Go Back   Android Forums > Android Discussion > Android Lounge
Android Lounge A place for general Android discussion and questions.

Get excited for the Samsung Galaxy S5! Find everything you need and discuss it in our Galaxy S5 Forum!

test: Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old February 10th, 2011, 08:32 AM   #1 (permalink)
Hiding behind a mystery
Thread Author (OP)
 
Roze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Where the Sakura grows
Posts: 9,847
 
Device(s): Moto Atrix [lovin'] Nexus One [Lost] LG Vu [Lost]
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 809
Thanked 2,192 Times in 1,489 Posts
Default SAMOLED vs. SLCD vs. qHD vs Retina Display

So I'm looking into the Atrix with its qHD screen, which before now, I have never heard of before. I've tried googling on what qHD is, but all I get is well technical jumbo that I don't understand and reads more like generic screen resolution than anything else. So for those that are tech savy, can someone explain qHD and compare it to the screens that are on the market today (SAMOLED, SLCD and Retina Display).

From my reading the order of best to last:
1)Retina Display
2)SAMOLED
3)SLCD
4)AMOLED
5) TFT LCD

I have NO idea where qHD goes into the rating.

Thanks,
Roze

__________________
Sign up with Dropbox using my referral and get an additional 1/2GB on top of the 2GB you get for signing up http://db.tt/YbULMZX

Many thanks,
Roze
Roze is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old February 10th, 2011, 10:00 AM   #2 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland
Posts: 326
 
Device(s): Galaxy SIII
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 33
Thanked 35 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Going by the resolution (same as retina display 960x640) and the other figures I located I would order your list thus...

1)qHD
2)Retina display
3)SAMOLED
4)SLCD
5)AMOLED
6)TFT LCD

I might be completely wrong on this but that's how I'm reading it...
czechplastik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 10:09 AM   #3 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 363
 
Device(s): Galaxy Nexus i9250 (yakju converted), Captivate on CM7.1
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 43
Thanked 51 Times in 43 Posts
Default

qHD only specifies the resolution, and not the display type. qHD = quarter of full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080 so a quarter of that is 960x540.

However going by CNet, they love the display, very bright and vibrant, with good color saturation.

CNET review
rubiconjp is offline  
Last edited by rubiconjp; February 10th, 2011 at 10:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 10:09 AM   #4 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland
Posts: 326
 
Device(s): Galaxy SIII
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 33
Thanked 35 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rubiconjp View Post
qHD only specifies the resolution, and not the display type. qHD = quarter of full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080 so a quarter of that is 960x540.
So which is better?
czechplastik is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 10:35 AM   #5 (permalink)
Hiding behind a mystery
Thread Author (OP)
 
Roze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Where the Sakura grows
Posts: 9,847
 
Device(s): Moto Atrix [lovin'] Nexus One [Lost] LG Vu [Lost]
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 809
Thanked 2,192 Times in 1,489 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rubiconjp View Post
qHD only specifies the resolution, and not the display type. qHD = quarter of full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080 so a quarter of that is 960x540.

However going by CNet, they love the display, very bright and vibrant, with good color saturation.

CNET review
Yeah that's what I've been reading...which is like...so? lol So the screen can be an LCD? A SLCD and it's qHD? I don't understand why Moto didn't say that, instead of just qHD. They make it as a feature, which I thought was the type of screen being used, not its demension
Roze is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 11:00 AM   #6 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 978
 
Device(s): VZW-Galaxy Nexus
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 105
Thanked 561 Times in 312 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roze View Post
Yeah that's what I've been reading...which is like...so? lol So the screen can be an LCD? A SLCD and it's qHD? I don't understand why Moto didn't say that, instead of just qHD. They make it as a feature, which I thought was the type of screen being used, not its demension
It is a feature. They are the first phone on the market to have that resolution. I would bet that Moto continues to use Sony's SLCD. BTW, the Retina Display again only refers to a resolution, the Iphone uses a generic SLCD too.
zerocool79346 is online now  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to zerocool79346 For This Useful Post:
Roze (February 10th, 2011)
Old February 10th, 2011, 11:29 AM   #7 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 363
 
Device(s): Galaxy Nexus i9250 (yakju converted), Captivate on CM7.1
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 43
Thanked 51 Times in 43 Posts
Default

Yep leave it to the marketing types to muddle the water. I'd also bet that qHD display on the Atrix is SLCD. It is still lower res than Apple Retina, and being larger than Retina, the display is probably a lot less sharp than Retina. And if it's SLCD, it probably won't match the SAMOLED in term of color vibrancy.
rubiconjp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 11:37 AM   #8 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 363
 
Device(s): Galaxy Nexus i9250 (yakju converted), Captivate on CM7.1
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 43
Thanked 51 Times in 43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocool79346 View Post
It is a feature. They are the first phone on the market to have that resolution. I would bet that Moto continues to use Sony's SLCD. BTW, the Retina Display again only refers to a resolution, the Iphone uses a generic SLCD too.
Yep the Retina refers to the resolution and the size of the display. Its resolution is 960x640 and its size is 3.5".

Obviously 960x640 on a larger display size such as EVO's 4.3" won't be "Retina" anymore, based on Steve's standard.
rubiconjp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 11:37 AM   #9 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,601
 
Device(s): Galaxy S4, Nexus 7
Carrier: giffgaff

Thanks: 136
Thanked 289 Times in 253 Posts
Default

Retina isnt even a type of a display, it's just a display with a high dot pitch/pixels per inch, doesnt matter what type of display it is, it's just a marketing gimmick.

