Quote from: Mr. Franz on April 02, 2023, 23:56:57Flickering has nothing to do with burn-in.

Complete nonsense. The longer the glow of the diodes at 100% brightness in the period, the lower their resource. This is why low-frequency PWM is used, because it is the only way they can increase the life of AMOLED to complete burnout and complete destabilization of color reproduction.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on April 02, 2023, 23:56:57The site has barly any user traffic. Within the small number of users commenting you have found already one who is pointing this out, that would be me.

Judging by the continuous contradictions and frank technical nonsense, you are apparently trying here for a salary from LG/Samsung and other AMOLED manufacturers.

Tech-savvy consumers avoid current AMOLED products. But yes, there are not so many of them in the general crowd of illiterate consumers. But how can this surprise anyone, as in politics, where an insane majority rules?

Quote from: Mr. Franz on April 02, 2023, 23:56:57Modern high end OLEDs of smartphones crush standard IPS displays in terms of brightness. Whether you like this fact or not.

Of course not, and I, as a pro, can see it well with my professional look.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on April 02, 2023, 23:56:57You should. It proofs you wrong. Again.

nose pulled tail stuck (c) It just says that they have some other problems that have come up that I have not yet seen.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on April 02, 2023, 23:56:57I never stated that there is no burn-in for OLEDS.

Hahaha - why then a screensaver from burning on AMOLED, which is not from the factory on IPS? Stop making me laugh, it hurts already...

Quote from: NikoB on March 31, 2023, 18:50:36Experienced authors write on this site, who can easily determine by eye that a certain calibrator is lying.

The writers here are experts on notebooks, not on display technology.
The fact that the Yoga 7 14 G7 was measured with 0,05 nits, but has no glow, clearly shows that there was a lack of knowledge in coducting this measurement and the author was not capable of or did not want to check measurements by eye.

Quote from: NikoB on March 31, 2023, 18:50:36AMOLED screens have become substandard with low contrast.

As long as there are no OLEDs with glowing Blacks in absolute darkness, this is a false statement.

Quote from: NikoB on March 31, 2023, 18:50:36Because if there is no flickering, it burns out much faster

Flickering has nothing to do with burn-in.

Quote from: NikoB on March 31, 2023, 18:50:36Reviews on NB write exactly the opposite - there are no objections from the mass owners. =)

The site has barly any user traffic. Within the small number of users commenting you have found already one who is pointing this out, that would be me.

Quote from: NikoB on March 31, 2023, 18:50:36I have a professional eye. I see that IPS is better always. Shall we argue further? I have a luxmeter with 0.01 lux accuracy.

It get´s more and more laughable.
Modern high end OLEDs of smartphones crush standard IPS displays in terms of brightness. Whether you like this fact or not.

Quote from: NikoB on March 31, 2023, 18:50:36We are talking about a green tint at angles on Samsung's top-end AMOLEDs. All without exception. I just didn't watch S23.

You should. It proofs you wrong. Again.

Quote from: NikoB on March 31, 2023, 18:50:36I just do not believe in 100k hours, because I personally saw LG TVs burn out in large shopping centers in demo mode, even with a dynamic picture but in a certain format.

Burn-in can occur long before the life time of pixels is reached.
Pixel life time refers to the brightness capabilities of pixels not whether or when they can burn-in or not.

Quote from: NikoB on March 31, 2023, 18:50:36You just stated above that there is no burnout. Hahaha.

WTF, I never stated that there is no burn-in for OLEDS.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 30, 2023, 23:03:23There can be many reasons why some reviewers on notebookcheck deviate. Foremost the lack of knowledge, which lead some authors to blindly adopt values measured from their devices while those who know their stuff do not. It is also possible that some are new in their jobs / work only as freelancer / received new cheap lightmeters as replacement of high-grade old equipment

Experienced authors write on this site, who can easily determine by eye that a certain calibrator is lying. Or not lying. And it's true, AMOLED screens have become substandard with low contrast. I'm sure of the second, not your false statement. Because if there is no flickering, it burns out much faster, and the price of dc dimminng is just a drop in the dynamic range, and hence the level of contrast. Hence the color stripes on the top LG TVs - the usual typical banding on the fill with gradients for all AMOLEDs. That is why they calibrate disgustingly - in most reviews, dE is greater than 2.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 30, 2023, 23:03:23All OLEDs (with exception of very old models released over ten years ago) feature absolute black, because they are able to turn their pixels completely off. This is a commonly accepted fact and has not changed with recent models.

Reviews on NB write exactly the opposite - there are no objections from the mass owners. =)

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 30, 2023, 23:03:23Why should the measurments of all reviewers be wrong? Even cheap lightmeters are perfectly able to measure brightness (unlike black level). I have an OLED smartphone and IPS display in front of me that also prove you wrong. The OLED smartphone is brighter.

