Didn't have room to fit the term "differences in technology" in the title. Also an objective pluses and minuses of each technology.
Please don't turn this thread into a bashing of different phones/displays. Lets respect all opinions :victory: I like to know the ins and outs of this stuff for the job .
For instance, I have read that AMOLED can have overly apparent pixels at lower resolutions and that the more often you look at black on the phone, the more battery you will save.
I, personally speaking, tend to enjoy AMOLED screens whenever I upgrade people to S3s vs. lumia 920 or iphones or HTCs.
Lumias lack vibrance to an almost unrealistic point for me. I can certainly understand if someone disagrees, however.
Iphones/ Ipads have great displays, though I find that I have to keep the brightness of them very high to keep viewing enjoyable.
HTCs are the most realistic color wise to me, though personally speaking I enjoy the contrast of AMOLEDS more. I will say, however, the pictures do not do the HTC One display justice. I haven't seen an S4 in person yet, though the HTC One easily trumps its predecessors in vibrance and clarity and is currently my favorite display, even over the S3. We'll see how that works out whenever I see S4.
What are battery saving tips for instance that I could give my customers with all brands for the customers (other than obviously higher brightness = less battery life)? Would it make sense to say that AMOLEDS burn more battery with green because of a greater amount of green sub pixels? Stuff like that.
Thanks in advance everyone!
AMOLEDs over saturate colors by default (although now you can tune it to be closer to real color reproduction if you so wish) which makes more things "pop out". AMOLEDs also do much better with black background, and in fact, I find it the best when watching movies/shows. Their weakness comes a bit with whites which keeps them from a better potential brightness, and they also suffer risk of screen burn-in (Less of a problem as long as you don't keep your screen turned on for hours when you're not using it).
Some battery saving tips:
-Turn off features you're not using. It normally goes without saying but I've met so many people who just want the complete experience who keep everything turned on and then complain because their battery goes to crap even when they're not using said features all that much.
-Beware background running Apps and Apps in general that require constant data checks. It's worth taking a few minutes to identify what these are and whether they're worth keeping and when to disable them.
-Another biggie of course is constant 3G/4G connection. Apps like Tasker and Automagic allow you to avoid constant signal locking with towers that drains your battery when you're not using any of the data.
Those are about the basics. It would be a good opportunity to point out, at least when pitching the Galaxy S4, that since it has a removable battery there's always the option of keeping a spare one that can be popped in when there's no more charge left. This would also happen to be a good time to sell them an extra battery if you keep it stocked. Oh yeah, and please, please, please direct customers towards useful apps. Again, I've met too many people with phones who just go with stock apps and never browse the Play store. There are so many useful apps on there, especially when it comes to managing your phone and taking advantage of all its features.
Sarcron said:
AMOLEDs over saturate colors by default (although now you can tune it to be closer to real color reproduction if you so wish) which makes more things "pop out". AMOLEDs also do much better with black background, and in fact, I find it the best when watching movies/shows. Their weakness comes a bit with whites which keeps them from a better potential brightness, and they also suffer risk of screen burn-in (Less of a problem as long as you don't keep your screen turned on for hours when you're not using it).
Some battery saving tips:
-Turn off features you're not using. It normally goes without saying but I've met so many people who just want the complete experience who keep everything turned on and then complain because their battery goes to crap even when they're not using said features all that much.
-Beware background running Apps and Apps in general that require constant data checks. It's worth taking a few minutes to identify what these are and whether they're worth keeping and when to disable them.
-Another biggie of course is constant 3G/4G connection. Apps like Tasker and Automagic allow you to avoid constant signal locking with towers that drains your battery when you're not using any of the data.
Those are about the basics. It would be a good opportunity to point out, at least when pitching the Galaxy S4, that since it has a removable battery there's always the option of keeping a spare one that can be popped in when there's no more charge left. This would also happen to be a good time to sell them an extra battery if you keep it stocked. Oh yeah, and please, please, please direct customers towards useful apps. Again, I've met too many people with phones who just go with stock apps and never browse the Play store. There are so many useful apps on there, especially when it comes to managing your phone and taking advantage of all its features.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tend to recommend two apps along with always restarting/ turning off your phone at least once a day. The apps I recommend are advanced task killer and 1tap cleaner for clearing cache. I recommend them based on their overall simplicity. If you know any simpler/ more effective apps please let me know.
Keep in mind that 95% of customers that come into the store find even connecting to password connected wifi complicated. They are hardly as computer/ UI intuitive as we are concerning apps and phone settings go. If it requires more than three intuitive clicks (not including the click to open it) we generally see it as a no go for recommendations. Lord knows how much we hate how complicated explaining port settings are to explain when people run into issues setting up their emails (Iphone 4/4s's are NOTORIOUS for this.. also if you have a bellsouth email, get a new one. They're plagued with problems) so that they don't have to come into the store every time a glitch occurs and an email becomes unresponsive.
I only understand the screen techs in "layman's terms" if you will, but here goes...
Traditional smartphone screens (HTC, iPhone etc.) are LCDs - liquid crystal displays. There is one big white backlight, and liquid crystals switch on and off to filter out different colors. Each subpixel (red, green, blue) can be adjusted to different levels for each pixel to create every color.
OLED screens, specifically AMOLED from samsung, stand for organic LED. The screen is literally made up of tiny tiny LEDs that are individually turned on or off and adjusted in brightness. This means when you see red, the red subpixels are on, and the blue and green ones are off.
I'm not sure why, but as of now, LCDs work better outdoors. The maximum brightness and reflectivity provide a brighter image on for example the HTC one compared to the S4. On the other hand, AMOLED produces more vibrant colors (I'm sure you heard the phrase "they pop out"), and I don't know why that happens either.