This is how it should look.

1)SAMOLED Plus
2)SAMOLED
3)SLCD
4)AMOLED
5)TFT LCD
Shocky is offline  
Last edited by Shocky; February 10th, 2011 at 12:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 12:12 PM   #10 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 135
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 7
Thanked 10 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by czechplastik View Post
Going by the resolution (same as retina display 960x640) and the other figures I located I would order your list thus...

1)qHD
2)Retina display
3)SAMOLED
4)SLCD
5)AMOLED
6)TFT LCD

I might be completely wrong on this but that's how I'm reading it...

The Atix's resolution is 960x540, not 640.

"Retina" display refers to the pixel density, not just resolution. So to the poster that said "based on Steve's standards'...it's not "his standards", its simple math. A larger screen with the same resolution has less PPI, making it not as sharp. Job's did say its called a retina display because the human eye can't distinguish pixel @300PPI and up...which I did read may not be entirely true.

iPhone 4's Retina Display Explained - PCWorld

I'm in the same boat as the OP, as in trying to find info on qHD when it was announced the Atrix touted it, but to no avail. It won't have the PPI of the iPhone 4, but should still be great. As far as picking LCD, SLCD, Amoled and SAamoled....going to be more of a personal preference whether you want vibrant or more realistic. Pros and cons on the viewing angles of each as well.

Screen wars! AMOLED vs. S-LCD vs. LCD vs. Super AMOLED | Android Central
aztooh is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to aztooh For This Useful Post:
jroc (February 10th, 2011)
sponsored links
Old February 10th, 2011, 12:26 PM   #11 (permalink)
Hiding behind a mystery
Thread Author (OP)
 
Roze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Where the Sakura grows
Posts: 9,847
 
Device(s): Moto Atrix [lovin'] Nexus One [Lost] LG Vu [Lost]
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 809
Thanked 2,192 Times in 1,489 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocool79346 View Post
It is a feature. They are the first phone on the market to have that resolution. I would bet that Moto continues to use Sony's SLCD. BTW, the Retina Display again only refers to a resolution, the Iphone uses a generic SLCD too.
Wow, thanks for that! That just clears the misunderstanding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aztooh View Post
I'm in the same boat as the OP, as in trying to find info on qHD when it was announced the Atrix touted it, but to no avail. It won't have the PPI of the iPhone 4, but should still be great. As far as picking LCD, SLCD, Amoled and SAamoled....going to be more of a personal preference whether you want vibrant or more realistic. Pros and cons on the viewing angles of each as well.

Screen wars! AMOLED vs. S-LCD vs. LCD vs. Super AMOLED | Android Central
I consider both LCD and AMOLED 'old technology' and not really interested in them, lol. Since both SLCD and SAMOLED replaced both of those.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shocky View Post
Retina isnt even a type of a display, it's just a display with a high dot pitch/pixels per inch, doesnt matter what type of display it is, it's just a marketing gimmick.

This is how it should look.

1)SAMOLED Plus
2)SAMOLED
3)SLCD
4)AMOLED
5)TFT LCD
What phone has SAMOLED+? I thought Samsung weren't going to be producing them until later this year? So basically the comparison of the 'best' screens on the market is really this:

qHD SLCD vs Retina Display SLCD vs SAMOLED

And I guess what is best is objective?

If you had to pick your phone, what screen would you pick?
Roze is offline  
Last edited by Roze; February 10th, 2011 at 12:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 12:43 PM   #12 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
MarcMaiden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Bay Area, ca
Posts: 590
 
Device(s): Galaxy Nexus CDMA, Nexus 7 on the way! Skyrocket, Droid Bionic, HTC Thunderbolt, Galaxy Tab, Kindle
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 46
Thanked 201 Times in 91 Posts
Default

I cant decide actually....

I loved colors on the SAMOLED,

but the SLCD was good (not amazing) at everything.

it really is personal though....some people do not care much for SAMOLED, and some people swear by it
__________________
Treo 650 -> Moto Q -> Blackberry storm -> Moto Droid -> Iphone 3gs -> HTC Aria -> Samsung Captivate->HTC Surround->Dell Streak-> HTC Inspire 4g & Atrix 4g->Nexus s->SGSII->Droid Bionic->Galaxy Nexus
MarcMaiden is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 12:57 PM   #13 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Jammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 972
 
Device(s): HTC Desire
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 56
Thanked 175 Times in 118 Posts
Default

Does anyone actually know the difference between LCD and SLCD?

From what I can gather, SLCD is a brand of LCD displays?
__________________
• HTC Desire • GingerVillain 2.1 • 32.49.00.32U_5.11.05.27 •

• Desire Root Index •

• My "I Am Android" Profile •

Jammy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 01:14 PM   #14 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 363
 
Device(s): Galaxy Nexus i9250 (yakju converted), Captivate on CM7.1
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 43
Thanked 51 Times in 43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aztooh View Post
"Retina" display refers to the pixel density, not just resolution. So to the poster that said "based on Steve's standards'...it's not "his standards", its simple math. A larger screen with the same resolution has less PPI, making it not as sharp. Job's did say its called a retina display because the human eye can't distinguish pixel @300PPI and up...which I did read may not be entirely true.
That's exactly why I said "Steve's standard". Steve's "Retina" standard is 300 PPI, which Apple Retina display exceeds at 326 PPI. But the real standard is around 477 PPI, where the pixels are truly invisible to a healthy human eye.