I have a professional eye. I see that IPS is better always. Shall we argue further? I have a luxmeter with 0.01 lux accuracy.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 30, 2023, 23:03:23A distored gamma curve leads to bad color reproduction (it´s like misty haze). Rainbow effects on OLED are mild compared to this effect, only kick in at really steep angles and (as you also admit) not all OLEDs do have it (including the new S23 models).

Again you write some nonsense. We are talking about a green tint at angles on Samsung's top-end AMOLEDs. All without exception. I just didn't watch S23.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 30, 2023, 23:03:23In case of long static content, most OLEDs actually overdo it (a test by the German site "chip" showed this). If e.g. red pixels were used much more than green and blue, the red pixels will not glow less but more afterwards and will cause burn-in by having more brightness than it should have. The pixel is not (!) at the end of its capacities when there is burn in, it is just wrongly adjusted.

)))))))))) Is that why almost all AMOLED reviewers on this site can't even calibrate with dE below 2? Straight from the factory? What will happen to this s*** after 1-2 years of working 8-12 hours a day? I don't even want to think about color accuracy - when the blue LED burns out ...)))

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 30, 2023, 23:03:23Source?

Asus, otherwise, why at "100000" hours a dynamic screensaver from the factory, if IPS has only 15k hours, but no one puts such screensavers there? ))))))))))))) You know how to think at least a little with your head and at least have some critical thinking and common sense. I yes...)))

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 30, 2023, 23:03:23Source?

Asus, otherwise, why at "100000" hours a dynamic screensaver from the factory, if IPS has only 15k hours, but no one puts such screensavers there? ))))))))))))) You know how to think at least a little with your head and at least have some critical thinking and common sense. I yes...)))
I just do not believe in 100k hours, because I personally saw LG TVs burn out in large shopping centers in demo mode, even with a dynamic picture but in a certain format. Approximately 6-12 months - and you can already see the difference in brightness, where there was a black zone and where there was a dynamic picture for 16 hours a day. Sellers also confirm this in conversations. So 100k hours is a lie of marketers and you bought it ... =)

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 30, 2023, 23:03:23So it should be no problem for you to name one peer-reviewed publication (preferably a double-blind trial with a proper control group setup)?

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4038456/

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 30, 2023, 23:03:23There are people using TV screens as their monitor. That is perfectly possible (except for the burn-in issue of OLEDs).

))))))))))))))))))))))) it is some kind of schizophrenia. You just stated above that there is no burnout. Hahaha.

I think that you are just a troll who is trying to shake the topic with starvation. But in reality, you have nothing to cover.

Quote from: NikoB on March 29, 2023, 22:34:21The reviewers have had hardware calibrators for many years and could previously accurately measure the level of contrast and detect or not detect glow (even by eye). But they previously stubbornly wrote on models with low-frequency PWM that there was an "infinite" black level and did not write the contrast level for this.

There are still recent notebookcheck reviews that correctly state both black level as 0 cd/m² and contrast as ∞:1.
It is not a thing of the past, it is only intermixed!
Most other review sites (including the most renowned display reviewers such as Vincent Theo and RTINGs) also agree on ∞ contrast for OLED. 

There can be many reasons why some reviewers on notebookcheck deviate. Foremost the lack of knowledge, which lead some authors to blindly adopt values measured from their devices while those who know their stuff do not. It is also possible that some are new in their jobs / work only as freelancer / received new cheap lightmeters as replacement of high-grade old equipment / ...

Quote from: NikoB on March 29, 2023, 22:34:21You are repeating complete nonsense.

Again:
One of those OLED notebooks measured by notebookcheck with an allegedly increased black level / decreased contrast demonstrably did not have it. I had that model before my own eyes, it was completely glow-free / absolute black to the human eye.

Have you ever seen even a single recent released OLED with glow in absolute darkness that would verify high black levels / low contrast measure? I doubt so.

In such a case there would be a massive outcry of users on hifi and consumer electronic forums. But there is none.
 
All OLEDs (with exception of very old models released over ten years ago) feature absolute black, because they are able to turn their pixels completely off. This is a commonly accepted fact and has not changed with recent models.

Quote from: NikoB on March 29, 2023, 22:34:21I made every possible attempt on the trading floor to adjust and increase the brightness on the S22 (there were several different models there and there were top-end Flips nearby).

Why should the measurments of all reviewers be wrong? Even cheap lightmeters are perfectly able to measure brightness (unlike black level).
I have an OLED smartphone and IPS display in front of me that also prove you wrong. The OLED smartphone is brighter.

Quote from: NikoB on March 29, 2023, 22:34:21confuse bad color reproduction with black level/gamma.