Also on AMOLED, when you see a lack of color (black, for instance), the pixels are OFF. This means that looking at black is exactly the same as when the phone is turned off. That is why you get an infinite contrast ratio; pure black is pure black. This is also why AMOLED gives a better battery life when looking at most images, especially black and dark ones. Conversely, the LCD will use the same power if it is on no matter what it is displaying. If it is displaying anything, it is fully on, as that big backlight covers the entire screen, with the dark pixels blocking it. This means that some light will "bleed" through the black pixels, making them appear slightly lit. The contrast ratio is a factor here, because some screens show less white when they are supposed to be black. When looking at mostly white images (Web browsing, for example), LCDs give better battery life because when you are looking at white on an AMOLED, every single subpixel is on, which consumes a ton of power. For the most part, though, unless you do heavy browsing or have a white-themed phone, AMOLED will generally give a better battery life.
The part about greens is entirely based on other aspects of the display. Most of Samsung's AMOLED displays are in the pentile matrix, which means that instead of three subpixels per pixel (RGB), you get two alternating types of pixels with two subpixels each - RG and BG. While the green pixels are slightly smaller, there are still twice as many, and this layout makes the overall image quality worse than the RGB matrix. In the GS2, Samsung used super AMOLED plus, which changed the pixel layout to RGB. This made the screen look really good, but they switched back to pentile with the GS3 because it is currently not possible to make AMOLED RGB screens with that high of a resolution. However, at 1080p, it is pretty hard for most people to be bothered by the pentile matrix. Most LCDs, aside from those found in Motorola phones for some stupid reason, use RGB.
Related
PenTile RGBW technology adds a white subpixel to the traditional red, blue, and green subpixels in a color display allowing a brighter display using less power.
The PenTile RGBW layout uses each red, green, blue and white subpixel to present high-resolution luminance information to the human eyes' red-sensing and green-sensing cone cells, while using the combined effect of all the color subpixels to present lower-resolution chroma (color) information to all three cone cell types.
Combined, this optimizes the match of display technology to the biological mechanisms of human vision. The layout uses one third fewer subpixels for the same resolution as the RGB Stripe (RGB-RGB) layout, in spite of having four color primaries instead of the conventional three, using subpixel rendering combined with metamer rendering. Metamer rendering optimizes the energy distribution between the white subpixel and the combined red, green, and blue subpixels: W <> RGB, to improve image sharpness.
The display driver chip has an RGB to RGBW color vector space converter and gamut mapping algorithm, followed by metamer and subpixel rendering algorithms. In order to maintain saturated color quality, to avoid simultaneous contrast error between saturated colors and peak white brightness, while simultaneously reducing backlight power requirements, the display backlight brightness is under control of the PenTile driver engine.
When the image is mostly desaturated colors, those near white or grey, the backlight brightness is significantly reduced, often to less than 50% peak, while the Liquid Crystal Display levels are increased to compensate.
When the image has very bright saturated colors, the backlight brightness is maintained at higher levels. Since most natural images and black on white text have few simultaneously bright and saturated colors, the average power of the PenTile RGBW panel is 50% less than a conventional RGB LCD.
Since the LCD backlight is the major power using component on many portable devices such as cell phones and personal media players, products that use the PenTile RGBW panel have appreciably longer battery life.
The PenTile RGBW also has an optional high brightness mode that doubles the brightness of the desaturated color image areas, such as black&white text, for improved outdoor view-ability.
The Motorola es400 and Motorola Atrix 4G cell phones use PenTile RGBW LCD displays.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenTile
You started a topic that ONLY quotes Wikipedia?
Regardless of what the article says, I know what my eyes see. Pixelation of small-scale text, terrible washed out yellows, and super pixelated greens.
Not quite sure what the point of this thread is... all you did was copy and paste some info from wikipedia. I'm perfectly fine with the screen, though a lot of people seem upset. Those complaints seem to be slowing down at least. It's not the best screen, but it's perfectly fine to me for my phone. I'd be a bit more upset if all picture quality was messed up (both screen and via HDMI), but it looks perfectly fine on other screens.
i copied and pasted text that proves that this pentile argument is false. You put up with some slightly ok colors and get 50% more battery life.
Techcruncher said:
i copied and pasted text that proves that this pentile argument is false. You put up with some slightly ok colors and get 50% more battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what part of the argument is false? everything that people are complaining about color-wise and clarity-wise is true.
dLo GSR said:
what part of the argument is false? everything that people are complaining about color-wise and clarity-wise is true.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some of us have better vision than others.
I would gladly have paid more for anything that wasn't pentile. I try my best to ignore it, but it's so difficult when you can always see it.
..................
It might be a bit more power efficient but the yellows and oranges seriously look off and the greens like look a fly screen.
Also the pixel response rate is seriously bad, TONS of ghosting. This display really only works well with black text on a white background with not much animation.
Blind_Guardian said:
Some of us have better vision than others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've had 20/20 all my life
dLo GSR said:
You started a topic that ONLY quotes Wikipedia?
Regardless of what the article says, I know what my eyes see. Pixelation of small-scale text, terrible washed out yellows, and super pixelated greens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because you're seeing something you knew about. If you didn't know it was a pentile screen you'd never see that stuff. Sitting my Atrix next to my iPhone 4 I can tell a difference, but not much of one.
I should mention I was in the Air Force and offered a pilot position, which isn't done unless your eye sight is damn-near perfect. I've had 40/20 vision my entire life and I'm a pretty good videophile. You see that stuff because you want to.
hotleadsingerguy said:
That's because you're seeing something you knew about. If you didn't know it was a pentile screen you'd never see that stuff. Sitting my Atrix next to my iPhone 4 I can tell a difference, but not much of one.
I should mention I was in the Air Force and offered a pilot position, which isn't done unless your eye sight is damn-near perfect. I've had 40/20 vision my entire life and I'm a pretty good videophile. You see that stuff because you want to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your vision must be failing or you have chosen to ignore it.
I compared the atrix to every other phone in a verizon store. Everything except the iphone 4 had a worse display.
hotleadsingerguy said:
That's because you're seeing something you knew about. If you didn't know it was a pentile screen you'd never see that stuff. Sitting my Atrix next to my iPhone 4 I can tell a difference, but not much of one.