So the Retina display isn't truly "Retina" until the eye is about 1.5 feet away from the Apple Retina LCD.

I have 20/20 vision and I can see the pixelation in my brother IP4.
rubiconjp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 01:24 PM   #15 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,601
 
Device(s): Galaxy S4, Nexus 7
Carrier: giffgaff

Thanks: 136
Thanked 289 Times in 253 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roze View Post
What phone has SAMOLED+? I thought Samsung weren't going to be producing them until later this year? So basically the comparison of the 'best' screens on the market is really this:

qHD SLCD vs Retina Display SLCD vs SAMOLED

And I guess what is best is objective?

If you had to pick your phone, what screen would you pick?
They will be available very soon so it's worth bringing them up, I wouldn't buy now, I'd wait for SAMOLED+ devices.

Yes I'm dodging the question but it's the truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcMaiden View Post
I cant decide actually....

I loved colors on the SAMOLED,

but the SLCD was good (not amazing) at everything.

it really is personal though....some people do not care much for SAMOLED, and some people swear by it
The SAMOLED screens also have much higher contrast, better viewing angles and they are brighter.
Shocky is offline  
Last edited by Shocky; February 10th, 2011 at 02:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 02:20 PM   #16 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jammy View Post
Does anyone actually know the difference between LCD and SLCD?

From what I can gather, SLCD is a brand of LCD displays?
SLCD is a Sony LCD with 18-bit color depth (actually - could be Samsung or Sony and could be full 24-bit color, but right now, it's Sony that's supplying them for mobile phones and as typically the 18-bit flavor).

LCDs are simply like having little valves or apertures at each subpixel that open or close to allow more or less light to pass through a colored lens or polarized plates scheme.

There are over a half-dozen actual LCD technologies - this wiki wrapup is old and outdated, but substantiates the idea - TFT LCD - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Each technology is quite different in its response time, off-axis viewing, tendency to look washed out, tendency to black crush and so forth.

Saying LCD is like saying "Italian food" - it doesn't say much by itself and saying that all LCDs have Problem X is like saying all pizza is difficult to eat with a spoon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rubiconjp View Post
That's exactly why I said "Steve's standard". Steve's "Retina" standard is 300 PPI, which Apple Retina display exceeds at 326 PPI. But the real standard is around 477 PPI, where the pixels are truly invisible to a healthy human eye.

So the Retina display isn't truly "Retina" until the eye is about 1.5 feet away from the Apple Retina LCD.

I have 20/20 vision and I can see the pixelation in my brother IP4.
Your eyes exceed the norm by far, and resolution in cycles isn't measured by 20/20.

As far as PPI - you're on the right track, but it's not a single number - as you mention - it's a relative number with respect to distance from the viewer.

Apple's original 480x320 was too coarse. They doubled both dimensions to ease software updates - that's the real reason for the retinal display.

Taking TV content from SD to the various HD schemes requires a piece of software called a scalar.

Betcha dollars to donuts that the whole qHD thing is to simplify math and try to increase quality for converted HD material.

How you'd care about those things on a phone-sized display depends on the user's eyes and type of use.

I find the less saturated colors on my LCD more appealing to me - but remember, my phone has had no less than 3 different displays in its production lifetime, so you can't even take my statement as model-based.

Until Android phones come with necessary adjustments beyond brightness - and that means at minimum contrast and gamma, the color comparisons between any technologies are anecdotal.

Look at enough SAMOLED phones side by side - ditto for LCD - and you'll start to see the unit-to-unit variations until you're unsure of the type-to-type variations.

In my opinion.
EarlyMon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; February 11th, 2011 at 11:12 AM. Reason: minor typo
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
czechplastik (February 10th, 2011), daveybaby (July 5th, 2011), Jammy (February 10th, 2011), jroc (February 10th, 2011), Laxidasical (August 31st, 2011), lordofthereef (February 10th, 2011), Sideman (February 11th, 2012)
Old February 11th, 2011, 01:23 AM   #17 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 875
 
Device(s): Nexus One, Droid Eris, MyTouch 3G
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 9
Thanked 208 Times in 150 Posts
Default

The iPhone 4 uses the same display that you will see on LG smartphones like the Optimus 2X. Just higher resolution. Apple sources the displays from LG.

I say if you can read pixels on an 800x480 display resolution, you are holding the phone too closely in a manner unhealthy for your eyes. Near focusing is caused by stretching the eyeball which may not completely stretch all the way back.
__________________
Check me at @Guamguy in Twitter
Guamguy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2011, 11:04 AM   #18 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Jammy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 972
 
Device(s): HTC Desire
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 56
Thanked 175 Times in 118 Posts
Default

Hitachi's 4.5-inch IPS display has 1280 x 720 res, 1,100:1 contrast, plans for mass production in October -- Engadget
Jammy is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Jammy For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (February 11th, 2011)
Old February 11th, 2011, 11:51 AM   #19 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

Sharp's had a way-good Android phone available only in Japan since last year that's 960x640 and the same exact screen size as the iP4.