A distored gamma curve leads to bad color reproduction (it´s like misty haze). Rainbow effects on OLED are mild compared to this effect, only kick in at really steep angles and (as you also admit) not all OLEDs do have it (including the new S23 models).

Quote from: NikoB on March 29, 2023, 22:34:21This cannot be, otherwise the same Asus laptops would not have a forcibly enabled utility that prevents accelerated burnout

So RTINGs is lying with their test?

The thing with burn-in is, that pixels age differently. OLEDs have huge (!) capacities to re-adjust the light loss due to aging. That is not the problem, the problem is to detect the exact amount that is needed.
In case of long static content, most OLEDs actually overdo it (a test by the German site "chip" showed this). If e.g. red pixels were used much more than green and blue, the red pixels will not glow less but more afterwards and will cause burn-in by having more brightness than it should have. The pixel is not (!) at the end of its capacities when there is burn in, it is just wrongly adjusted.

Quote from: NikoB on March 29, 2023, 22:34:21and the resource of their panels is declared to be approximately 8k hours.

Source?
LG OLEDs do have an official live span of 100 000 hours since the models from 2016 (see "LG: OLED TV lifespan is now 100,000 hours", Rasmus Larsen, flatpanelshd).

Quote from: NikoB on March 29, 2023, 22:34:21The harm from low-frequency flicker, especially during prolonged work behind such screens, has long been a proven fact. There is enough research on the effect of low-frequency flicker on the Internet.

So it should be no problem for you to name one peer-reviewed publication (preferably a double-blind trial with a proper control group setup)?

Quote from: NikoB on March 29, 2023, 22:34:21And I'm not interested in the topic of research on TV panels - everything is different there. It's a dynamic picture.

There are people using TV screens as their monitor. That is perfectly possible (except for the burn-in issue of OLEDs).
Flickering for sharper motion (aka motion blur reduction techniques) is also a thing for monitors (especially for gaming and scrolling). A lot of monitor manufacturers advertise this.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 29, 2023, 01:18:27No. I accuse some of their reviewers to measure unintentionally inaccurately probably due to using cheap equipment and giving wrong interpretations of the measured values (e.g. if a lightmeter is only capable of detecting 0.03 cd/m² at lowest, the value of 0.03 cd/m² will also be given for anything below).

You are repeating complete nonsense. The reviewers have had hardware calibrators for many years and could previously accurately measure the level of contrast and detect or not detect glow (even by eye). But they previously stubbornly wrote on models with low-frequency PWM that there was an "infinite" black level and did not write the contrast level for this. There were some laptop models, like cheap Asus, that tried to remove flicker (it was NOT found there), but at the cost of a drop in contrast by 2 orders of magnitude at once.

Now, according to the tests, it turns out that new panels have appeared that still flicker, and at the same time, the contrast has still fallen by 2 orders of magnitude. Thus, the key advantage of AMOLED over IPS is completely lost, and the panels are no longer even close to HDR (with static metadata).

What is the point of buying such s*** instead of a normal AMOLED, where the actual black level is much better than 0.0005 nits, as required by the minimum HDR standard? And still get a flickering screen? Under the bulldozer all such series with such screens immediately.

Those. either all the reviewers are lying or you are writing nonsense. Because what's the point of measuring contrast with a calibrator that has a low dynamic range, if they see with their own eyes that there is orders of magnitude better black level? Who forces them to publish this nonsense about a high fake black level, if they didn't do it on purpose before and didn't measure it, if they saw with their eyes that it's actually orders of magnitude better than the calibrator can measure.

Are you able to think logically and consistently? So what did you decide in the end - did the authors lie before, are they lying now, or are you wrong in your conclusions about the reasons for such numbers in the reviews?

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 29, 2023, 01:18:27Note that high-end Samsung phones will only activate full brightness (> 1000 cd/m²) in automatic brightness control mode when the light sensor detects maximum light. In manual brightness mode they are at first limited to 429 cd/m² (which could be a bit lower than good IPS monitors). If you activate additional brightness you will get 733 cd/m² in manual brightness mode, which should also destroy most monitors (cd/m² numbers refer to the Galaxy 23 Ultra).

I made every possible attempt on the trading floor to adjust and increase the brightness on the S22 (there were several different models there and there were top-end Flips nearby). They all lost to my IPS in terms of brightness, despite the fact that it has 480-490 nits declared at its peak and it is already very old. At the same time, at a large viewing angle, all Samsung S series had a green screen tint with completely spoiled color reproduction, but my smartphone did not, like the Samsung A series, which I didn't like even more.

If I couldn't visually achieve a better visual experience, including the brightness on the screen of several models of the S22 series vs my old smartphone in the lighting of the trading floor, then where does normal brightness and the best picture come from in office lighting?