I should mention I was in the Air Force and offered a pilot position, which isn't done unless your eye sight is damn-near perfect. I've had 40/20 vision my entire life and I'm a pretty good videophile. You see that stuff because you want to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you read any of my posts in the main Pentile complaint thread, you'd know that I didn't even know the phone had a Pentile screen (or what that was for that matter) until after I got annoyed at the greens and yellows of the screen. It's ABSOLUTELY obvious that greens show jagged pixels, expecially when looking at thin greens (zoomed out text, lines, etc) and that yellows are more of a squash color. That was the first thing I noticed when zooming through some sites and playing Angry Birds (having played it on my iPod touch many times before). I then came on this site and read Anandtech's review and found out what a Pentile was.
If you can't tell the difference or shortcomings of a Pentile dispaly vs. a similarly dense display (i.e. the Retina) I can't point to anything else but denial. The screen is nice, but not that nice.
On an unrelated side note, I work in engineering for the modules that guide your fighter jets when you need to see without your eyes. I do wish I could take a ride in one though.
Atrix screen and HDMI sample videos
Last night I went to a concert and taped the show. The screen remained on for the entire 2 hours and still had 70% battery power left. If I were on my previous Captivate it would not have lasted 2 hours. It would seem the same people unhappy with the Atrix screen would be unhappy with the battery life if the Atrix had a different screen. I have posted this before: the Atrix screen is perfectly fine, even better than fine considering its efficiency. I have several hi res (720p) movies that look absolutely wonderful on the Atrix. Colors and resolution look beautiful. The colors do not have the super saturation of the Captivate, but still perfectly fine. Motorola should have provided some sample videos, but they didn't.
I was in the AT&T store playing around with the docks. There are 4 720p sample videos on the phone apparently only available thru HDMI. If someone could post those videos here so we can all have a look at them that may help quiet the screen concerns.
dLo GSR said:
You started a topic that ONLY quotes Wikipedia?
Regardless of what the article says, I know what my eyes see. Pixelation of small-scale text, terrible washed out yellows, and super pixelated greens.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not so much pixelated, but pixel-less. Text is undeniably sharper on the Atrix than it was on the Captivate.
kkeo said:
It's not so much pixelated, but pixel-less. Text is undeniably sharper on the Atrix than it was on the Captivate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't disagree with that, but when you look at green text there us definitely a difference vs other colors.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Techcruncher said:
I compared the atrix to every other phone in a verizon store. Everything except the iphone 4 had a worse display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
aside from the iphone 4 which ofcourse has a better screen..
why would i want to go with an atrix screen and not a super amoled screen if i can see the pixels on both screens. yet the super amoled has better blacks and better colors in general ?
mind you i have used all phones including the atrix " even though it was a short period of time "
I am happy with the screen. It is not perfect, but then it is a mobile phone.
If i want awesome colors and deep blacks I have a rockin' 54" plasma. If I want super clear high resolution fonts, I got a great monitor.
I will trade a perfect phone screen for better battery any day. And for me, this pentile display is damn near perfect.
Blind_Guardian said:
Your vision must be failing or you have chosen to ignore it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol nice one or maybe he is hypnotizing himself that the Pentile display is acceptable because he doesn't want to go through the trouble of returning the dual core webtop phone LOL :-D
But seriously SUPER AMOLED screen has very vibrant color which I actually like but the battery life is bad for web browsing. I wish they have sepcial designed webpage viewer to create black background and white text for SUPER AMOLED screen to conserve battery life.
Finally, I think I've gotten used to the Pentile screen color. Its not really good bit at least its acceptable eventhough the color are distorted and not sure if software can solve the color issue.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA Premium App
So, everyone is complaining about the Atrix display? What about the cellphones dating back from the 1990's? I bet the display was pretty ****ty too. Oh wait, i dont see anyone complaining. Did any of you know about Pentile display back then? NO!?
Please spare us the comparison of what display is better etc..
Here is an idea. Why dont the rest of the ppl who complain about Pentile/SAMOLED etc..invent your own display? simple as that.
You dont like the display on the phone, DONT BUY IT! Stop whining about it.
Hi everyone!
As we all know, we're drawing close to the magical two-year anniversary since the Galaxy S was first released. Given all the time that has passed, our screen probably has seen pretty heavy usage, and as we know AMOLEDs degrade with use, it seems pretty inevitable that as time wears on, more and more people will be encountering burn-in on their screens. I'm sure that as XDA users, lots of us use our phone much more than the average layperson, and given an even more select group of us are diehard power users, a few of us would have noticed it much, much earlier.
Other forums have their own *****ing threads about burn-in, so I decided to create this thread for people to discuss their own experiences on the Galaxy S. Have any of you encountered your screen burning in yet? What's the silliest burn-in that you know of? Were you even aware that your AMOLED screen could burn in? I'm pretty sure some poor chap thought he could use his Galaxy S as a bedside clock, and wound up with a clockface permanently branded into his screen.
I'll start the ball rolling: I use a pure black status bar on my phone, as is typical of most custom ROMs here, so I have a clear bluish strip along the top of my screen. Blue AMOLEDs have a shorter half-life than red or green, so as the AMOLEDs on the rest of the screen slowly fade with use and become gradually and imperceptibly less bluish, the ones at the top of my screen are preserved, hence the strange appearance. This should be a farely common pattern of burn-in, so I would be surprised if many people don't have it as well.
Yep ditto on blue ghostly status bar burn-in here
It's not really visible over 10% brightness so it hasn't really bothered me though
My SGS has the SMS layout burnt onto my screen as well. It's not very obvious, but you can see "shadows" of it if you view the phone's screen from a certain angle with a white background.
I always use my phone in lowest brights possible, hence there is not much burn in for my screen. Only a little bit burn in where status bar's clock is. Other than that, nothing noticeable. :-D
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA
The lack of AMOLED is currently the only reason I haven't switched to a Sony device yet, so I just wanted a thread to gauge interest in having AMOLED screens on future devices.
