Super amoled screens not very sharp? Don't want on EVO.

[linzgeneral]

Is it me or are the super amoled screesn simply not as sharp as normal lcd screens such as the EVO or Droids? I am a stickler for a sharp screen and looking at the super amoleds seems like looking as font constructed from lego blocks. The resolution grid, if you will, is very obvious/visible and not very impressive. I noticed this first on the Droid Incredible and to a worst extent on the Samsung Galaxy S which I looked at yesterday. I am simply not very impressed at either of these screens and wonder if we will suffer the same visual fate in the event that a future superphone or even subsequent revisions of the EVO switches to the amoled screens. Sure the colors are great but if that means blocky font then I am not willing to take one step forward and two backward. To be honest I am completely satisfied with color on my EVO, just wished resolution was higher.

 

[EarlyMon]

It's just you.

Never judge a display out of the box, without ensuring that you've at least adjusted it for brightness. (Sadly, that's all you CAN adjust on Android.)

The SAMOLEDs offer trade-offs in performance to the LCD - neither is perfect, both are very very good.

The SAMOLED draws a LOT less power - that's why I'd want one.

 

[Caloy]

I'd rather have SAMOLED then TFT-LCD. Like EarlyMon says, less power draw as well as better and more vibrant photos and videos.

 

[ekang]

I agree and disagree with the op. While the evo screen looks great to me, the super amoled screen is a superior screen. On top of saving some battery life, it looks more vibrant and clear.

On top of that, it's more responsive. I believe it will eventually be the standard screen on mobile phones. This is all just my opinion though. I'm sure people with disagree

 

[EarlyMon]

When supply can match demand, helped along by Samsung's new fab, completion in 2011, then SAMOLED will likely become the standard.

Unless and until they invent something better.

 

[CriticalCritic]

I agree and disagree with the op. While the evo screen looks great to me, the super amoled screen is a superior screen. On top of saving some battery life, it looks more vibrant and clear.

On top of that, it's more responsive. I believe it will eventually be the standard screen on mobile phones. This is all just my opinion though. I'm sure people with disagree

I'd only disagree with the responsiveness. This screen on my Evo is painfully sensitive. Sometimes it will register my touch even when I didn't feel it myself. My Moment's amoled required a much more deliberate touch.

And EarlyMon had a good point. The Samoled does draw less power, which is a big deal when considering how freaking big this screen is! Though, it's not a huge deal when compared against all the other things that draw more power, every bit still helps!

 

[droid51378]

not to mention the weight difference...

 

[linzgeneral]

I know its just not me as I have observed at least two people with a like opinion. I think people are mixing up bright and vibrant, both related to clear and sharp. The amoled screens are NOT sharp. I looked at a droid incredible with obviously blocky pixels, albeit bright and vibrant colors and compared it a a normal Moto droid. The Droid though not as colorful had strikingly clearer font which you had to strain your eyes in order to see pixels. You DO NOT have to strain your eyes or even look hard to see pixels on the Incredible or even worst the Galaxy. Now to think of it, I believe I noticed the same thing on the Samsung moment. It is indeed a trade off and subjective to one personal preferences but while the Amoleds might just be a better screen, they are not superior in all aspects of desired screen characteristics.

 

[linzgeneral]

I neglected to conclude that after having sated my opinion, perhaps a Super Amoled with increased resolution might be a mutual solution that would have everyone happy. We would get to enjoy all of the documented advantages of the Amoled along with superior sharpness. Hopefully we wont have to wait too long for this.

 

[EarlyMon]

The Droid Incredible and the Samsung Moment are both AMOLED.

The Galaxy-class phones alone are SAMOLED.

I'm not confusing brightness with vibrant.

Brightness is a standard video term.

Vibrant is a subjective/descriptive term.

The colors on the S/AM/OLED screens have a higher saturation - another video term.

The Droid Incredible is like the EVO - 480x800 - but unlike the EVO, its smaller size (3.7" vs 4.3") means that if anything the dot pitch will be finer - unimportant as dot pitch is invisible at the normal use case of about 9" ~ 15" away.

Two displays, running the same user GUI, at the same device resolution, cannot have a difference in "blockiness" of the pixels.