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 29, 2023, 01:18:27On the other side, almost all IPS monitors have IPS glow, so off angle picture quality (black level, gamma curve) will decrease fast.

Don't confuse bad color reproduction with black level/gamma. On the S22 series, it is completely screwed up at an angle, which is completely absent on my smartphone and most IPS models. As I did not notice this on the A series, what struck me is that their screens are clearly better than the screens in the top series.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 29, 2023, 01:18:27Without burn-in (that only shows up with static content) there is no change in brightness or color gamut over 10 000 hours of usage.

This cannot be, otherwise the same Asus laptops would not have a forcibly enabled utility that prevents accelerated burnout, and the resource of their panels is declared to be approximately 8k hours.

Compare this to a minimum of 15k backlight for any IPS panel for laptops and a minimum of 30 (usually 40k) hours for monitors.

Obviously, AMOLED is here both in terms of color accuracy (dE> 2 is almost always in reviews, and this results reviewers has AFTER calibration) and in terms of resource, IPS is drained to the fullest. They, current versions AMOLED panels are not 100% suitable today for professional work with accurate color and simply because of the small resource, not to mention the harm to health from flickering.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 29, 2023, 01:18:27Can you provide any independent, peer-reviewed research on that?

The harm from low-frequency flicker, especially during prolonged work behind such screens, has long been a proven fact. There is enough research on the effect of low-frequency flicker on the Internet.

And recently, a researcher from Samsung indirectly confirmed that they recognize the problems of low-frequency PWM and will try in every possible way to raise its frequency as high as possible in new versions of AMOLED panels. But today they cannot do this, therefore, on large public resources, such as Wikipedia, such articles about harm and with indications of the presence of low-frequency flicker are simply deleted by corrupt Wikipedia owners and their moderators. Because when hundreds of billions are at stake, like when tobacco companies have it, no one cares about the health of their customers. Until active citizens force states to pass laws banning low-frequency AMOLED screens, nothing will change. If everyone is corrupt and on pay, everything is bad. Tobacco companies began to put pressure only after mass harm began among a rapidly aging population. Prior to this, the average age of life was shorter, so cancer and other problems of smoking simply did not have time to take effect. Because flickering effects affect the autonomic nervous system, the harm is more subtle and long-term. And this will affect the future, as will the dragging of smartphones with a SAR of 1W or more (hello iPhone lovers). The longer the population lives, the more obvious such long-term factors of harm to the body.

And I'm not interested in the topic of research on TV panels - everything is different there. It's a dynamic picture. And on monitors and laptops 90% of the time, static work with text, where the harm of flicker is maximum.

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52Are you directly accusing the reviews on this site of deliberately false data?

No. I accuse some of their reviewers to measure unintentionally inaccurately probably due to using cheap equipment and giving wrong interpretations of the measured values (e.g. if a lightmeter is only capable of detecting 0.03 cd/m² at lowest, the value of 0.03 cd/m² will also be given for anything below).

This is a well know problem.
E.g. RTINGs note in some of their OLED reviews next to the measured contrast ratio when they did not have their best equipment available: "Like all OLEDs, it can turn off individual pixels to display true black, making it fantastic for dark room viewing. It effectively has an infinite contrast ratio; the posted number is too low due to our light meter's limitations."

By the way, I had a very similiar model to the one reviewed here at home (Yoga 7 14 G7), for which Notebookcheck measured 0.05 cd/m² black level (review in 02.09.2022). Yet the sample had zero glow (!) in absolute darkness.

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52You just above deny the accuracy of the measurements in the reviews on this site. Why are you sure these numbers are correct?

Because measurement tolerances of cheap equipment influences black level measurement much more than the measurement of high brightness (given measurement deviations of 5 cd/m²: 1000 or 1005 cd/m² for max brightness is still about the same, while 0 cd/m² or 5 cd/m² is the difference between pure black and light grey).

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52In fact, this is not so, in fact, most manufacturers declare a native contrast ratio of 1000000: 1.

LG used "infitive contrast" in their marketing quite extensively. But this is practically only up to what the marketing department considers to be most attractive for the customer.

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52I see with my own eyes that even the old IPS that has worked for more than 5 years outperforms the top S22 of the previous series in real brightness when lighting the trading floor.

I can´t confirm that at all (next to me is my Samsung smartphone from 2020 and two, basic IPS monitors from different manufacturers. In the darkness my Samsung is brighter than both, however not by a large degree).
 
Your perception is also not in line with the given measurements.
Note that high-end Samsung phones will only activate full brightness (> 1000 cd/m²) in automatic brightness control mode when the light sensor detects maximum light. In manual brightness mode they are at first limited to 429 cd/m² (which could be a bit lower than good IPS monitors). If you activate additional brightness you will get 733 cd/m² in manual brightness mode, which should also destroy most monitors (cd/m² numbers refer to the Galaxy 23 Ultra).

