Today, you asked: Clean the confusion about quantum dots and what they do, and why are PC monitor not good as TV.
Quantum dot confusion
Farid writes: Quantum dots TV (LCD-based or OLED) and non-quantum dots with their high color volume compared to TV, are you to see extra colors that the creators want to see? How many materials are mastered in those extreme colors, if I do not have then I am missing QDI-Oled Or did QD-Mune lead TV? I plan to upgrade my 2020 Wold TV.
First, an explanation: only a few OLED TVs use TV quantum dots, and they use them in a very different way than LCD TVs.
LCD TVs currently use quantum dots as LED or mini-LED backlights used in LCD TVS are struggled to exclude pure white light. Without pure white light, a wide color for the color filter in an LCD TV is difficult to remove the surge. Quantum dots carry pure blue which is LED Are It is good to produce and use that blue light energy for red and green glow. Mix blue LEDs with red and green glowing quantum dots, and now you have a very pure white light that can carve a very pure white light that can carve a color filter of an LCD panel in millions of colors.
A quantum dot is OLED TV. In this case, the red and green quantum dots work with the shining blue OLED at the pixel level. There is no color filter here – the use of blue, red, and green mixture mixture – and in LCD to achieve a wide gamut of colors, in LCD, no reduction is to be reduced. However, it is important to note that WRGB OLEDs can also cover a very broad color sargam and do not require quantum dots to do it. Being this case, your 2020 OLED TV is a wide color Sargam TV. You don’t remember anything.
There are many colors of materials that exist beyond the capacity of LCD TV which do not have quantum dots. Anything that is in HDR-and now there is a lot of that material that can produce a non-quantum dot TV.
For the best and most pleasant picture quality, yes, you want a quantum dot – or QD – LCD TV or an OLED TV. This does not mean that LCD TVs are bad without quantum dots, they are not just as good in producing increased colors. And since Quantum Dots are making it in less expensive TV, this is a sign that TVs are going to be very cheap without quantum dots and will not usually be great picture quality. Good photo quality? Yes, just not great.
Monitor or TV screen?
Gavin writes: Hello, I have recently got a QD-Old G6 Samsung monitor. I was wondering why we don’t watch a ton shiny screen on monitor and why some TVs actually do better as a monitor for some people. For example, some of the few reviews I saw on a bright monitor said that they were not almost as good. LG C4,G -4etc.
Another thing I wanted to ask: Why is the brightness on the monitor so limited on the contrast to the TV counterparts? You can have a monitor and the same panel on TV (as well as similar cooling) and glow is still an issue for the monitor,
Why are there not more monitors with shiny screen? Monitor is often used near windows or in a truly bright environment where dazzle can be a major problem. If you sit right in front of a monitor and have any light in the room, you will see a lot of your own until there is any kind of anti -reflection treatment of the screen. In addition, any reflection from the surface will be bright for the eye compared to the same reflection seen several feet away from performance.
This leads to the next question: Why are monitors less bright than TV? A part of it is to be done with power supply. To get a monitor as a TV as a TV will require a beautiful beef power supply – and it has been done – but having a large outboard power brick is a real problem. Critics complained about that at all times, and I can tell you from personal experience that I do not like it.
Another reason: Monitor is designed to see close-up, so they do not need to be so bright. Zeke and Chris will confirm this: a 1,000-night, 10 percent of the window is seen from one leg or two distance, dramatically brighter, says, eight feet away.
Monitor does not have pictures processors; If they do, they are very weak. To look good as a monitor as a TV, you would like to calibrate the video signal output. However, until you are in professional production, it is very rare because this picture processing interval and is not very good for gaming.
Any dolby vision, no problem?
Gab writes: I know that QD-Olad Samsung cites a lack of support for DTS audio and dolby vision HD formats in Samsung TV, as they can probably not buy one for themselves-TVS is good quality and high class in all other fields. If you run your blue-ray player or streaming box through you, can you not only work around DTS issue speechless,Sound Setup to get that audio format still when using HDMI Passthrough to get video information from AVR/Soundbar? If so, why are people hanging on this issue? For Dolby Vision, I think there is nothing you can work because TV is what is to support for it, right? Or am I misunderstanding that concept and can you work around it too?
This is correct: if your TV does not support DTS – or maybe not all of it – then you can connect your sources directly to your soundbar, receiver or processor.
When it comes to Dolby Vision, support is to be made in TV. There is no workaround. But if you do not have a dolby vision, then it is no longer a deal-breaker in my opinion. I like Dolby Vision very much, and I think it does good things for less performance TVs – it looks as good to HDR content as it can do on TV with limited brightness capabilities. However, it seems only better when the manufacturer took the dolby vision grade seriously; Usually all other HDR versions are serving from that grade. Sometimes the dolby vision version is not good as HDR 10 or HDR 10+ version – it depends on the manufacturer. Dolby Vision is a powerful tool, but, in the end, it is only as good as the manufacturer who runs it. It is technically the most competent HDR format and ecosystem, but its capabilities are still being discovered and are not close to being used for Max anywhere.
So, at this day and age, is there a premium TV that lacks dolby vision support? Yes I think so. Is this a deal-breaker? Only when you want to vote with your wallet. Finally, a TV dolby may look extraordinary even without a dolby vision, and Samsung has proved that this is true.
OLED boost brightness
Marcus writes from Austria: last year’s top-of-the-line OLED panel (eg) LG G4) To enhance the brightness, used MLA technology and did a great job on it. But CES This year, MLA was no longer something. Instead, the latest OLED panel by LG ( G5And Is used by Panasonic Many) was a “RGB Agranukram” panel. It does not use anything like MLA. What about the combination of RGB leading panel with MLA coating at the top? Can this be an even more luxurious picture – or let’s say “ridiculous bright” image? Would this be possible? When I get the technical aspect correct, the MLA is a small, small lens array coated at the top of a “regular” wold panel – so this lens coating should also be possible on top of the RGB Agranukram panel.
I think the MLA can be applied to the new 4-defense or leading display technology. The LG display got away from the MLA because it was disabled, super expensive to apply, and a little useless. I am happy that we got it for a while, but finally, I think the MLA was a bridge-gap measure aimed at clapping back on QD-Olade, while the Agranukram for TV ended in OLED development. With the OLED TVS 4,000-Night sector test, the need for OLED to be very bright is disappearing. It is possible that we may be near the end of the bright wars between OLED TVs.