Pixels are pixels. They can only have light associated with them. The hue of SAMOLED pixels are different than for LCD - that's it, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

And as I write this, I'm holding a Samsung Moment next to an EVO - and the Moment has no blockiness whatsoever - it's pleasantly razor sharp. And its font renditions are superb.

Oh - besides hue - the light from the EVO's LCD display appears obviously circularly polarized, whereas the Moment is linear - but both are sporting anti-scratch covers, so take that with a grain of salt.

So - it's still you.

And by the way on that whole saturation/vibrant thing -

Colorfulness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As I've said elsewhere - hold both up to a calibrated HDTV display - neither is going to come out favorably with respect to color.

So, the preference in the end will be subjective.

At first, I missed the vivid colors of the Moment - but quickly got used to the EVO as being more natural in some respects (not the purplish tint it has, though!!).

We don't need any more resolution (it's last of the four factors to affect perceived detail anyway, despite the fact that I'm committing forum heresy) - what I would dearly like to have in a future SAMOLED is a set of freaking color adjustments.

They'll give me that when I get my sharks with frigging laser beams on their heads.

 

[KB3MMX]

I wonder if there isn't a large difference in some of the phones build quality because the Samsung Captivate OLED in my brother in laws phone was FAR better picture and video quality than my Father in laws Droid X with a LCD screen.
We ran picture and video tests side by side and everyone agreed the OLED picture was far superior in color, clarity and sharpness while the Droid X LCD looked very washed out....... I have also noticed the same on the EVO's LCD as compared to OLED......interesting that we've seen the opposite of what the OP has experienced.

 

[linzgeneral]

The Droid Incredible and the Samsung Moment are both AMOLED.

The Galaxy-class phones alone are SAMOLED.

I'm not confusing brightness with vibrant.

Brightness is a standard video term.

Vibrant is a subjective/descriptive term.

The colors on the S/AM/OLED screens have a higher saturation - another video term.

The Droid Incredible is like the EVO - 480x800 - but unlike the EVO, its smaller size (3.7" vs 4.3") means that if anything the dot pitch will be finer - unimportant as dot pitch is invisible at the normal use case of about 9" ~ 15" away.

Two displays, running the same user GUI, at the same device resolution, cannot have a difference in "blockiness" of the pixels.

Pixels are pixels. They can only have light associated with them. The hue of SAMOLED pixels are different than for LCD - that's it, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

And as I write this, I'm holding a Samsung Moment next to an EVO - and the Moment has no blockiness whatsoever - it's pleasantly razor sharp. And its font renditions are superb.

Oh - besides hue - the light from the EVO's LCD display appears obviously circularly polarized, whereas the Moment is linear - but both are sporting anti-scratch covers, so take that with a grain of salt.

So - it's still you.

And by the way on that whole saturation/vibrant thing -

Colorfulness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As I've said elsewhere - hold both up to a calibrated HDTV display - neither is going to come out favorably with respect to color.

So, the preference in the end will be subjective.

At first, I missed the vivid colors of the Moment - but quickly got used to the EVO as being more natural in some respects (not the purplish tint it has, though!!).

We don't need any more resolution (it's last of the four factors to affect perceived detail anyway, despite the fact that I'm committing forum heresy) - what I would dearly like to have in a future SAMOLED is a set of freaking color adjustments.

They'll give me that when I get my sharks with frigging laser beams on their heads.

It sounds great but reality dictates something totally different. The samsung moment is blocky- I passed it off as an inferior phone as soon as I turned it on and noticed it immediately. If you cant see that then either you got a different phone (higher res) or you eyes aren't very good. While the Incredible has a smaller screen than the EVO and you would expect the pixelation to be less, it is not -not according to my eyes. I spent about two minutes with the galaxy S only, as the lego blocks font turned be off immediately. This was surprising since it is the same resolution as the EVO but a smaller screen which should have translated into less blockiness. The reality is that it seemed alot blockier. It just occured to me that maybe the Amoleds are simply too bright and are illuminating the fonts and exposing the pixels in a way that a less bright screen might not. Who knows?

 

[EarlyMon]

There's nothing wrong with my eyes.

And you just got the point of my remark regarding brightness (second sentence I made in this thread).

Who knows? I do. (lol) I've adjusted both screens for brightness.

It makes all the difference in the world.