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52Moreover, all top Samsung smartphones, including clamshells, have a green screen at a large viewing angle (which, for example, is not on the A series).

That varies. According to notebookcheck the newest top model from Samsung (Galaxy S23 Ultra) does (just like the A series) not show any color stiches off angle.
On the other side, almost all IPS monitors have IPS glow, so off angle picture quality (black level, gamma curve) will decrease fast.

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52I have not seen these tests and have not seen them with my own eyes.

Check up the reviews from RTINGS. "Flicker" is a separated category in each of their reviews. LG OLEDs have a small hick-up in brightness after the change of each frame but are considered completely PWM free.

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52fast burnout (a resource of up to 50% loss of brightness is several times lower than on IPS backlight and fast destabilization of color rendering, [...]

Without burn-in (that only shows up with static content) there is no change in brightness or color gamut over 10 000 hours of usage. There has been a long-term test on that from RTINGS using now outdated LG OLEDs from 2017 (just google "Real-Life OLED Burn-In Test On 6 TVs" by RTINGS).
If there is burn-in, there will of course be (depending on the level of burn-in) massive shifts in color and brightness. However, this can often mean that the burn-in image is actually brighter than other pixels. This is the case when the correction algorithm overcompensates brightness.   

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52is a technical reason for this - the AMOLED substrate is much more sensitive to deflection and damage, so the protective layer on laptop matrices is intentionally reinforced with a glass hard coating. Otherwise, there is no point in doing what most buyers do not like, if you can do it differently.In monitors, I did not see matte AMOLED, they were all glossy.

Manufacturers can at any time put a matte finish on any display glass. Your explanation makes absolutely no sense.
Only today, Lenvovo announced another notebook with matte AMOLED configuration (Lenovo Yoga Slim 6 Gen 8), where this is obviously also no issue at all.
Regarding monitors: There are barely any OLED monitors on the mass market yet. The first high-end products available target customers with preferences for high picture quality and not those with a preference for a matte coating.

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52The main thing is that they significantly reduce glare.

With matte coating you will get less high specular glare, but diffuse reflections (although they are not as strongly emphasized as specular ones) will cover up a much larger area of the screen.
This is a matter of taste, but I was never really happy with the behaviour of my matte screens outside, and inside the loss of picture quality was too much noticeable.

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52These are the safest screens for the eyes, and especially for the eyes of children, for which the use of flickering and especially AMOLED screens should have been banned by law 13 years ago.

Can you provide any independent, peer-reviewed research on that?

Quote from: NikoB on March 28, 2023, 15:03:52Your last paragraph is a complete technical and ergonomic nonsense.

You could not be more wrong. In fact, this is backed up by extensive peer-reviewed research.
I would recommend you to read some articles about how hold-type-displays (LCD, OLEDs) create sample-hold-blur during eye-tracking scenarios and how impulsed-type displays (CRTs, Plasmas) prevent this negative effect.

A good place to start is the video series on motion from RTINGs.
Just search for "Motion on TVs: Black Frame Insertion and PWM dimming (2/5) - Rtings.com" on Youtube
 

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 27, 2023, 00:21:13n fact flickering is needed (PWM does NOT do this) to reduce sample-&-hold blur for low framerates (low meaning anything < 1000). This is why blur reduction techniques (BFI, strobed backlight, ...) create much stronger flickering as PWM on purpose.

Your last paragraph is a complete technical and ergonomic nonsense.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 27, 2023, 00:21:13at calculates by a obvious false measurement of 0.03 nits, which by the way would be bad even for LCDs)

Are you directly accusing the reviews on this site of deliberately false data?

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 27, 2023, 00:21:13Renowned display experts such as Vincent Teoh (HDTVTest) or RTINGs also attest OLEDs a black value of exactly zero and infinitive contrast.

In fact, this is not so, in fact, most manufacturers declare a native contrast ratio of 1000000: 1.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 27, 2023, 00:21:13Samsungs Galaxy S23 Ultra (OLED smartphone): 1133.2 cd/m² full-screen brightness, ∞:1 contrast (source: notebookcheck review)

You just above deny the accuracy of the measurements in the reviews on this site. Why are you sure these numbers are correct?
I see with my own eyes that even the old IPS that has worked for more than 5 years outperforms the top S22 of the previous series in real brightness when lighting the trading floor. Moreover, all top Samsung smartphones, including clamshells, have a green screen at a large viewing angle (which, for example, is not on the A series).
So I see what I see - all AMOLEDs lose to IPS panels in office lighting in terms of real picture quality. And this is the main thing.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 27, 2023, 00:21:13Wrong. LG monitors use AMOLED displays and they are flicker-free.

