Samsung emphasise colour volume on their new QLED HDR TVs - news discussion

The marketing message is that QLED is just like OLED, except it adds a wiggling tail so is better.

But since much HDR content is graded at 4,000 nits, is the subtext actually to skip the half-measures and wait for a future SQOLED that can provide the 4,000 nits at full colour volume?

Autocalibration, on the other hand, sounds like a lovely feature for enthusiasts.
 
Last edited:
As does the auto-banding-removal, auto-bleedfix, auto-rear-panel-re-affixing, and oh, wait...

:trollface:

;)
 
The problem is that whatever we call it, it remains a backlight led TV. In fact, the true qled was always about self emittive technology aka no need for backlight.
When this arrives, then oled will have a true competitor. Until then, you can have 10000 nits and you will still have the same problems
 
I'd be really interested to hear thoughts on the ability of led backlit TVs to properly saturate colours in darker areas when mixed content is on screen.

This, alongside the presence of significant haloing, seems to be the major difference in HDR performance between my set, a dx902, and the 2016 OLEDs.

All the talk of peak brightness / colour volume seems to ignore the fact that unless you set even a FALD to an overly aggressive backlight control setting (and therefore dim peak whites anyway) I've never seen any evidence of any backlit TV being able to accurately display colours in dark areas with mixed content on screen.
 
Autocalibration, on the other hand, sounds like a lovely feature for enthusiasts.
I have a high end NEC computer monitor with auto calibration software. You place the measuring device on the screen, start the calibration software, pick your targets and hit go. Then you wait a few minutes while the screen adjusts itself. It is great and very easy.

I wish calibrating my TV was so easy.
 
The problem is that whatever we call it, it remains a backlight led TV. In fact, the true qled was always about self emittive technology aka no need for backlight.
When this arrives, then oled will have a true competitor. Until then, you can have 10000 nits and you will still have the same problems

I watched an interview with the CEO of Nanosys, and the full domestic TV implementation of "proper" emissive QLED looks to be a good three to five years away yet.
 
Hi @Steve Withers , a bit off topic but it's the only interesting LED news I've seen, I don't suppose you got a look at Sony's CLEDIS panels?
 
Hi @Steve Withers , a bit off topic but it's the only interesting LED news I've seen, I don't suppose you got a look at Sony's CLEDIS panels?

Good point. The only CLEDIS info I've seen from CES 2017 was a YouTube video from the Linus Tech Tips channel, showing the massive CLEDIS wall. It'd be interesting to see where this is in terms of development.
 
Good point. The only CLEDIS info I've seen from CES 2017 was a YouTube video from the Linus Tech Tips channel, showing the massive CLEDIS wall. It'd be interesting to see where this is in terms of development.
There is a bit more discussion on it over on AVS

Though not much in the way of details other than each small panel being $5000 each so definitely not something coming anytime soon by the sounds of it but you never know. They also said it can do 1000nits of brightness on a full screen test pattern which is insane!
 
While I agree it's great to see that Samsung are pushing for a more accurate picture and showing the full colour volume. The fact is its still an LCD TV with all the problems that come with it.
Did they also say you get blooming, banding,backlight bleed, grey blacks in HDR, and snow blindness from 1500 nits...:facepalm:

Samsung calling it a QLED when it's not actually a proper self emissive display. Just another piece of Spin, BS, from them..IMO

I look forward to seeing an actual 55-65" self emissive QLED. And seeing what it's capable off. And with none of the drawbacks you get with any current LCD. No matter how they dress or pimp it out. Or change it's name for the umpteenth time.....:cool:

I will stick with OLED for the foreseeable future. As I find it way bright enough for me. Even though it's not capable of going as bright as any current supped up LCD.
Or should that be called (Samsung)?? _ LCD-LED, Nano Crystal, Quantum Dot, QLED-2017..... ZLED-2018??
 
Last edited:
It seams a one would expect. Nits good and push P3 colour space TV with a name meant to confuse. Hopefully it does not track to P3 and provides good value.
 
Still and LCD panel...

What what is up with brightness, brightness, brightness these days? My OLED is 600 knits I believe and when white seen comes on a TV during the night I get half blind....or when there's one really bright part of an image and I can't see anything else because of it....

A good TV does everything well, colour reproduction, black levels, motion handling, processing....

This I'm afraid is another marketing gimmick
 
Or should that be called (Samsung)?? _ LCD-LED, Nano Crystal, Quantum Dot, QLED-2017..... ZLED-2018??

Quantum Crystal Laser Nano Light Emitting Super Mega Dot Display coming in 2020....
 
There is a bit more discussion on it over on AVS: Sony CLEDIS Micro-LED Display at CES 2017 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews

Though not much in the way of details other than each small panel being $5000 each so definitely not something coming anytime soon by the sounds of it but you never know. They also said it can do 1000nits of brightness on a full screen test pattern which is insane!

Good point. The only CLEDIS info I've seen from CES 2017 was a YouTube video from the Linus Tech Tips channel, showing the massive CLEDIS wall. It'd be interesting to see where this is in terms of development.