 

[EarlyMon]

We ran picture and video tests side by side and everyone agreed the OLED picture was far superior in color, clarity and sharpness while the Droid X LCD looked very washed out....... I have also noticed the same on the EVO's LCD as compared to OLED......interesting that we've seen the opposite of what the OP has experienced.

Compare both a properly-adjusted HDTV.

Otherwise, that side by side comparison is purely subjective.

 

[linzgeneral]

Compare both a properly-adjusted HDTV.

Otherwise, that side by side comparison is purely subjective.

I apologize for the "eye" comment as my intent was not to be offensive. My personal solution is a higher resolution Amoled screen. Heck a higher res any type screen for that matter. It is time for the phone manufacturers to amp up the screen res to match the increasing sizes as not to lose sharpness. Can you imagine our size screens with a resolution or clarity equivalent to that on the Iphone4? That would be amazing. Again, no mean to offend my fellow forum mates as you guys are full of knowledge and feel like close friends.

 

[EarlyMon]

I apologize for the "eye" comment as my intent was not to be offensive. My personal solution is a higher resolution Amoled screen. Heck a higher res any type screen for that matter. It is time for the phone manufacturers to amp up the screen res to match the increasing sizes as not to lose sharpness. Can you imagine our size screens with a resolution or clarity equivalent to that on the Iphone4? That would be amazing. Again, no mean to offend my fellow forum mates as you guys are full of knowledge and feel like close friends.

No worries.

For me personally, there's no point to higher resolution.

At 12" - my typical distance - the phone is completely integrated. I compared it recently to an iP4 with the same font and text, adjusted for the same relative size and that was accomplished by simply holding the iP4 a little closer.

There was absolutely no difference in sharpness under the following conditions:

We both used the Georgia font family, and sized it so that it was nearly identical with the Evo laid on top of a paperback with that same font. (Actually, the Evo was just a tad smaller.)

You can get much smaller fonts on both devices, and eventually the iP4 will win out - except - several old-school studies for print established that long-term use of that font family smaller than that paperback aren't terribly healthy. (I have links supporting that in at least one other thread, I'll repost them on request (but not instantly ). And not referring to myths, referring to basic eyestrain.

Also, I'm older and can no longer focus below 7" anyway. At distance my visual acuity is above the norm - Mother Nature does so love her little games. (I just realized - maybe there IS something wrong with my eyes! lol But for the observations I've offered, I promise my orbs are 100%.)

We all adjust to a certain field of view rather naturally, from what I've seen.

Everyone that grabs my EVO holds it back from their face and goes, Oh wow!

And then they pick up their smaller phone, hold it closer and squint, ever so slightly.

Look for that behavior - I'm sure you'll notice it. In my experience it's neither age nor gender nor corrective lenses related.

PS - The iP4 owner that was side by side with me on that one - ordered an EVO. He repeated that he didn't understand the EVO's sharpness with it not being retinal. When it came time for him to show me how the display looked at 3" - we agreed it was time for him to buy the beers.

Bigger screen. Size does matter.

 

[njbianco]

It sounds great but reality dictates something totally different. The samsung moment is blocky- I passed it off as an inferior phone as soon as I turned it on and noticed it immediately. If you cant see that then either you got a different phone (higher res) or you eyes aren't very good. While the Incredible has a smaller screen than the EVO and you would expect the pixelation to be less, it is not -not according to my eyes. I spent about two minutes with the galaxy S only, as the lego blocks font turned be off immediately. This was surprising since it is the same resolution as the EVO but a smaller screen which should have translated into less blockiness. The reality is that it seemed alot blockier. It just occured to me that maybe the Amoleds are simply too bright and are illuminating the fonts and exposing the pixels in a way that a less bright screen might not. Who knows?

Before my Evo i owned the Samsung Moment witch like the HTC Incredible it has a Amoled screen(not Super Amoled like you keep saying) and when there next to each other the Moment is much LESS pixelated waaay more vibrant & etc then my Evo. I love my Evo way more then my old Moment but i will have to say in almost every way insept for in sunlight the Moments screen was better(and yes i have great vision), but like everything you have said this is just my opinion.

 

[mrspeedmaster]

Is it me or are the super amoled screesn simply not as sharp as normal lcd screens such as the EVO or Droids?.