I have not seen these tests and have not seen them with my own eyes. Moreover, if they really do not flicker on a standard pencil test and a video camera, then this means only one thing - they have a lot of other problems that immediately arise on AMOLED in such cases - fast burnout (a resource of up to 50% loss of brightness is several times lower than on IPS backlight and fast destabilization of color rendering, and, as dozens of reviews of laptop panels have shown - and so disgusting - testers almost never manage to calibrate AMOLED with dE below 2, i.e. all these screens are not suitable for semi-professional work with color, not speaking about professional work.
Plus, even on LG's top-end AMOLED TVs, owners note unremovable banding, which is absent, for example, on projectors with D-ILA/LCOS reflective panels. And again, talk about less detail in color depth.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 27, 2023, 00:21:13The fact that most (AM)OLEDs displays are glossy is the decision of the manufacturers. There is no technological necessity.

There is a technical reason for this - the AMOLED substrate is much more sensitive to deflection and damage, so the protective layer on laptop matrices is intentionally reinforced with a glass hard coating. Otherwise, there is no point in doing what most buyers do not like, if you can do it differently.In monitors, I did not see matte AMOLED, they were all glossy.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 27, 2023, 00:21:13Mate screens reduce overall picture quality (colors and black level during daylight). Not acceptable for me.

The main thing is that they significantly reduce glare. 4k IPS@120-144Hz with a semi-matte screen - the best that has been done today for laptops. These are the safest screens for the eyes, and especially for the eyes of children, for which the use of flickering and especially AMOLED screens should have been banned by law 13 years ago. But money is more important to the authorities, as is corruption from big business. The same thing happened and even now exists with the tobacco industry in a lot of countries, although today you can't find an idiot who will argue about the dangers of smoking ...

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 27, 2023, 00:21:13Most users do not care about the low amount of flickering introduced by PWM

The majority of the world's population are illiterate inhabitants, especially in technology (the general decline in the level of education against the backdrop of technological progress and science is already obvious to any educated person who has a wide circle of communication with different segments of the population), who need competent followers. Guides. Otherwise, they easily jump off a cliff without noticing the problem...

Quote from: NikoB on March 26, 2023, 18:58:37If the contrast is set to 12000:1, there can be no infinite black level, i.e. there can be no 0 nits. The maximum that AMOLED can give is about 0.0005 nits, and exactly the same amount is required by the HDR specification.

You have only reversed my argument: As OLEDs feature infinite black (0 nits), there is no way they only have a contrast of  12000:1 (that calculates by a obvious false measurement of 0.03 nits, which by the way would be bad even for LCDs).

0.0005 nits is the black level reported for Pioneer Kuros G9.5 from 2010 and these still feature glow visible to the human eye.
Modern OLEDs are way below that. If you watch an OLED displaying black in a complete dark room, the human eye is not able to detect any glow or other form of light emission (even after several minutes once your eyes have adapted to low light).
Estimation for the dynamic range of human eyes are between 10^9 and 10^-6 nits. So OLEDs have to be at least (!) below 0.000001 nits. And as this is practically 0 nits for the human eye anyway, contrast is ∞.
Renowned display experts such as Vincent Teoh (HDTVTest) or RTINGs also attest OLEDs a black value of exactly zero and infinitive contrast.

Quote from: NikoB on March 26, 2023, 18:58:37any smartphone with IPS (and even more so VA panel monitors) and a native contrast ratio of 1000: 1 + (VA 3000: 1) when illuminated at 300-500 luxury, easily beats the top AMOLED panels in the latest smartphones.

WTF?!

Samsungs Galaxy S23 Ultra (OLED smartphone): 1133.2 cd/m² full-screen brightness, ∞:1 contrast (source: notebookcheck review)
Motorola Moto G53 5G (IPS smartphone): 559.4 cd/m² full-screen brightness, 1468:1 contrast (source: notebookcheck review)
Dell S3221QS (VA monitor): 300 cd/m² full-screen brightness, 3,194:1 contrast (source: RTINGS review)

The S23 Ultra OLED will crush any of the other screens during daytime due to much more full-screen brightness. There is not even a debate about that.

Quote from: NikoB on March 26, 2023, 18:58:37They [AMOLED] always flicker nastily

Wrong. LG monitors use AMOLED displays and they are flicker-free.

Quote from: NikoB on March 26, 2023, 18:58:37they are always glossy and glare nasty

Again wrong. The LG 27GR95QE has a matte finish.
The fact that most (AM)OLEDs displays are glossy is the decision of the manufacturers. There is no technological necessity.