Because all of this is being cast in terms of Apple, how about a little game-changer? We like to talk about media - how would THX or the SMPTE rate screen sizes and distances?

Here's a handy calculator for their principle criteria:
Viewing Distance Calculator
Maybe also note: Angular_Resolution in HDTV viewing distances

And the one thing that all of the makers like to keep secret - the eye's maximum resolution of a static field is way different than it is for moving pictures.

It's not just the dots, or dots per inch - even a full galaxy of stars is but a single pixel when viewed from sufficient distance.

My comfort distance when viewing my 4.3" Evo is about .75' - when viewing my wife's Shift or buddies' iPhones - I bring it in closer. I tend to instinctively adjust for a comfortable viewing angle for the whole screen. That's me.

Fun home experiment especially if you have a high-res laptop: sit at your laptop where you usually do - I'll bet you see no pixels, just lines. Hold your phone up between you and your laptop at your comfortable, normal, phone-viewing distance.

Now - what is the percentage or fraction of your phone's _apparent_ display size with respect to the _apparent_ size of your laptop.

Finally - take into account the resolution of the phone vs. the resolution of the final area that the phone _apparently_ occupies on the laptop.

In my personal case, my 800x480@4.3" phone has same or better resolution than my 1440x900@15" laptop.

I've yet to complain about pixelation on my laptop.

