HDMI Forum Announces Version 2.1 Of The HDMI Specification

  • WELCOME TO THE NEW SERVER!

    If you are seeing this you are on our new server WELCOME HOME!

    While the new server is online Scott is still working on the backend including the cachine. But the site is usable while the work is being completes!

    Thank you for your patience and again WELCOME HOME!

    CLICK THE X IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER OF THE BOX TO DISMISS THIS MESSAGE
HDR is better for the OLED screens.
I was given to believe that the dynamic range limitations of OLED made it worse for HDR versus LCDs that were good for 1000nits and higher. 150-1000 is better than 50-500, no?

To be certain, a finely divided gradation is ideal, but the term "range" only speaks to the distance between top and bottom.
 
The digital spec is well defined. In a 10 bit it is 16-255; 8 bit it is 16-235. On a projector with dynamic iris, a 16 black chart displayed in a blackout room has no light output. OLED should do the same. At the bright end of the spectrum, color and white can produce excellent spread without clipping to 2000 nits on OLED now. LCD/LED at best is 1000 nits. Projectors can reach to about 500 nits but these are rather expensive laser engines. A projector is a problem to figure the nit light off the screen because the screen can range in size, bigger screen area - lower brightness. Therefore the way projectors are compared is light output from the lens in lumins. 1800 lumins is about top for a UHP lamp at 280 watt. On a 100" diagonal screen with a 1.0 gain matte white is only about 150 nits. The same screen area, a 100" OLED is probably the best display for overall image, but if you want large screen, today, a projector is the way to go for $ cost but then HDR, especially, will suffer. Last I saw a 100" OLED was about $100,000. Equivalent size projector for 150 nits is about $10,000. In other words, pick your compromise.

The gradients to avoid color banding is a different spec. The Sony ( what I am familiar with) using SXRD panels has a "Triluminous®" engine that produces over 33,000 colors at once and can add sharpness to the picture without the traditional white edge artifact common to LED and super OLED screens.
 
If that were the case, why is everyone fawning over the Panasonic being projected to do 800 nits?

Don't know! I'm not there, but I know Samsung OLED is boasting 1000 nits OLED. 1500-2000 is a theoretical top end limit to the technology.

Then we have the newest Sony prototype technology Called "Backlight Magic" or something to that effect which returns to focused LED behind a panel, that they claim can do 4000 nits, but lacks pixel level color control that OLED has the advantage. It is also claimed to have blacks as good as OLED but I find that difficult to believe. The LED back light would need to focus on the pixel level which they admit it can't do.

It really is a work in progress, always changing. Pick your technology and for sure the moment you turn it on there will be something better. I'd be rather watching what I have than waiting for the next new thing.
 
I'm not there, but I know Samsung OLED is boasting 1000 nits OLED.
As I've said, talk is cheap around CES season and 1000 nits is nowhere near the 2000 nits that you claimed. Theoretical extremes are rarely approached in consumer-level gear.

I'm not ready to give up on pixel level backlighting. I wonder if they can use a variation on e-Ink.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)