Quote from: NikoB on March 26, 2023, 18:58:37In laptop and monitor panels, high-frequency PWM, a long panel life up to 50% dimming (usually at least 15k hours for laptops and 40k hours for monitors), full color resolution and a matte screen are important. With an acceptable contrast ratio of 1500:1. Plus, the response is no more than 5-6ms on G2G / B2W. And of course good viewing angles.

- Mate screens reduce overall picture quality (colors and black level during daylight). Not acceptable for me.
- There are almost no LCD monitors with good viewing angles due to the lack of ATW polarizes. Even in notebooks these panels are sadly rare.

Quote from: NikoB on March 26, 2023, 18:58:37most importantly, will not flicker.

Most users do not care about the low amount of flickering introduced by PWM.
In fact flickering is needed (PWM does NOT do this) to reduce sample-&-hold blur for low framerates (low meaning anything < 1000). This is why blur reduction techniques (BFI, strobed backlight, ...) create much stronger flickering as PWM on purpose.

Kann man die Tasten rechts umkonfigurieren?

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 25, 2023, 20:00:34If contrast decreased and they still feature 0 cd/m² min brightness, the question is what do you mean by contrast

You are confused about the terms. If the contrast is set to 12000:1, there can be no infinite black level, i.e. there can be no 0 nits. The maximum that AMOLED can give is about 0.0005 nits, and exactly the same amount is required by the HDR specification. With static metadata. Dynamic HDR (aka HDR10+) is more flexible in this regard.

If this site cannot unify the values in different reviews in the absolute scale of measurements, the value of the data in them is zero.

Quote from: Mr. Franz on March 25, 2023, 20:00:34In office areas with are large windows during bright daylight, LCDs might give better results but in most electrically illuminated rooms OLEDs already have the edge over LCDs.

And this is a false statement, which everyone can easily see in office lighting or on the trading floor - any smartphone with IPS (and even more so VA panel monitors) and a native contrast ratio of 1000: 1 + (VA 3000: 1) when illuminated at 300-500 luxury, easily beats the top AMOLED panels in the latest smartphones. And office lighting and subdued sunlight at home are the most common use cases.

That is why all AMOLED-based panels will never be able to conquer the laptop and monitor panel market.
They always flicker nastily, they are always glossy and glare nasty (which, by the way, is even constantly seen in Hollywood films, where Apple laptops are often shown, and there are always glossy screens - it looks ridiculous from the outside and like an obvious anti-advertising of glossy screens)

The only market where AMOLED makes sense is TV. Because in complete darkness, they are unmatched as almost perfect black technology compared to other technologies, with the exception of microLED.

In laptop and monitor panels, high-frequency PWM, a long panel life up to 50% dimming (usually at least 15k hours for laptops and 40k hours for monitors), full color resolution and a matte screen are important. With an acceptable contrast ratio of 1500:1. Plus, the response is no more than 5-6ms on G2G / B2W. And of course good viewing angles.

AMOLED can only provide super contrast (or low black levels otherwise), good viewing angles (where there are no problems with glare) and high response speed. All this is good in games.

But in the office load, AMOLED loses outright to IPS / VA. And this is a fact. All attempts to implement it as in smartphones are initially doomed to failure. Until it becomes matte, it does not get a minimum resource of 15k and 30k hours up to a 50% drop in brightness, it will always have full color resolution and, most importantly, will not flicker. And for people who work professionally with color, dE after calibration should be below 1. Which almost no AMOLED panel can provide - even 2 is rarely given to it.

If it were otherwise, there would not have been a clear attempt to counteract the fact of AMOLED flickering on large public (popular resources) and obvious harm to the nervous system (especially children). And works like the Samsung researcher only prove that development companies are well aware of how dangerous AMOLED panels are in smartphones, and especially in laptops and monitors. And that is why, I am sure now of this, new panels are appearing, where by increasing the black level (ie, dropping the "super" contrast that marketers are so fond of advertising), they increase the frequency of the PWM. Because either a high PWM frequency or a low black level and a low PWM frequency are extremely harmful to the eyes and the nervous system as a whole.

Quote from: NikoB on March 25, 2023, 12:13:15It is you who are mistaken. NB in all reviews previously always wrote about "infinite" black, without indicating the level of contrast at all (like it's pointless).

Yes, stating the contrast ratio while having true black is kind of pointless because it is always ∞. That is simply due to the definition of contrast as Luminance_Max / Luminance_Min.

Quote from: NikoB on March 25, 2023, 12:13:15And suddenly in the latest reviews he began to indicate. Obviously, or they were cunning earlier in the reviews, all the authors or the characteristics of the panels have changed.