And for a real eye-opener - do the same thing from your normal seating distance if you have a larger HDTV.

~~~~~

I'm very intrigued by the extra brightness of the new LG NOVA display - I've no idea what that technology is - much higher brightness at much lower power consumption.

I'm very intrigued by the new US$1 billion Mirasol fab being built in Taiwan right now - Mirasol is a kinda hybrid-transreflective display tech from QualComm.

I'm very intrigued by the Pixel Qi hybrid LCD-transreflective display on the Notion Ink Adam Android tablet.

My biggest problems with S/AMOLED or LCD isn't dots right now - it's color purity - and the ability to maintain full readability in the desert's direct outdoor sunlight, when I'm using my device as a phone.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2011, 12:01 PM   #20 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,601
 
Device(s): Galaxy S4, Nexus 7
Carrier: giffgaff

Thanks: 136
Thanked 289 Times in 253 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyMon View Post
Look at enough SAMOLED phones side by side - ditto for LCD - and you'll start to see the unit-to-unit variations until you're unsure of the type-to-type variations.

In my opinion.
I don’t think saturated is the right word to describe colour on SAMOLED screens, I would say the colours are much more vibrant.

I've compared the latest phones in person and to me the S/LCD screens are a little dull, almost washed out compared to the SAMOLED screen, they do nothing particularly well or badly.

Where as the SAMOLED screens have amazing contrast, colours and again they are brighter.
Shocky is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old February 11th, 2011, 12:01 PM   #21 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 363
 
Device(s): Galaxy Nexus i9250 (yakju converted), Captivate on CM7.1
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 43
Thanked 51 Times in 43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyMon View Post
Your eyes exceed the norm by far, and resolution in cycles isn't measured by 20/20.

As far as PPI - you're on the right track, but it's not a single number - as you mention - it's a relative number with respect to distance from the viewer.
Yep I brought 20/20 up only to say that these days I have good but not extraordinary vision. I used to have 20/13 vision coming out of college.

At 477 PPI, the pixels are truly invisible to the human eyes, no matter the distance. At 326 PPI (Apple Retina), the pixels only become invisible at the distance of 1.5 ft. Closer than that and the pixels can be seen, and I can attest to that fact.
rubiconjp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2011, 12:04 PM   #22 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

Reset. I stupidly read your sentence backwards, rubinconjp, my bad.

For myself, it's a lower number - I can no longer focus as closely as I could when I was younger.

For the numbers tho - you're well above average.

That's the only real argument for higher-res displays - to have single products that can please _nearly_ everybody.
EarlyMon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; February 11th, 2011 at 12:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2011, 12:12 PM   #23 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shocky View Post
I don’t think saturated is the right word to describe colour on SAMOLED screens, I would say the colours are much more vibrant.

I've compared the latest phones in person and to me the S/LCD screens are a little dull, almost washed out compared to the SAMOLED screen, they do nothing particularly well or badly.

Where as the SAMOLED screens have amazing contrast, colours and again they are brighter.
When comparing both to each other, the SAMOLED is indeed best described as vibrant.

When playing the same movie sources through each and holding each with a properly-adjusted (calibrated) HDTV in the background, playing the exact same content, in synchronization, with the apparent phones' image size the same as that of the HDTV, and apparent brightness adjusted to match the calibrated HDTV, both come up lacking - but the SAMOLED will now look saturated and black-crushing in comparison - while the LCD will tend to not black-crush, but will have trouble with some of the color extremes. You _might_ find that it's suddenly not washed out under those conditions.

Compared to a reference standard, both are poor, and personal preference applies.

When carrying as your phone, personal preference applies.

I'm not knocking SAMOLED because I don't have it - I'm knocking all of them for not having any simple adjustment capabilities. The unit-to-unit variations do exist, so what you see on yours may not be what a compadre elsewhere sees on his.

FWIW -- for my experiments with that, I used Big Buck Bunny Download
EarlyMon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; February 11th, 2011 at 12:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
jroc (February 11th, 2011)
Old February 11th, 2011, 12:24 PM   #24 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 233
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 19
Thanked 18 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rubiconjp View Post
qHD only specifies the resolution, and not the display type. qHD = quarter of full HD.

Full HD is 1920x1080 so a quarter of that is 960x540.

However going by CNet, they love the display, very bright and vibrant, with good color saturation.

CNET review
^this. The OP equates dots-per-inch to quality, but that's only part of the story. As was said, brightness, color accuracy, how's it work in sunlight, all these are at least as important.
kb58 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2011, 12:34 PM   #25 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kb58 View Post
^this. The OP equates dots-per-inch to quality, but that's only part of the story. As was said, brightness, color accuracy, how's it work in sunlight, all these are at least as important.
For media - CNET Quick Guide: HDTV Resolution Explained - CNET Reviews

For a phone - I really hope we start to see transreflective (think: color e-ink) soon.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2011, 12:39 PM   #26 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,601
 
Device(s): Galaxy S4, Nexus 7
Carrier: giffgaff

Thanks: 136
Thanked 289 Times in 253 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyMon View Post
I'm not knocking SAMOLED because I don't have it - I'm knocking all of them for not having any simple adjustment capabilities. The unit-to-unit variations do exist, so what you see on yours may not be what a compadre elsewhere sees on his.
You can adjust the colour with an app from the market on the Galaxy S, however this effects everything not just video but there is an option for colour profiles.
Shocky is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2011, 12:41 PM   #27 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shocky View Post
You can adjust the colour with an app from the market on the Galaxy S, however this effects everything not just video but there is an option for colour profiles.
Last I looked, I could find no such app. If you'd be so kind as to point me in the right direction, I can pass that on to the many Samsung owners I cross paths with, here on AF and in the outside world - thanks in advance for that.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2011, 12:49 PM   #28 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,601
 
Device(s): Galaxy S4, Nexus 7
Carrier: giffgaff

Thanks: 136
Thanked 289 Times in 253 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyMon View Post
Last I looked, I could find no such app. If you'd be so kind as to point me in the right direction, I can pass that on to the many Samsung owners I cross paths with, here on AF and in the outside world - thanks in advance for that.
It's called Galaxy Tuner, I've never actually felt the need to adjust it, looks great to me.


https://market.android.com/details?id=com.dowkim.GalaxyTuner
Shocky is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Shocky For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (February 11th, 2011), jroc (February 11th, 2011)
Old February 11th, 2011, 01:50 PM   #29 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

^Nice find!

A little confusing - it seems to clearly require Froyo (a specific kernel), but the rooted or not language lost something in translation.

But - it's a start in the right direction.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 2nd, 2011, 01:01 PM   #30 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1
 
Device(s): Droid X (Entire Family)
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

If you put the qHD resolution on a 3.5 inch screen, it would only have 15 less DPI. (315 DPI-->330 DPI) This means that the "retina" display is not that much better than qHD when put on the same size screen :-)