I put together a couple of videos about Micro-LED last year;
Micro LED Technology looks exciting....

.
 
I have a high end NEC computer monitor with auto calibration software. You place the measuring device on the screen, start the calibration software, pick your targets and hit go. Then you wait a few minutes while the screen adjusts itself. It is great and very easy.

I wish calibrating my TV was so easy.

I really don't understand why high end TVs aren't calibrated in such a fashion on the assembly line. Would be relatively easy as part of any power up QC test surely...
 
I'm not sure that it would be that easy and cheap.....
 
Still and LCD panel...

What what is up with brightness, brightness, brightness these days? My OLED is 600 knits I believe and when white seen comes on a TV during the night I get half blind....or when there's one really bright part of an image and I can't see anything else because of it....

A good TV does everything well, colour reproduction, black levels, motion handling, processing....

This I'm afraid is another marketing gimmick

Again with this misconception about brightness...nobody wants a 600 or 1500 nits tv cranked up when watching regular sdr footage but when watching hdr more brightness is better...a lot better.

I am a big fan of oled and i agree about dressing up a pig and so on with lcd but that doesn't mean i cant see oled shortcomings as well(or maybe i should say LG`s oled shortcomings)

One of the reasons for upgrading from my panasonic vt30 is hdr and if i had gun to my head right now after watching a couple of hdr demos on both an LG b6 and samsung ks8000 i would choose the LG, mainly because the viewing angles and haloing of the samsung but i have to say if these new qled improves on these issues while LG doesn't improve notably with the near black och banding processing....i might make a different choice this fall.

I´m guessing sony and panasonics oled`s will be out of my economic reach
 
I really don't understand why high end TVs aren't calibrated in such a fashion on the assembly line. Would be relatively easy as part of any power up QC test surely...
Aside from the fact that they would need to run the TVs in for 50-100 hours first and any calibration done at the factory wouldn't take into account the environment that the TV was ultimately used in, it would also be time consuming and expensive. The Cinema/Movie THX modes on modern TVs are fairly accurate out of the box but actually calibrating each panel to DeltaEs (errors) of under 1 would definitely result in the TVs themselves being more expensive.
 
Aside from the fact that they would need to run the TVs in for 50-100 hours first and any calibration done at the factory wouldn't take into account the environment that the TV was ultimately used in, it would also be time consuming and expensive. The Cinema/Movie THX modes on modern TVs are fairly accurate out of the box but actually calibrating each panel to DeltaEs (errors) of under 1 would definitely result in the TVs themselves being more expensive.

Good point well made, Mr Withers.

AudysseyVision next then? Consumer grade auto calibration...
 
I really don't understand why high end TVs aren't calibrated in such a fashion on the assembly line. Would be relatively easy as part of any power up QC test surely...

Calibration generates correction color tables (LUTs) and requires somewhere to store them afterwards. So in the case of TVs they would have to build in hardware with some sort of memory storage to store the hardware LUTs. This probably costs a bit more in hardware but I suppose when these boy-o companies have the cheek to charge thousands for a TV, a tiny bit extra of cost to them to add this shouldn't be much.

With the previous example with computer monitor calibration, usually the LUTs are stored in software in eg. Windows 7 (Color Management Profiles) by the calibration software. This means they don't alsways "stick" like for example on multi-monitor setups or during gaming.

On some more expensive monitors they include hardware LUTs so the tables are actually written and stored in monitor hardware - this is much better and means the colour correction will stay regardless of what programs are running on the monitor. Seems hardware LUT monitors are very rare and getting even rarer.

I know Dell had a 27" model that had it but they adding it to newer models and my 27" Dell doesn't have it! So they took it away because it wasn't worth their while to keep it because they thought nobody used it and it saved a few pennies per monitor!

By the way as an interesting aside, when calibrating my monitor you have to tell it the nits value to calibrate to and it only goes up to 120 nits maximum, so when calibrated the monitor is much darker than a non-calibrated Dell, which usually is way brighter out of the box (like over 240 nits) so when people say HDR isn't much brighter maybe that's because we are so used to seeing content that should be at 100nits being shown incorrectly much brighter instead.

Also most peoples current LCD monitors can go up to about 300nits so we could show HDR content with some special player software that (tone?) mapped down to 300nits if someone would write it!
 
On some more expensive monitors they include hardware LUTs so the tables are actually written and stored in monitor hardware - this is much better and means the colour correction will stay regardless of what programs are running on the monitor. Seems hardware LUT monitors are very rare and getting even rarer.
Most people don't want to pay that much for a monitor but they are easy to find from NEC & Eizo (the top brands). Benq have started selling some and Dell has a couple of models.

By the way as an interesting aside, when calibrating my monitor you have to tell it the nits value to calibrate to and it only goes up to 120 nits maximum,
That sounds odd. I can set my target way higher if I wanted too.

I really don't understand why high end TVs aren't calibrated in such a fashion on the assembly line. Would be relatively easy as part of any power up QC test surely...
You can do that but as the screen is used its response will vary over time so periodic re calibration is ideally required so it should be done by the user anyway at some point.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom