buckmichaels

Auditioning
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
14
Reaction score
8
Points
10
Age
57
Location
Coolidge Arizona
Real Name
Mike
Having had an LG OLED TV with screen burn in, I would probably gravitate towards a model other than OLED. Is there a technology that gives you a great tv picture, without the danger of the OLED burn in? I'm looking for a 65".
 

Robert_Zohn

Value Electronics
Insider
Joined
Sep 17, 2005
Messages
803
Reaction score
527
Points
610
Location
Scarsdale, NY
Website
valueelectronics.com
Real Name
Robert Zohn
Mike, Not sure what vintage OLED TV you had, but wanted you to know that beginning with the 2017 model year and every year thereafter OLED TVs have integrated several technologies to help prevent burn-in. 2016 and earlier OLED TVs were more susceptible to image retention.

With that said you still would have to avoid static images that stay on the screen for more than 2 hrs without changing the content and that content with the same static image is watched every day.
 

Edwin-S

Lead Actor
Premium
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
8,416
Reaction score
1,658
Points
9,110
Wow. LG's new 8K set can play content that doesn't even exist but it can't play certain content that has existed for a decade. What a selling point it is to be able to play non-existent 8K content. Makes me want to run out and buy one right now. :laugh:
 

Robert_Zohn

Value Electronics
Insider
Joined
Sep 17, 2005
Messages
803
Reaction score
527
Points
610
Location
Scarsdale, NY
Website
valueelectronics.com
Real Name
Robert Zohn
Not sure, but I assume you are referring to static images that can burn into the screen? If this is your point, then please remember we had the same issue with plasma and CRT TVs.

Emissive display technology is more susceptible to leaving phosphor retention and burn in when the same static image is left on the screen for 2 hrs per day and the same content is repeated daily

Edge-lit or backlit displays are more resistant to displaying static images for longer period before they show burn-in.

Also wanted you to know that all 8K TVs deliver a better picture with any content, low resolution cable, 4K HD streaming and BDs than ANY 4K TV image quality can deliver. Samsung, Sony and LG put the best video processors and best panels exclusively for the premium 8K TVs.

Let's be thankful for technology advancements.
 

Edwin-S

Lead Actor
Premium
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
8,416
Reaction score
1,658
Points
9,110
Not sure, but I assume you are referring to static images that can burn into the screen? If this is your point, then please remember we had the same issue with plasma and CRT TVs.

Emissive display technology is more susceptible to leaving phosphor retention and burn in when the same static image is left on the screen for 2 hrs per day and the same content is repeated daily

Edge-lit or backlit displays are more resistant to displaying static images for longer period before they show burn-in.

Also wanted you to know that all 8K TVs deliver a better picture with any content, low resolution cable, 4K HD streaming and BDs than ANY 4K TV image quality can deliver. Samsung, Sony and LG put the best video processors and best panels exclusively for the premium 8K TVs.

Let's be thankful for technology advancements.
Not sure how you can say this, considering that there is a thread here discussing how people cannot tell the difference between 4K and 8K on any TV set of any size that fits in an average home. And I highly doubt that upscaling SD or lower quality images up to 8K is going to make them look noticeably better than 4K. I'm all for technology advancements but not when they drop a technology advancement that actually had real content out there that could use it while trying to sell us on an "technology advancement" that has 0 content, other than via upscaling. At least, 4K has a modest amount of native 4K content available. 8K has 0 native content and I expect will have 0 native content for a long time. Does anyone expect Broadcasters and other content providers to start broadcasting in 8K when most of them have barely started taking advantage of 4K?

I mean, if someone wants to pay a premium for a technology that has no native content available then, hey, it is their money, but 8K is an even more useless and expensive advancement than 3D capability:an actual useful feature with actual content that people were complaining was jacking up the cost of a TV set for something they wouldn't use.
 

Robert_Zohn

Value Electronics
Insider
Joined
Sep 17, 2005
Messages
803
Reaction score
527
Points
610
Location
Scarsdale, NY
Website
valueelectronics.com
Real Name
Robert Zohn
It's true that 8K resolution alone offers minimal advantage over 4K and it's also true that we have very little 8K content in the USA. However, my point is that all TV manufacturers put the very best video processors and panel technology exclusively in the 8K TVs models. So if you want the best TV it's an 8K model.