SupahMatt is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old June 2nd, 2011, 01:07 PM   #31 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ArmageddonX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,538
 
Device(s): Nexus5 - Nexus10
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 369
Thanked 840 Times in 417 Posts
Default

I'm currently reading articles today on the differences between qHD displays. Pentile vs rgb stripe technology. So even that sub-category of display has variety. =)

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is an article about the differences between RGB LCD and Pentile LCD:
Why Bother With a PenTile RGBW LCD if an RGB Stripe is Available? | PenTile Blog

Pentile vs RGB Stripe Technology

Unless I'm reading this wrong, they only go with Pentile to save power. Correct?
The traditional RGB display is brighter and more colorful. Correct?

EDIT: I just read another article that said it's simple a re-arrangement of how the pixels are displayed. So a cross pattern like # instead of an X pattern. Still researching this on my own.
__________________
Note that thoughts expressed here are merely my personal opinions and will hopefully
share my thoughts on the matter to stimulate a respectful discussion.
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." ~ Hippocrates
"If anyone's head is acting an antenna, seek help or wear tin foil." ~ EarlyMon
ArmageddonX is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 2nd, 2011, 01:54 PM   #32 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

It simplifies when you think in terms of light, optics and perception.

Here's the physics of that:

You conspire with pixels to see a continuous image under the right viewing situations (not too close or too far).

That happens because somewhere between the pixels and your visual cortex, the light from the dots gets integrated.

You see a wide range of colors because red, green and blue are sufficient to integrate in a such a way as for you to perceive a wide range of colors. So pixels typically have individual red, green and blue subpixels.

I've read many reasons for the development of PenTile arrays - maybe I've read the truth, or maybe I've read propaganda to hide trade secrets and compromises at the time.

The idea of PenTile is simple - if colored light integration is going to happen in the end, why not cheat a little and kinda re-arrange the sub-pixels in a way that they share the work between neighboring pixels.

So the pixel count is spec'd the same, but the sub-pixel count is lower (by what? 35%? I don't recall the exact number, it's likely in one of your links).

All in all, a pretty cool approach on some levels. But - there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. So, while I've no doubt that PenTile qHD is sharper than 800x480 anything, it won't be as sharp as RGB qHD for all uses (like text, where the shared subpixels are crossing boundaries between pixels). And color control can be harder with PenTile - doable - but harder.

Many people can't see the difference, many can see it clearly. Last year, I posted two different pictures of the same colored text web page and asked which was LCD, which was PenTile AMOLED - only a scant few guessed correctly that they were both pictures of the same Samsung display from slightly different angles.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 2nd, 2011, 02:52 PM   #33 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ArmageddonX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,538
 
Device(s): Nexus5 - Nexus10
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 369
Thanked 840 Times in 417 Posts
Default

So, to clarify for myself, the PenTile makes the pixels work better together but in the process lowers clarity & color? While the traditional RGB Stripe has more vivid color and is even sharper; but less efficient?
ArmageddonX is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 2nd, 2011, 03:18 PM   #34 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmageddonX View Post
So, to clarify for myself, the PenTile makes the pixels work better together but in the process lowers clarity & color? While the traditional RGB Stripe has more vivid color and is even sharper; but less efficient?
I don't want to misrepresent or confuse, so please bear with me.

For a given same technology (say LCD for example) and same resolution (say qHD for example), PenTile will use less control circuitry than RGB, so will be more electrically efficient for that reason, despite having a potentially teeny-tiny energy penalty for calculating that cross-pixel control.

Depending on the individual panel properties, you may get an apparent increase in vivid color. Why? Suppose I'd like to present a solid red panel. In the RGB case, 2/3 of my pixels are dead and dark. In the RGBW PenTile arrangement 3/4 of my pixels are dead and dark - and there are 33% fewer subpixels to begin with. In order to reduce the screen-door effect (where you can see a checkerboard of black lines with colored dots, like looking through a screen door) and to achieve the same total light output, the red LCD apertures must be opened wider - or the backlight must be increased - on the PenTile display in order to see the same solid red field.

So - claims of up to 50% power savings on PenTile arrays may or may not be true, depending on the user's settings for brightness, chosen based on the user's source preferences (text pages, movies, that sort of thing).

But PenTile should be more energy efficient.

(EDIT - I'm retracting this position - Photon lcd screen.... Pentile or not?)

To confuse matters, there's been more than one PenTile - consider this Samsung RGB PenTile from their AMOLED days:

File:Nexus one screen microscope.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So - vivid is up for grabs, but I'd suggest you'll get a truer color rendering with RGB.

As for the subpixels working better together - they all work great together.

It's just that with PenTile, they're trying to work more cleverly with fewer subpixels.

The lowering of clarity will depend on the matrix layout - but with more subpixels, the edge will go to RGB.

This discusses subpixel rendering and may be helpful -

Subpixel rendering - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
EarlyMon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; July 23rd, 2011 at 12:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to EarlyMon For This Useful Post:
ArmageddonX (June 8th, 2011)
Old June 2nd, 2011, 03:32 PM   #35 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ArmageddonX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,538
 
Device(s): Nexus5 - Nexus10
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 369
Thanked 840 Times in 417 Posts
Default

I think I understand.

RGB-Stripe = may have better color, sharper image, more power consumption

RGB-PenTile = clever way to save power & display *nearly* identical clarity & color
ArmageddonX is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 2nd, 2011, 03:33 PM   #36 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

Yes.

And if your vision is less or more sensitive to fine details then that *nearly* part goes up or down accordingly.

(Everyone claims to have incredibly sensitive vision and gets touchy about it. You can no more choose that than you can your height - but it seems on the intertubes most people act like it's a personal deal. People are highly variable, including their vision and eye-brain systems. Fact.)
EarlyMon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; June 2nd, 2011 at 03:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 2nd, 2011, 03:41 PM   #37 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ArmageddonX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,538
 
Device(s): Nexus5 - Nexus10
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 369
Thanked 840 Times in 417 Posts
Default

You're the best EarlyMon. Thank you.
ArmageddonX is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ArmageddonX For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (June 2nd, 2011)
Old June 2nd, 2011, 05:47 PM   #38 (permalink)
Leeeroy Jennnkinnns!
 
novox77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,968
 
Device(s): Evo 4G, 3D, LTE
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 1,190
Thanked 3,268 Times in 1,410 Posts
Default

Sometimes it helps to have a picture. Below is PenTile RGBG (used on Samsung SAMOLED screens):



In the above picture, all pixel elements are on, so this screen is showing white. Because red+blue+green light gives white. It doesn't look white cause it's magnified. Not really the point. Now, Early gave an example of a screen showing something red. That means the greens and blues turn off. The following pic shows what happens when PenTile RGBG has to render the primary colors alone and the rediculous amount of screendoor effect:



Note that the screen door effect is different depending on which color the screen is rendering. There's a ton of black between the red and blue. Green shows up more like vertical stripes. Because the ratio of dark to subpixel is much higher in PenTile display, given equal brightness of subpixels compared to a traditional square layout, PenTile screens will appear less bright. To compensate, the screen must shine brighter, using more power.

With images, you rarely have a solid color for a large area, so this screen door problem is masked somewhat. But for solid blocks of colors seen on lots of websites and apps, it's quite obvious. Also, white text on black background, basically the settings menus in Android, look horrible on Pentile because text has tons of perfectly vertical and horizontal lines. And that's where PenTile really suffers. Remember I said white requires all three of the primary colors? Look at the top pic and tell me how you can possibly derive a straight line from that mishmash tile pattern of subpixels, making sure each "pixel" uses the same amount of R G and B. You can't.

So... what you get is a fuzzy or jagged edge on your text with a bit of red, green, and blue glow along the edges. You see this kind of "chromatic aberration" along any edge of contrast, actually.

With SAMOLED, at least you have the deep blacks and the super-saturated colors to dazzle you and help you overlook the PenTile crappiness. But there's no excuse for putting PenTile RGBG on an LCD-based screen. Yep, I'm looking at you, Motorola... Only reason I can think of is for the power savings, and possibly cheaper construction cost. At a sacrifice to clarity and brightness efficiency.

This article shows comparison pics between regular square RGB stripe LCD and PenTile RGBG LCD. AnandTech - The Motorola Atrix 4G Preview

You can clearly see the difference in brightness and the screen door effect. And note all the chromatic aberration around the text in the Google Maps comparison on the PenTile side, particularly the "dio" part (below). Looks horrendous on PenTile.




No need to go easy on PenTile. It sucks. Samsung ditched it for the Galaxy S2.
__________________

The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it. -Neil deGrasse Tyson

Help me out: Sign up with Dropbox and we both get 500MB extra space. Thanks!
novox77 is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to novox77 For This Useful Post:
ArmageddonX (June 2nd, 2011)
Old June 2nd, 2011, 06:34 PM   #39 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ArmageddonX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,538
 
Device(s): Nexus5 - Nexus10
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 369
Thanked 840 Times in 417 Posts
Default

Wow, you guys are really into this display thing. Hehe... I have to say, you have convinced me never to buy a PenTile display ever. As a heavy text messager and I do a lot of reading on my phone I can imagine that would be miserable! I'll make sure my next phone is a Stripe/traditional LCD/display.
ArmageddonX is offline  
Last edited by ArmageddonX; June 2nd, 2011 at 06:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2011, 05:14 AM   #40 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
mrqs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Suomi Finland Perkele
Posts: 1,448
 
Device(s): htc sensation nokia n8 samsung galaxy (broken - waterdamage)
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 46
Thanked 92 Times in 78 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyMon View Post
Fun home experiment especially if you have a high-res laptop: sit at your laptop where you usually do - I'll bet you see no pixels, just lines. Hold your phone up between you and your laptop at your comfortable, normal, phone-viewing distance.

Now - what is the percentage or fraction of your phone's _apparent_ display size with respect to the _apparent_ size of your laptop.

Finally - take into account the resolution of the phone vs. the resolution of the final area that the phone _apparently_ occupies on the laptop.

In my personal case, my 800x480@4.3" phone has same or better resolution than my 1440x900@15" laptop.

I've yet to complain about pixelation on my laptop.
there's a very important aspect to that comparison you didn't take in to account: information density on the screen

say you're viewing a webpage
on the laptop everything's fine with a 1440x900 resolution; plenty of text and pretty pictures of naked ladies android phones
go to the same page on your phone and all of that information is being shrunk to a fraction of the physical size
the text on the phone will be much smaller than the one on the laptop - you'll be able to read it because you generally hold your phone closer to your eyes than the laptop screen, but the pixel density is going to have to be much higher as well, or else the character will become blurry and eventually unreadable
__________________
All the best bands are affiliated with Satan - Bart Simpson
mrqs is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to mrqs For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (June 3rd, 2011)
sponsored links
Old June 3rd, 2011, 05:51 AM   #41 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrqs View Post
there's a very important aspect to that comparison you didn't go into in this thread: information density on the screen
ftfy

That part had been discussed elsewhere - but you're right, best to have it a part of this thread as well.
EarlyMon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2011, 06:12 AM   #42 (permalink)
1ds
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: India
Posts: 52
 
Device(s): Galaxy S Super Lcd with stock Froyo 2.2.1
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 2
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Every Display panel boasts its own USP, in the end it depend upon user eye taste what he likes.

I Chose SUPER LCD because

Immune to burn-In which starts in excessive usage
No tints hues like we get in AMOLEDS(AMOLEDS are known to show tints like blue n yellow)
True to life accurate colors without over-saturation(Again AMOLED pushes colors way to hard makes images un-real)
Bit more viewing angle than AMOLED +
White is really WHITE

there are some downsides Super LCD too

Poor sunlight readability
Blacks are not True BLACK they are more like GREY BLACK
Cant save power with black themes


at the end of the day there is no such display which overcomes every display flaw and we have to compromise because of their limitations.
1ds is offline  
Last edited by 1ds; June 3rd, 2011 at 06:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2011, 09:47 AM   #43 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ArmageddonX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,538
 
Device(s): Nexus5 - Nexus10
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 369
Thanked 840 Times in 417 Posts
Default

So, the qHD LCD displays are immune to burn it? Or is that just the Sony (Super) LCD brand?

I'm on my Smartphone (when I have one) probably 30-45minutes out of every hour. So immunity to screen-burn is a big selling point to me actually...

Good information about the up & downsides to AMOLED (and LCD too). Most the time you just see people praising it and it can be difficult to get a non-biased opinion of different display types.
ArmageddonX is offline  
Last edited by ArmageddonX; June 3rd, 2011 at 09:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2011, 10:23 AM   #44 (permalink)
The PearlyMon
 
EarlyMon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Mexico, USA
Posts: 44,042
 
Device(s): LTEvo, 3vo, and Shift
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 41,701
Thanked 54,832 Times in 21,868 Posts
Default

LCDs act like little valves or shutters or apertures. They open or close to allow the backlight to flow through, then through a colored lens and/or polarizing layers.

You can get stuck pixels on an LCD. This is because there are transistors creating an electrical field that the LC material responds to (to open or close) and sometimes, those transistors can get stuck into a constant state. And the transistors can stay in stuck state even if you remove power - when you power up, you'll get pixels that are stuck at black, red, you name it.

If that happens there are apps and web pages that will cycle the colors for several minutes. What that does is pulse those control signals until the transistors in question get unstuck.

Left untreated for a _long_ period of time, the LC material at a stuck pixel will experience a chemical change and you'll get the LCD equivalent of burn-in: a permanently stuck pixel.

Leaving stuck pixels alone is NEVER a good idea. If you have a whole bunch of them happening it'll look like ghosting or burn-in.

(On the first cheap LCD displays coming out about a decade ago, they'd even ghost the screen badly. Haven't seen that in years and years.)

Whole stuck LCD pixel thing applies to every LCD made - phone, computer, TV - because it's a transistor issue.

Last time I suffered it was on a JVC LCD HDTV several years ago - fixed by changing color pattern with a slide-show.

