, LED displays are almost invariably cheaper than QLED or OLED!

"My Wii U gamepad had burn in and that was an LCD and I do have LCDs that had burn in." - you are clearly mistaken. Unless they were ancient 1st gen LCDs, a reset/power cycle typically resolves such issues. Like I said a defect like a stuck or dead pixel are different and are covered by warranty. OLEDs are just as likely to suffer stuck/dead pixels. Just see all the impact damage to OLEDs. A very common sight would be Samsung smartphones with a column of magenta stuck pixels after drop damage.

To say that your monitor did not last 4 years is not the point. Maybe you just bought cheapo electronic brands that don't last. The point is that LCDs won't suffer gradual dimming and burn in degradation over the same 4 years compared to OLED! Failure can be due to many things like the PCB or power supply just frying or giving up the ghost.

I have never actually heard of OLED as backlight in TVs though, are you thinking of QLEDs?  I have only ever seen OLED used as the emitter and colorer. 

Quote from: S.Yu on June 02, 2019, 16:20:53

Quote from: Guttierez on June 02, 2019, 13:33:36
OLEDs do indeed emit a lot of energy from 450 nm down to UV.  You can google OLED spectrum to see some examples.  LCDs are a different beast in that the emitted light has been filtered and diffused by layers of material and liquid transistors.  Can also google this and see that practically speaking OLED can be a lot worse than LED in emitting ultra blue and ultra violet light.

If that's the case then OLED TVs behave like LED TVs, since they do have an LCD layer, the OLED is only responsible for pixel grade backlight control.

Oh, I was referring to OLED pixels-based panels, not OLED-backlit types of panels in TVs.  More like what we see in phones, tablets and eventually laptops, not TVs.  My apologies.

Quote from: S.Yu on June 02, 2019, 16:20:53

Quote from: Guttierez on June 02, 2019, 13:33:36
OLEDs do indeed emit a lot of energy from 450 nm down to UV.  You can google OLED spectrum to see some examples.  LCDs are a different beast in that the emitted light has been filtered and diffused by layers of material and liquid transistors.  Can also google this and see that practically speaking OLED can be a lot worse than LED in emitting ultra blue and ultra violet light.

If that's the case then OLED TVs behave like LED TVs, since they do have an LCD layer, the OLED is only responsible for pixel grade backlight control.

The LED setup is quite different to OLED, even for TVs.  The emissive layer of OLED displays is situated behind very thin layers, compared to LED displays, which uses a large plastic diffuser along with other glass layers in front of the diffuser, as well as matte white plastic sheets.  Any of those layers in an LED setup can be designed to filter out extra blue light, because the LEDs only serve as backlight to a non-emissive layer.  In OLED panels as they are today, there is no current layer that can directly serve as a blue light filter, but certainly, a layer can be introduced, which I believe is what Dell might be working on.  That's my guess, but from the structure of the OLED panel, this is in principle at least, possible.

Quote from: Guttierez on June 02, 2019, 13:33:36
OLEDs do indeed emit a lot of energy from 450 nm down to UV.  You can google OLED spectrum to see some examples.  LCDs are a different beast in that the emitted light has been filtered and diffused by layers of material and liquid transistors.  Can also google this and see that practically speaking OLED can be a lot worse than LED in emitting ultra blue and ultra violet light.

If that's the case then OLED TVs behave like LED TVs, since they do have an LCD layer, the OLED is only responsible for pixel grade backlight control.

OLEDs do indeed emit a lot of energy from 450 nm down to UV.  You can google OLED spectrum to see some examples.  LCDs are a different beast in that the emitted light has been filtered and diffused by layers of material and liquid transistors.  Can also google this and see that practically speaking OLED can be a lot worse than LED in emitting ultra blue and ultra violet light.

OLED=crap, permanent burn-in, much higher cost, higher blue light, etc...
LCD/LED=best, cheaper, stable, burn-in immune, perfected over decades, etc.. etc..
[/quote]

Not entirely true. OLED can theoretically be cheaper than LCDs as they have less parts to manufacture. Assuming they have a good supplier it does end up cheaper.

Higher blue light is also untrue. OLED peaks at 453nm while many LCDs actually use blue LEDs for the backlight as they are cheaper than pure white while the LCD can shift the warmth.

Also full aray backlights are far more expensive than OLED. My monitor cost $2K and it's LCD. Samsung's QLED also costs more than LG's OLED displays. Also, burn in isn't perfect, it's just highly unlikely with all the things it does to prevent it. My Wii U gamepad had burn in and that was an LCD and I do have LCDs that had burn in. Not to mention LCDs have far more issues with stuck/ dead pixels, the backlight going bad, and the color saturation being lower. Hell I have yet to have an LCD last 4 years yet. The last one died with the backlight dying. They are definitely not perfect.

Puppy, don't forget that LCD is immune to screen burn in. You will have tons of screen burn in with OLED, not to mention additional blue light. Manufacturers would love more costly tech to keep driving up prices (notice how they are making laptops more and more non-repairable, soldered in RAM, soldered in data drives?) All of these help increase profits.

OLED=crap, permanent burn-in, much higher cost, higher blue light, etc...
LCD/LED=best, cheaper, stable, burn-in immune, perfected over decades, etc.. etc..

OLEDs have blue diodes that emit primarily in the range of 430 nm and on-going research is taking place to both increase its efficiency and longevity.  So, filtering out blue light at this wavelength would decrease panel efficiency somewhat but I would imagine that irreversible eye damage is probably more important to most users.

White LEDs and blue LEDs emit a significant amount of high energy visible light that is between 400 to 450 nm.  No color gamut used in anything related to computers or prints has anything close to 460 nm.  The widest gamut listed on Wikipedia is ProPhoto RGB, which is way bigger than sRGB and Adobe RGB by a huge amount.  Even ProPhoto RGB's lowest end is at >465 nm.  That means filtering all light below 450 nm will not impact the color gamut at all, while reducing the damage caused by prolonged exposure. 

In the same way, a typical camera filters out UV and infrared at the lens-level and professional photography has never suffered color gamut reductions because of those filters, because they filter out wavelengths beyond any usable range, which actually increases sensor dynamic range.

How do you display a saturated blue, without outputting that wavelength? Not impacting color gamut is BS. Also I doubt if the meager 200nits of a typical laptop LED screen after some backlight aging counts as strong LED light.

Should we read it as: OLED panels are still very expensive, create a story to sell cheap LCD panels longer than necessary? It is nonsense.