Also the Warner Brothers test that was at the HPA last month has little to no value for real life experiences. What they proved is that the human visual system can only see a slight advantage with a 8K display when viewed at further distances. They used two 88" 8K OLED TVs with 8K content that was down-converted to 4K and then up-converted back to 8K for the evaluation. Not sure why they did all of the up and down conversions as we lost image quality just from all of the resolution conversions. Further, we already know everything they determined many years ago from the eye doctors vision charts.

What I see every day in our a/v showroom is the very best premium 4K HDR TVs butt next to the 8K TVs with the same content everyone, novices and video enthusiasts can easily see all of the picture quality advantages of the 8K TVs.

Regarding 8K native content consider the following. Hollywood has begin shooting some films with 8K video and scanning film in 8K, 8K is a reality for NHK, and BBC. 8K camera owners have created native 8K YouTube videos, 8K games are available from PCs and 8K gaming will come later this year from PlayStation and X-Box game consoles. Also later this year Sharp and Canon will launch their native 8K HDR cameras.
 

Edwin-S

Lead Actor
Premium
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
8,416
Reaction score
1,658
Points
9,110
I normally tend to adopt early, but 8K is one "technology advancement" that I can wait to become commoditized. I'll only move up to 8K when the 4K set I have fails and 8K sets are all that are available.

I'm pretty sure by that time 16K will be arriving on the scene.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robert_Zohn

Blackscreen

Extra
Joined
Jun 9, 2014
Messages
22
Reaction score
6
Points
11
Real Name
Robert Hart
I want to know where all the LG rollable OLED TV's are....

They demonstrated some awesome-looking floor-rising rollable Oleds. It's obviously something that would have broad appeal if prices were affordable, so where are they???

Rollable large-screen TVs solve a bunch of issues with large flat-screens. They'd be easier and cheaper to transport. You could put a 100"+ TV in the living room without the wife complaining that "it dominates the room". You could have variable aspect ratios like on projectors with no black bars etc.

I was expecting TV's that roll down like projector screens to completely replace two-piece projection in home theaters.

Am I the only one who wanted one???
 

LeoA

Cinematographer
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
2,958
Reaction score
1,527
Points
4,110
Location
North Country
Real Name
Leo
The only native 8k games you're going to see on the next Xbox and Playstation will be things like Tetris, solitaire, etc.

The power of these systems will make 4k/60fps gaming with highly detailed 3d worlds much more viable than it has been though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sam Posten

Blackscreen

Extra
Joined
Jun 9, 2014
Messages
22
Reaction score
6
Points
11
Real Name
Robert Hart
Later this year, at the launch LG will only offer the 65" RX series rollable OLED TV and they will be very expensive. Great technology, but it needs time to mature for prices to come down and larger sizes become a reality.
I think that's a huge mistake on their part. It completely misses the key value of the tech imo. 65" is far too small for it to matter or for anyone to pay a premium for.

They should be aiming for an affordable ($5000 or less) rollable TV that is no smaller than 100". Then it would bridge the gap between the home theater and living room crowd who actually spends money of this stuff.

I also think it makes no sense to position rollable TVs as s premium price product. People who can afford $10,000+ TVs usually aren't worried about saving space...

I was hoping to see affordable versions of their 103" 21:9 TVs too. LGs 2020 line-up offers nothing over their 2019 or 2018 or 2017 line-up for me. May as well grab last years close-out bargains.
 

Robert_Zohn

Value Electronics
Insider
Joined
Sep 17, 2005
Messages
803
Reaction score
527
Points
610
Location
Scarsdale, NY
Website
valueelectronics.com
Real Name
Robert Zohn
LG Rollable TV is a very niche speciality and difficult to manufacturer with the perfection necessary in this bleeding edge advanced technology. It's a luxury lifestyle TV and no other TV manufacturer can make anything close to this highly styled TV.
You can't compare it to any other TV. Luxury buyers are keenly interested in this product as it matches their minimalist style and desire to hide the TV.