I know the pros and cons of both AMOLED and LCD/IPS so there's not much point discussing those unless you really want to.
Don't necessarily care for it. More interested in a 5.5 or 5.7 inch screen.
Amoled can be better for the battery but I dislike the screen burn that occurs after a year or so. (Can vary based on how much phone is used.)
Sent from my SM-G900P
AMOLED looks real nice but between burn in and extra battery drain on light colors, I'll stick with LCD.
Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk
I much prefer IPS over AMOLED. AMOLED is overly saturated and typically in a pentile subpixel arragement leading to an inferior amount of subpixels.
IPS is one of the reasons I prefer Sony devices.
I can still see the pixellation in AMOLED screens, even in the Galaxy S5. Most people don't notice it, but I do - and because I know it's there, it will always bother me. AMOLED has poor color reproduction, and the screen has the potential to burn in (review units at any big box store are almost invariably burned in, even after only two weeks of constantly being on).
IPS LCD is the only thing I will consider.
IPS+ LCD is the best vivid display with true-to-life colours, especially with x-reality and Triluminos display.
Gorgenapper said:
at any big box store are almost invariably burned in, even after only two weeks of constantly being on).
IPS LCD is the only thing I will consider.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
npaladin2000 said:
AMOLED looks real nice but between burn in and extra battery drain on light colors, I'll stick with LCD.
Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Burn in has stopped being a problem a long time ago. I have a Note 2, no burn in issues, nor on my Note 1 before, or Galaxy S2 or Galaxy S before that.
You should have the screen auto switch-off after 10 minutes (or less) anyway, it will just drain the battery. The reason you see demo models getting burn in is because they never switch the screen off. I thought that was obvious, but I guess not..
wrsg said:
Burn in has stopped being a problem a long time ago. I have a Note 2, no burn in issues, nor on my Note 1 before, or Galaxy S2 or Galaxy S before that.
You should have the screen auto switch-off after 10 minutes (or less) anyway, it will just drain the battery. The reason you see demo models getting burn in is because they never switch the screen off. I thought that was obvious, but I guess not..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, but even if you don't consider burn-in, AMOLED definitely has it's tradeoffs. LG, Sony, Apple, HTC all use IPS LCD. Off the top of my head Samsung and Motorola are the only companies using AMOLED in high end devices, definitely the minority, not the majority.
Also keep in mind that the Note 2 does not use the typical pentile matrix that most AMOLED panels use
se1000 said:
Right, but even if you don't consider burn-in, AMOLED definitely has it's tradeoffs. LG, Sony, Apple, HTC all use IPS LCD. Off the top of my head Samsung and Motorola are the only companies using AMOLED in high end devices, definitely the minority, not the majority.
Also keep in mind that the Note 2 does not use the typical pentile matrix that most AMOLED panels use
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just because it's the minority doesn't make it inherently bad. It's less used because it's more expensive, which is why Samsung and Motorola devices are usually more expensive than the others.
It has its tradeoffs but it also has benefits, less battery draw, more comfortable on the eyes, better contrast (imo). A lot of it is subjective, but I just want to raise awareness of the benefits and hopefully get more people asking the companies for AMOLED.
The day Sony introduce AMOLED, that's the day I will for sure stop supporting them.
Less battery draw is situational. Only when you're dealing with dark apps will there be less battery draw, since black pixels draw no power on AMOLED. Looking at Facebook or websites or other things with a lot of bright or white backgrounds requires more pixels to be lit up, thereby consuming more power.
Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk
npaladin2000 said:
Less battery draw is situational. Only when you're dealing with dark apps will there be less battery draw, since black pixels draw no power on AMOLED. Looking at Facebook or websites or other things with a lot of bright or white backgrounds requires more pixels to be lit up, thereby consuming more power.
Sent from my LG-D851 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Untrue
http://www.electronicsnews.com.au/news/oleds-ready-for-the-mainstream
wrsg said:
Untrue
http://www.electronicsnews.com.au/news/oleds-ready-for-the-mainstream
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That article was from TWO THOUSAND AND NINE!!!!!! A lot has changed for both technologies. Overall, I would say AMOLED and LCD are pretty close, with the edge actually going to LCD these days. Just lookup different devices with the same specs and look at screen on time figure. For example, the G2 had better screen on time figures than the S4 by a long shot (and I believe the S5 as well)
I'm in no way saying that AMOLED is bad by any means, I'm just saying that it isn't a superior technology either.
Personally as long as a screen has +400ppi it's really going to be sharp from any reasonable viewing distance. IPS has made strides in contrast ratio and color accuracy (gamut). AMOLED has improved in green/blue cast, and the ppi increases have negated the pentile issue.
In the end, a good screen is a good screen.
wrsg said:
Untrue
http://www.electronicsnews.com.au/news/oleds-ready-for-the-mainstream
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should understand that battery drain doesn't only comprise of the display itself. You must take other things into considerations. (wakelock, background apps, etc.) And if you really talk about display wise, it's true that AMOLED display allows better saturation in terms of colours and also better contrast ratio due to the no-black-pixel lighting up, but on light surfaces it still suffers on battery drain. You want a phone without such issues? Just go back to Nokia 3310 then
And if AMOLED screen is as expensive as an IPS+ LCD screen, I suggest you go check with factories and see how much it's actually made. From my source, they would either practically be the same price, or IPS+ screen tends to be slightly more expensive.
Display is always personal preferences. I'd rather an IPS+ screen due to the natural colors that it produce and it really stands out on the Z2/Z3 as I had hands-on on both of them. And if you are going to discuss this, why not head towards the General Android section? There will be a hell lot of people which will be throwing a lot of facts out making you understand better. No point making this discussion here. Not like Sony will ever go for AMOLED display. They'd rather the real colors then over-saturated and unnatural colors.
I don't want a phone with AMOLED, because the color representation isn't accurate as IPS.
What I would like to see is a phone with LCD IPS display lightened by RGB LED, most LCD panels use WLED (white LED).
RGB LED increase the color representation and color contrast.
When you see small tracks on a solid color picture (from light blue to dark blue for example) it's a problem that RGB LED don't suffer from.
Sent from my Xperia Z2 using Tapatalk
I wouldn't say IPS is a deal breaker to me but, oh man, Z3 would be catching my attention much more with a Amoled display. I was using a Galaxy s4 and now I'm on moto g (gave the s4 to my wife) and I really miss the dark blacks. The blacks on ips is just a light gray.
As the Note4 Display has just been tested as the best mobile display currently available, there is no reasonable argument not to opt for AMOLED in the future - except availability and price.
This includes brightness, color accuracy AND brightness as well as efficiency!
Based on our extensive Lab tests and measurements, the Galaxy Note 4 is the Best performing Smartphone display that we have ever tested. It matches or breaks new records in Smartphone display performance for: Highest Absolute Color Accuracy, Highest Screen Resolution, Infinite Contrast Ratio, Highest Peak Brightness, Highest Contrast Rating in Ambient Light, and the smallest Brightness Variation with Viewing Angle. Its Color Management capability provides multiple Color Gamuts – a major advantage that is not currently provided by any of the other leading Smartphones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note4_ShootOut_1.htm
Bäcker said:
As the Note4 Display has just been tested as the best mobile display currently available, there is no reasonable argument not to opt for AMOLED in the future - except availability and price.
This includes brightness, color accuracy AND brightness as well as efficiency!
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note4_ShootOut_1.htm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed, people seem to be either grossly misinformed or because X brand uses LCD instead of OLED, they've either become a fanboy of the former or opponent of the latter. Samsung's newer AMOLEDs are hands down the best mobile displays available. There isn't even any competition, to claim otherwise is silly.
They offer far better blacks, contrast ratio (which is vital on a mobile - daylight and outdoors), much wider colour gamut (and accuracy) than any *mobile* IPS panel and lower power draw. Aside from this, pixel responsiveness is effectively instant; for motion, games and overall fluidity and responsiveness they are MASSIVELY better than IPS .. this is the reason the Samsung phones seem so smooth (not because they're faster or have some kind of software or driver based special sauce). Also, because the panel is less brittle, it's less likely to suffer catastrophic damage or the glass/plastic cover smash or crack. They also use fewer toxic substances than LCDs.
As far as I'm concerned, the only other game in town is Sharp's IZGO technology. This because it can potentially eliminate bezels much more easily than competing display tech (see latest Sharp phones), and it reduces IPS-like panels' power draw.
The Quantom Dot filters in Amazon's Kindle tablet do improve colours and blacks a little, but it's really expensive at the moment, and is perhaps a better partner for VA panels, which have much deeper blacks and better contrast than IPS (Sony uses QD filters in their Triluminos VA panel TVs). Also they use Cadmium Selenide, and Cadmium is a very nasty substance.
Emissive Quantum Dot (once they have eliminated Cadmium) is perhaps the holy grail, in a few years time, since it should have none of the longevity issues of OLEDs, and all of the low power, (potentially) low cost, high gamut, high responsiveness benefits.
Anyway, for now I'll be happy with my Z3 Compact that'll be arriving early next week, and use it to complement my Jolla, hopefully with a Sailfish port in due time .... but a Samsung AMOLED screen on a Z4 or 5 Compact would only make it more desirable, in my view.
mudnightoil said:
this is the reason the Samsung phones seem so smooth
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Frankly that is a laughable statement, as Samsung Android devices are anything but smooth given their TouchWIZ-based bloat.
mudnightoil said:
The Quantom Dot filters in Amazon's Kindle tablet do improve colours and blacks a little, but it's really expensive at the moment, and is perhaps a better partner for VA panels, which have much deeper blacks and better contrast than IPS (Sony uses QD filters in their Triluminos VA panel TVs).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Xperia Z3 is supposed to be using Triluminous technology that includes quantum dots. That will probably have to be confirmed once the phones are released, since in the past there have been Triluminous phones without incorporating quantum dots, but the possibility exists.
While there are some things I like about AMOLED, unless you have content optimized for it, it's very battery inefficient. And the most popular smartphone applications are generally things like Facebook, web browsing, and a few other things that still don't offer a "dark" mode optimized for AMOLED, that minimizes the number of lit background pixels. White backgrounds are not a friend of AMOLED. .
This topic is made so it can help people if they are considering buying this phone because one of it key features which is the screen. So I think it would be great if you could write your opinions and experiences about screen.
I will also express my opinion. No raging allowed, every opinion is equally important and we all have different taste and likes.
Before sharing my opinion, I have to say that reason for me buying wasn't screen at all. What is much more important to me is software functionality, battery life, ergonomics and screen size. I haven't even seen QHD video before I bought and brought this baby home. But when I saw that QHD LG preload video, I just got stunned as every person that gets to see the video on my phone.
In mine opinion the screen is relatively good. It's very sharp without a doubt, everything looks eXtra crisp, much better than any 1080p screen definitely. The colours are bit pale comparing to any other AMOLED screen, but I mostly fixed that issue by manually adjusting colour in Accessibility. I used to have Galaxy S, Galaxy Nexus and Galaxy S3, so my eye was "trained by Samsung" for that extreme saturation, strong colours and DEEEP black. Only thing I miss about that AMOLED screen is the black colour, other colours were far too attacking for me, they were like overreacting girlfriend complaining for every minor thing that aren't that important (that's how I see it in my head). On G3 screen and other LCD's probably I prefer more accurate, real world colours. Brightness isn't an issue for me, even though I think that brightness could still go a bit higher than it is right now. I live in Croatia where the days are very sunny and sun is strong and I never had to go over 70% brightness outdoors. Screen on time on "internet warrior" and "antenna overload" days get me to only 4 hours, but on average day I get 5:30h of screen on time. (I'm not heavy user anymore, I always try to save my battery and turn off all antennas and apps that I don't use, also I adjust my brightness manually which varies from 60% in bright enviroment to 20% in dark enviroment). I would say screen on time on single charge is pretty average for flagship phone.