~~~~~~~

Actual burn-in on OLED-type displays seems relatively rare from what I've read from users here, but it does happen. In those cases, it's like the old CRT days - actual image constantly burned in to the display.

Samsung Galaxy S owners have reported good results with that same rotating color app or web sites in very many - but not all - cases at the first hint of possible burn-in.

With OLED, light energy is produced at the subpixel itself. With LCD, the light is just a light behind the panel.
EarlyMon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; June 3rd, 2011 at 10:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2011, 10:25 AM   #45 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ArmageddonX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Arizona, USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,538
 
Device(s): Nexus5 - Nexus10
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 369
Thanked 840 Times in 417 Posts
Default

I still have an old 19-inch CRT I bought when I built my first Pentium 133 rig I keep just to remind myself... it's huge... anyway... Off-Topic lol...
ArmageddonX is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2011, 11:40 AM   #46 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Stuntman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,009
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, HTC Desire Z, Asus Eee Pad Transformer with Keyboard Dock, Nokia N97
Carrier: Bell

Thanks: 208
Thanked 572 Times in 450 Posts
Default

I recall reading an article about AMOLED displays where the lifetime of blue pixels are much shorter than that of the red and green pixels. It seems the manufacturing process or material for each colour of pixel is different and the longevity of blue pixels is an issue with AMOLED displays. There is no such issue with LCD's.
__________________
<\
\>tuntman
Stuntman is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2011, 01:02 PM   #47 (permalink)
1ds
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: India
Posts: 52
 
Device(s): Galaxy S Super Lcd with stock Froyo 2.2.1
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 2
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmageddonX View Post
So, the qHD LCD displays are immune to burn it? Or is that just the Sony (Super) LCD brand?

I'm on my Smartphone (when I have one) probably 30-45minutes out of every hour. So immunity to screen-burn is a big selling point to me actually...

Good information about the up & downsides to AMOLED (and LCD too). Most the time you just see people praising it and it can be difficult to get a non-biased opinion of different display types.


Burn-in only affects AMOLEDS because each pixel is like a lamp which glow on its own, i have Sony CRT tv at home 21" whenever i switch it on for prolonged hours channel logo on top right leaves a hue or say burn-in that place( to notice it on CRT display a static image of RED BLUE or GREEN on same area for 3 hours and you will see that static image have left some residue when you change the channel but that vaanishes when set is switched off overninght but AMOLED makes a tattoo of that which never goes!!) i think AMOLEDS do the same but very slowly but they do, a friend of mine keeps his Galaxy S AMOLED on max brightness all the time and his screen shows etched battery logo & signal bar when white background is displayed though its no HUGE but its there if you look after it, and it justifies Burn-in,


S-LCD not matter its an Sony,Samsung or qHD from other display makers will never ever show burn-in or etching whatsoever i have very old sony ericsson k750i which i bought way back and i use as a bed clock and believe me from past 2 years its continuously ON(24X7 on charging!!!) and back-lit is on always and yet no sign of display wear or pixel dead/stuck! though led lamps are bit dim but its only noticeable in 100% brightness, in the end i say AMOLED panels are good but they are like CFL lamp yes they glows more than edsion Bulb but one day they will fuse, it will take few more years for AMOLEDS to be on par with SLCD( on wear and tear grounds)
1ds is offline  
Last edited by 1ds; June 3rd, 2011 at 01:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2011, 03:29 PM   #48 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 826
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 19
Thanked 49 Times in 47 Posts
Default

Personally I think its all just marketing...no one is complaining of horrible experiences because thier phone has x type of display. Besides it isn't just the screen that sells the phone
MyNamesTooLong is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MyNamesTooLong For This Useful Post:
EarlyMon (June 4th, 2011)
Old June 10th, 2011, 07:49 AM   #49 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Which Display is best for reading in sunlight?

is super amoled plus the way to go if I need the best readability in sunlight??
ronrelyea is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old July 4th, 2011, 10:58 PM   #50 (permalink)
New Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 13
 
Device(s): Nexus One, Nexus S
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I prefer slcd over amoled, much sharper and more accurate colour, how is super amoled plus for colour accuracy?

Btw any fans of amoled can get the same effect on windows by going into graphics options and turning on digital vibrancy for nvidia cards, not sure what it's called for ati.
MaFi0s0 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Go Back   Android Forums > Android Discussion > Android Lounge
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:35 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.