We're not going to see affordable 21:9 103" TVs either.

Regarding LG's 2020 line up they have made nice upgrades from 2017 to 2018 to 2019 and again for 2020. Last year's TV prices are surprising close to the launch prices of the 2020 TVs. For example the most popular best selling LG OLED TV is the 65" C9 that is on final closeout for $2,199 and the successor 65" CX series is launching at $2,497. Anyone buying a new 65" OLED TV is very well advised to spend $300 more for the new 2020 CX series. Thinks about spending $2,199 for an older model when for a very little more you can get the new upgraded a9 Gen 3 processor with better up-conversion of low resolution cable content, and LG's new upgraded webOS 5.0 Smart interface.

Sorry we don't agree on these issues.
 

Blackscreen

Extra
Joined
Jun 9, 2014
Messages
22
Reaction score
6
Points
11
Real Name
Robert Hart
I think rollable TV's are only a luxury niche product if they are priced that way. The vast majority of people don't care about better processors or understand what they are. A TV that folds away neatly when not in use is my wife's dream come true.

Flat screen TVs only overtook CRT because they look nicer and take up less room. The display tech in Plasma is inferior. LCD is inferior to plasma but overtook it because it was cheaper.

Try telling your average Joe about more pixels, contrast ratios, processors with better upscaling and interpolation etc and they glaze over. A large TV that rolls up from the floor is cool to almost everyone. But... Not for $15,000.

I think we will see the affordable 100"+ TV too. LG are already selling 88" models for around $2000. I've seen new 98" 4k LCDs going for around $8000. There's no reason not to hope that trend (of larger + cheaper) will continue.
 

Sam Posten

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Oct 30, 1997
Messages
28,279
Reaction score
5,210
Points
9,110
Location
Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
Website
www.navesink.net
Real Name
Sam Posten
I think you seriously overestimate the number of people who care about hiding their TVs. Regardless, they are priced as luxury goods this year and your disappointment in that is not going to change the available number that LG can produce of this small market segment this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robert_Zohn

Blackscreen

Extra
Joined
Jun 9, 2014
Messages
22
Reaction score
6
Points
11
Real Name
Robert Hart
I think you seriously overestimate the number of people who care about hiding their TVs. Regardless, they are priced as luxury goods this year and your disappointment in that is not going to change the available number that LG can produce of this small market segment this year.
That's true. I can't change LG's product catalog with the power of my mind. My disappointment won't change anything, except my interest in upgrading.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-LG. I have a 77" LG Oled in my living room and two 65" Oleds elsewhere in my house. I love my Oled displays. They delight me every time I use them.

I'm just in the market for something larger for my basement home theater. I'd like to replace my projector screen with a larger flat-screen. The problem is that Oled has ruined me for all other display tech.

We were starting to see manufacturers experiment with larger flat screens a few years ago. It's important to state our interest in online forums so manufacturers know there is a market if the price is sensible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robert_Zohn

Blackscreen

Extra
Joined
Jun 9, 2014
Messages
22
Reaction score
6
Points
11
Real Name
Robert Hart
You should consider JVC's NX5 for the basement theater upgrade with Panasonic's UB820. The native 4K HDR image is stunning and nothing like this was ever possible before these two 4K HDR devices that were made in video heaven were available.
Someone I know has an NX5. They are excellent, especially for a projector in that price range. It won't scratch this particular itch though.

Now that I've seen 100" + flat screens, I'm going to wait a while before my next upgrade. I have a high-end 1080p Barco projector that will continue to fill my large screen basement needs for now.

If the flatscreen market still hasn't made any progress (with affordable 100"+ TVs) in a few years then I guess I'll put the cash into projector upgrades instead. I'm feeling optimistic though. LG has already released an 88" Oled. There is obviously a trend for bigger TVs.... A 98" Oled has to be in the works. Then, will rollable screens, who knows...

I've been a projector guy all my life but Oled changes everything for me. I just can't seem to unsee what I saw....
 

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

Threads
343,746
Messages
4,688,803
Members
141,023
Latest member
GMartin58