What are you opinions?
If you're colorblind, please disregard this thread. Rate this thread to express how you deem the color saturation and accuracy of the Samsung Galaxy Note 8's display. A higher rating indicates that you think that color accuracy is very high and saturation is excellent.
Then, drop a comment if you have anything to add!
1 star . My one is very yellow
Adaptive advanced red off green off blue max
And it is almost white
Might have to return ?
I have the unlocked version, I won't give it a number, but I feel the phone's screen is very good.
Menchelke said:
I have the unlocked version, I won't give it a number, but I feel the phone's screen is very good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Generally very pleased. But Basic mode on display still is very saturated . Also since when was warm a pink hue? Ive always led to believe warm is short wavelength that should exhibit a yellow hue which mine doesn't.
3 stars
Sent from my SM-T819Y using Tapatalk
I would like to know the settings for best accuracy since I'd like to edit photos on this, I read the screen has an excellent accuracy but mine is pretty yellowish. Tried the basic mode but its absolutely lifeless and lacks contrast.
Hello. Home theater enthusiast here. Thought I would share my opinion as I have my own calibration tools (i1d3 with HCFR, Lightspace and DisplayCal, and eeColor boxes for 3D LUTs for 1080p and lower content (4K boxes are still too expensive IMO).
This is by far the best display I own. This thing is just as good as my LG E6 OLED... with a 3D LUT! I'd like to mention that the E6 and similar displays are deployed and used for critical grading of movies due to their accuracy and gamut coverage. Without a 3D LUT they're pretty crappy due to limited and buggy built-in calibration controls (you can only have part of the gamut accurate by sacrificing accuracy everywhere else. Skin tones, memory colors or a distributed error focusing on improving the 50-70% saturated colors, can only have one of these or none at all.
Sorry, getting off topic, back to the Note 8 display.
This is very important. DON'T USE ADAPTIVE MODE IF YOU WANT ACCURATE COLORS -OR- THE STANDARD D65 WHITE POINT COLOR TEMPERATURE.
Adaptive has a fairly aggressive boost to saturation. Also, the RGB slider controls are for controlling the SECOND saturation boost on top of what Adaptive has already boosted!
Adaptive/Cinema/Photo use a DCI-P3 in BT.2020 colorspace
Basic uses rec.709/sRGB colorspace.
All non-HDR content (movies, pictures, graphics) do not use this color space. The colors will not be converted properly (primaries and secondaries have an axis shift. Also, 50% saturation in sRGB/rec.709 (non-HDR movies) will be at a different location in the visible spectrum (i.e. not the same color). This is a notable difference if you can quickly do an A/B comparison.
Basic is the most accurate colorspace simply because it's rec.709/sRGB and that is what everything was made for. Use Cinema or Photo if you want/like the saturation boost that happens when viewing /rec.709/sRGB content with a DCI-P3 in bt.2020 colorspace.
HDR videos have embedded metadata (sort of like ID3 tags for music files) which will trigger the display to automatically change to the appropriate and totally separate color space that you can't choose in the display options. The reason for this is because HDR by spec needs each pixel of the screen to produce drastically higher luminance (nits). rec.709/sRGB generally reach up to around 300-400 nits at peak on a quality display while HDR has a defined peak of 10,000 nits by spec. No current display can reach this yet, most are around 2-5000 nits (OLEDs are in the 700-1800 range. See AVSForum for discussions about OLED vs LCD/Quantum dot/Projector HDR nit levels).
This prevents users from using HDR levels of luminance for extended periods of time. More nits needs more voltage, more volts means not only faster battery drainage, but also more heat is generated and shortens the life of each OLED subpixel as the organic compound ages (more voltage quickens aging).
Image BURN IN is caused when some OLED subpixels have aged faster than others near it. This IS permanent.
Image RETENTION is NOT permanent yet looks just like image burn in. This is from voltage that has built up and can no longer be contained in the components controlling each pixel. Simply discharge them by turning the screen OFF (As in power off. I think Always On Display keeps them primed and ready for use). You could also look at animated full screen color noise/static patterns. This would improve uniformity by fully charging the components for remaining pixels. (ex: The old and free ".js" file version of jscreenfix. Present version is web based and not full screen).
If you're worried about being blinded by the high HDR nits, don't be.
The intent of HDR is to NOT cap peak brightness and provide a fixed gamma transfer function (layman: How bright something is relative to your display's darkest possible black and brightest possible white).
To explain what I mean, let's say we have two identical displays with an impossible 100% for color accuracy. And let us assume we have a perfectly mixed movie for both SDR and HDR (alot of movies are only graded once from the source material and then that graded copy gets regraded for the other releases. Basically this is bad but most movie studios are either trying to save money or simply don't care unless it's a "blockbuster" movie....
So again, let's say he have a perfect SDR and HDR release.
Side by side they will be 90% identical. The "HDR" levels are ONLY for specular highlights, like light reflections water/chrome/etc, clouds, sparks and other generally small details. Having something at 10,000 kits that is only, let's say, ~30x30 pixels isn't going to appear blindingly bright but will appear brighter in relation to the pixels around it (which again is the whole point of HDR).
Now for the other three screen modes...
Despite what you think you're seeing, CINEMA/PHOTO/BASIC MODES ARE NOT "TOO RED". ADAPTIVE DOES HAS TOO MUCH BLUE.
Adaptive is default, and by the time you get to the display options your brain has already adapted to this colder color temperature and you perceive the change as having too much red.
Instead of trying to explain why this happens, look at THIS ILLUSION.
The biological and science mechanics at the core of this illusion is exactly why you should NEVER compare colors by sight alone, and this is basically what happens when switching back and forth between modes after adapting to one mode. The rods/cones on our retina are not digital and takes time for them to adapt to changes in stimulation to light entering your eyes.