What you are seeing is the problem with AMOLED/SAMOLED screen. Most notably, the Pentile-Matrix sub-pixel rendering issue.

Because they way the green phosphors are rendered, they are not getting the full resolution of 800x480. It is more like 533

 

[Jahmakan]

Some people use the same argument when debating LCD vs Plasma, that the LCD is sharper to them. Guess it's personal preference.

 

[Caloy]

Some people use the same argument when debating LCD vs Plasma, that the LCD is sharper to them. Guess it's personal preference.

I agree.

 

[iboombastic]

Its actually true, when you use an AMOLED Display you can see weird blockness looking at white backgrounds. SAMOLED also has a weird purplish hue to it.

 

[EarlyMon]

Alrighty, gang!

Well, the best link was the last one where the author spoke at length with people who wanted to point out all sorts of things about light physics but the author came away saying he believed them, but then pointing out that it was obvious that AMOLED had a deficiency.

If I read correctly, the obviousness applies to text on a white background.

OK. That saves me a long-winded EarlyMon special.

How about a little test instead?

I have two phones - an EVO and a Moment. I put up WifelyMon's favorite zodiac site and made the text quite small so that my conditions - strictly by eye and hand-holding - were: make text same size in both pictures by eye, and hold camera above phones the same distance by hand, no zoom other than that required for macro as best these old hands can manage. Then - crop and rotate to fit the forum allowances for snaps - no other processing whatsoever.





Which picture belongs to which screen technology?

And no - it's not the same picture doctored - I got people on that one before.

These are separate and undoctored, not even by changing size - that's raw camera image in jpg you're seeing in both.

Vote early, vote often.

PS - Any voting that my snaps suck and aren't good enough to tell are noted in advance. This is the best I could do on a Sunday afternoon with WifelyMon wondering why I was using her phone in the first place.

Besides - in the first link, one poster showed a great close-up of razor sharp font and great color on screen icons of an AMOLED snap in a series from Asia, but was dismissed.

PPS - A free Thank You from me to everyone that votes.

 

[Caloy]

Its actually true, when you use an AMOLED Display you can see weird blockness looking at white backgrounds. SAMOLED also has a weird purplish hue to it.

It's also true that SAMOLED also produce deeper blacks and more color saturations. Thus producing better image/video quality.

So there you have it, if you prefer text qaulity over image/video quality get an LCD. if you prefer image/video quality over text quality, get an AMOLED screen. Choose your poison gentlement.

 

[Caloy]

Alrighty, gang!

Well, the best link was the last one where the author spoke at length with people who wanted to point out all sorts of things about light physics but the author came away saying he believed them, but then pointing out that it was obvious.

If I read correctly, the obviousness applies to text on a white background.

OK. That saves me a long-winded EarlyMon special.

How about a little test instead?

I have two phones - an EVO and a Moment. I put up WifelyMon's favorite zodiac site and made the text quite small so that my conditions - strictly by eye and hand-holding - were: make text same size in both pictures by eye, and hold camera above phones the same distance by hand, no zoom other than that required for macro as best these old hands can manage. Then - crop and rotate to fit the forum allowances for snaps - no other processing whatsoever.

View attachment 8394

View attachment 8395

Which picture belongs to which screen technology?

And no - it's not the same picture doctored - I got people on that one before.

These are separate and undoctored, not even by changing size - that's raw camera image in jpg you're seeing in both.

Vote early, vote often.

PS - Any voting that my snaps suck and aren't good enough to tell are noted in advance. This is the best I could do on a Sunday afternoon with WifelyMon wondering why I was using her phone in the first place.

I would think that the first 1 is the Samsung and the 2nd one is the Evo.

Honestly I can barely tell (that is of course if I even chose the correct one). But the difference is so minute, I can read both quite well. That being said, I'm going for the SAMOLED screen over the LCD.

 

[rml4uk]

I agree with the OP. I went into an AT&T store to look at the Captivate's supposedly amazing Super AMOLED screen and I was not impressed at all. Although it was very bright and vivid, the screen was not very clear and pixels were definitely visible. You would think that the screen would look clearer than the Evo's considering it is the same resolution on a smaller screen, but the screen clarity was closer to that of my old 3GS, than the Evo.