I mentioned the notebookcheck review of Asus Zenbook Pro 16X, which talked of infinite contrast for OLED. This review is only three months old (published on December 2022). There are older reviews (e.g. Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 Pro 14 OLED in April 2022), which do the same thing as here (that is calculating the contrast based on a measurement of black which falsely is above 0 cd/m²).
So probably some reviewers just know less about the topic than others (and/or have different measurement tools for detecting black level).

Quote from: NikoB on March 25, 2023, 12:13:15I would rather believe that new hybrids are entering the market, where they are trying to increase the PWM frequency, and this immediately leads to a drop in super-contrast to such values.

If contrast decreased and they still feature 0 cd/m² min brightness, the question is what do you mean by contrast (it can´t be the definion given above and what notebookcheck calculates)?
LGs WOLED technology (which is by the way also AMOLED because it uses an active matrix) does not have PWM and still features infinitive contrast. So there shouldn´t be a trade-off.

Quote from: NikoB on March 25, 2023, 12:13:15is why they are not popular, and there are actually no AMOLED monitors and never will be.

As stated above, LG OLEDs are also AMOLEDs. The term is just favored by Samsungs marketing department for their smartphones. 

Quote from: NikoB on March 25, 2023, 12:13:15In the light, there is no difference between IPS 2000:1 and AMOLED 1000000:1 at all, but visually, in office lighting, IPS / VA win. And everyone can easily verify this by comparing 2 smartphones with IPS and AMOLED. IPS always wins in office lighting visually. And only in complete darkness AMOLED drives.

High ambient lighting is a different story.
Under these conditions black level is no longer dominantly determined by light emission of pixels but on how well the display and its coating swallows light. LCDs mostly do this better than OLEDs (you can check that put putting an OLED and LCD display into pure sun light while both are off, usually the LCD is far darker and OLEDs are almost grey). Plus brightness gets really important because your eyes, which are limited in contrast, do not adapt to brightness range of your display any more, as there are now brighter light sources around. So displays with low brightness are perceived as low contrast by the human eye even if their actual contrast ratio is infinite.

In office areas with are large windows during bright daylight, LCDs might give better results but in most electrically illuminated rooms OLEDs already have the edge over LCDs.

Quote from: NikoB on March 25, 2023, 12:13:15since here it is an order of magnitude more critical than in smartphone screens.

Ja, das stimmt. Es liegt an dem Winkel. Die Laptopdisplay sind größer, als von Handys, aber normalerweise haben sie gleichen Abstand zu Augen. Dadurch Laptop-PWM beeinflusst viel mehr die Pupillen, hier müssen sie schon ununterbrochen reagieren. Daraus kommen die Kopfschmerzen.

It is you who are mistaken. NB in all reviews previously always wrote about "infinite" black, without indicating the level of contrast at all (like it's pointless). And suddenly in the latest reviews he began to indicate. Obviously, or they were cunning earlier in the reviews, all the authors or the characteristics of the panels have changed. Given the key drawback of AMOLED - monstrous flicker and fast burnout, I would rather believe that new hybrids are entering the market, where they are trying to increase the PWM frequency, and this immediately leads to a drop in super-contrast to such values. In Asus, in cheap laptops, it drops even more to 6000: 1, but there, as NB reviews assure, there is no flicker.

I previously posted here a link to the research work of a Samsung employee, who indirectly confirmed the harm from low-frequency PWM for people and that all sorts of attempts are being made to increase the frequency for monitor panels and laptops - since here it is an order of magnitude more critical than in smartphone screens. People work behind them the whole working day and the harm is maximum. That is why they are not popular, and there are actually no AMOLED monitors and never will be.

And if they lower the contrast by 100 times or more - what's the point of AMOLED if there is no their vaunted super-contrast in complete darkness? In the light, there is no difference between IPS 2000:1 and AMOLED 1000000:1 at all, but visually, in office lighting, IPS / VA win. And everyone can easily verify this by comparing 2 smartphones with IPS and AMOLED. IPS always wins in office lighting visually. And only in complete darkness AMOLED drives.

Super, dass ihr die Sache mit dem Moiré-Effekt erwähnt. Bei den meisten Reviews von Geräten mit dieser Problematik ist davon nichts zu lesen.

Quote from: NikoB on March 24, 2023, 15:38:44They no longer have a super contrast of 1000000:1, but only a miserable 12000:1

All modern OLEDs have an infinite contrast ratio because that are able to display pure black (0 cd/m²). Notebookcheck here probably simply used a measurement tool that was only capable of detecting 0.03 cd/m² at lowest, so they took that as the measurement for the OLED.
This results in the "low" contrast rating of 12000:1 (~ 379,1 cd/m² / 0,03 cd/m²).

This is quite missleading as for example for the review of the "Asus Zenbook Pro 16X", which also used OLED,   notebookcheck correctly measured 0 cd/m² and calculated a contrast of ∞:1.