It appears this way because most displays come from the factory with a cooler color temperature than the industry standard D65 white point. This makes displays look better on a showroom floor under all their fluorescent lights. Simply put, if you think it's "too red", it's because you're used to seeing something that's "too blue".
Actually use these other modes for a day or there about so you have put real hours into looking at the screen, not just a few minutes of the day. Then try switching back to your adaptive settings. You may be surprised to find your opinion to be different about the other modes being too red.
This doesn't mean you can't prefer adaptive mode's saturation boost and/or cooler warmer temperature (aka a more "blue" screen), nor am I criticizing anyone who does not use Basic.
I'm just presenting fact, and not my opinion, based on data in regards to accuracy.
Personally I use Cinema mode and only switch to Basic for drawing.
TL;DR:
Adaptive has terrible accuracy, doesn't have a D65 white/color temperature, uses an HDR colorspace for non-HDR content (this is bad), and two levels of built-in saturation boost (RGB slider controls effect only one of these boosts).
Straight from the factory basic has color accuracy rivaling even the best ISF calibrated displays with a 3D LUT, has D65 white/color temperature, and uses same SDR colorspace that non-HDR content was made with.
I've done my own measurements with my own calibration equipment, and my results support their findings. Not that I doubt their results, I mean DisplayMate is known in the Home Theatre scene for their technical articles. If you don't agree with them then do your own measurements to get factual data for comparison. Human eyes are lying sacks of crap (read: adaptive) and you can search AVSForum if you need explanations and/or proof of this.
Here is DisplayMate's shootout for anyone enterested.
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_Note8_ShootOut_100.htm
Just turned my phone to basic. Looks a lot better now. No more super bright cartoons colours. It also makes the colours of my graphic design logos more accurate.
I've always used Basic mode in all my previous Samsung devices inc my tablet.
However, the basic mode on the N8 shows a pink hue which is not tolerable to my eyes. Now, if the basic mode showed a true warmer tone like a slight yellow hue it wouldn't be so bad.
Talking of which, I was always under the impression that the term "warm" in respect of display technology meant whites would appear somewhat yellower , not pink like this display. ?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Isn't there an app to fully calibrate the screen?
Limeybastard said:
I've always used Basic mode in all my previous Samsung devices inc my tablet.
However, the basic mode on the N8 shows a pink hue which is not tolerable to my eyes. Now, if the basic mode showed a true warmer tone like a slight yellow hue it wouldn't be so bad.
Talking of which, I was always under the impression that the term "warm" in respect of display technology meant whites would appear somewhat yellower , not pink like this display. ?
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're trying to compare how the screen looks by your eyes alone, you're doing it wrong. Look at Illusion link in my long post.
How that illusion works is the best "short" version of explaining why you think Cinema/Photo/Basic looks pink.
If you really want to know if the screen is in fact too red, or too blue or even green, you need to use calibration equipment (colorimeter, spectrometer/spectroradiograph, and software; HCFR and DisplayCal are free, Light Illusion, CalMan, ChromaPure are expensive.
Getting your own gear is quite costly, but you might be able to rent it for half a day or so for a fraction of the price. If anyone is even remotely interested in this go to AVSforums.
I've actually measured 5 others (1 European and the rest USA variants) besides mine (Korean version), and every one was within the repeatability tollerances for my i1d3 pro. I don't think there will be any differences from manufacturing randomness due to how accurate they are straight from the factories, and I feel the same for any regional differences.
I'm not trying to offend anyone, but you are extremely likely to be wrong if you think Cinema/Photo/Basic modes are too red/warm using your eyes or another display as reference. Human eyes will adapt to warmer or cooler color temperatures regardless of accuracy, and factual data from tools all point to those display modes having amazing accuracy (See DisplayMate's shootout).
As for the question about color temperature...
The visible spectrum of light the typical human eye see will see more green colors than red and blue combined.
Blue is the portion we see the least of.
D65 is the standard white point which is based on the spectral pattern of light from the sun.
Since white is all colors, having D65 white means colors will interact with other colors realistically so there is no drastic change in perception around other light sources like tinting only under fluorescent lights but not incandescent lights.
Warm and Cool are how we describe which corner on a CIE chart a white is closer too in relation to where D65 is.
The above isn't totally true, but I didn't want to go into detail, but it's close enough I think. See AVSforum for the truth from people far more knowledgeable than I, like real ISF certified calibrators, Calibration hardware/software companies used by movie studios and scientists, etc).
Try using the phone for a couple of hours straight while set to Basic, then go back and change it. Do you still think it looks pink?
Before I forget again, it's possible a screen protector can cause a tint, as the material of the protector and any coatings it has (polarization, anti-glare, oleophobic, etc) will change the spectral distribution of the primary colors red/green/blue. This will change your perception of color based on your environmental lighting. So it could look perfectly fine in one room of your house and different in another if they had different types of light. That's just an example, as there are so many types of lights and each have their own color temperature and spectral distribution. Not just like incandescent vs fluorescent lights, but various types of incandescents (size, shape, power consumption, bulb material, diffuse coating, etc).
EMJI79 said:
Isn't there an app to fully calibrate the screen?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android does not have any real color management, so you can't really calibrate the screen.
It's not really needed with this models' display, from the factory they are one of if not the most accurate displays you can get. It is on par with OLED displays with a 3D LUT that are used by movie studios for color grading.
Take a gander at DisplayMate's shootout for the Note 8. This is a technical analysis made by DisplayMate who's business is dealing with grading level accurate displays for those studios.
I just realised I may look like I'm advertising for AVSforum. I'm not.
It's just that what XDA is to Android and related stuffs, AVSforum is to home theatre and related stuffs. Actually they're better as they actually have active "official" members of the industry and not representatives. It's great being able to talk to people at or close to the source. I say active because they're not just there to advertise or sell you something. You can learn 99% of everything about calibration, for free, from the same people who's job is calibration or ISF instructors who hold paid or college classes. The equivalent type of people missing from XDA would be like engineers, lead techs and top level technical people from smartphone divisions from all the companies.
Kamikaze_Ice said:
Android does not have any real color management, so you can't really calibrate the screen.
It's not really needed with this models' display, from the factory they are one of if not the most accurate displays you can get. It is on par with OLED displays with a 3D LUT that are used by movie studios for color grading.
Take a gander at DisplayMate's shootout for the Note 8. This is a technical analysis made by DisplayMate who's business is dealing with grading level accurate displays for .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think for colour accuracy it also comes to personal preference, like for sound equalization.
I used mine initially in the AMOLED Photo mode but did notice that colors were oversaturated. I've since switched to Basic mode and so far prefer it to the other modes. No, it isn't perfect, but whites are more white than Adaptive mode and colors are less over-saturated than the other modes. AMOLED Photo would still be my second choice. Adaptive mode has whites that are much too blue.
I found amoled screen to be really dependent to orientation. In the best one it is better than IPS and in all the other ones it is worse. They really got to fix this.
EMJI79 said:
I think for colour accuracy it also comes to personal preference, like for sound equalization.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Accuracy is NOT and NEVER WILL BE personal preference (unless you prefer accuracy, lol). Preference is an opinion, and has nothing to do with the truth. I prefer Cinema mode, despite knowing Basic is the most accurate mode for all content shown on the screen (HDR will trigger HDR mode, which use completely different settings.)
In this case the screen accuracy is referencing the standard it was made for (BT.2020 and Rec.709).
You're free to think Basic looks too red, but there is a 99% chance that you are wrong (<1% chance due to bad screen protector materials/polariaztion filter/dot matrix/oleophobic & other coatings and your environmental lighting).
Again, the screen is one of the most accurate displays ever made. Take it to any calibrator (not "geek squad"...) and they will get the same results as DisplayMate... assuming the calibrator has a spectro to profile his meters to the amoled screen.
I won't even get into sound. I'll just point everyone to Head-fi.org forums as well as AVSforums. Way to many variables to cover, even for IEMs which take your "room sound" out of the equation. Both places will do a far better job at explaining the science behind everything for audio and (digital) visual things. And yes, real science. Everything I've mentioned has hard proof (measurements) and not ancedotal or biased opinion.
None of this means you can't like something that's "not accurate". Just wanting to make it known that yes many don't know what they're talking about (Not trying to be rude here. Just sayin').
Bs, who tells you I have the exact same eye as you. Who tells you present measurements or even science covers whole phenomena variables (plus Godel and other scientist prove science can't completely theorise a phenomena).
Unless you have attended to MIT or Princeton chances are you haven't achieved science study level I have.
I don't appreciate the haughty way you commented my post.
EMJI79 said:
Bs, who tells you I have the exact same eye as you. Who tells you present measurements or even science covers whole phenomena variables (plus Godel and other scientist prove science can't completely theorise a phenomena).
Unless you have attended to MIT or Princeton chances are you haven't achieved science study level I have.
I don't appreciate the haughty way you commented my post.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's your screen issues. ? Just out interest.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
No real issue but I am not satisfied with the way greens are displayed, like on vegetation pictures.
Kamikaze_Ice said:
Despite what you think you're seeing, CINEMA/PHOTO/BASIC MODES ARE NOT "TOO RED". ADAPTIVE DOES HAS TOO MUCH BLUE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is probably true, however, I grew accustomed to a more blueish white, that the basic mode appears too warm now.
I remember last year, after trading my Note 7 for the second time and going to the LG V20, that I thought the LG had a way too bright white, noticeably more blue. However, after having had that for about a year and finally switching back with the Note 8 a few days ago, the basic just doesn't feel right anymore. I really like the adaptive (that is, with a few minor adjustments to the sliders), but whenever I am in a game or watching something, then the adaptive mode has way too much saturation. Then the only thing that does help is switching back to Basic mode, but I get annoyed by how warm it appears to be as soon as I hit anything with a white background (like settings or text messaging). The laptop I'm writing this on also has a more blueish white, my Samsung SHUD TV seems to be somewhat in the middle of it all but less red than my Note.
While basic may be the best setting, I can't say I really like it. Switching back and forth between the modes is a workaround, not really a solution. I really want to like this phone, but it is quite an annoyance to me personally, even more so when I consider I'm paying 950 USD for it. I am going to give it a few more days to see if I can get better used to basic mode or if I am going to return it to the store. It saddens me a bit that there's no option to add a little bit more blue to the basic mode, which, to me, is really all it needs.
I would also like to add more blue even to adaptive mode.
Sent from my Samsung SM-G955F using XDA Labs
svache said:
This is probably true, however, I grew accustomed to a more blueish white, that the basic mode appears too warm now.
I remember last year, after trading my Note 7 for the second time and going to the LG V20, that I thought the LG had a way too bright white, noticeably more blue. However, after having had that for about a year and finally switching back with the Note 8 a few days ago, the basic just doesn't feel right anymore. I really like the adaptive (that is, with a few minor adjustments to the sliders), but whenever I am in a game or watching something, then the adaptive mode has way too much saturation. Then the only thing that does help is switching back to Basic mode, but I get annoyed by how warm it appears to be as soon as I hit anything with a white background (like settings or text messaging). The laptop I'm writing this on also has a more blueish white, my Samsung SHUD TV seems to be somewhat in the middle of it all but less red than my Note.
While basic may be the best setting, I can't say I really like it. Switching back and forth between the modes is a workaround, not really a solution. I really want to like this phone, but it is quite an annoyance to me personally, even more so when I consider I'm paying 950 USD for it. I am going to give it a few more days to see if I can get better used to basic mode or if I am going to return it to the store. It saddens me a bit that there's no option to add a little bit more blue to the basic mode, which, to me, is really all it needs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Although a different device, the basic mode on my Samsung tab S2 LTE is awesome. It's a night and day difference to the Note 8 , albeit both adaptive modes on both devices are closer in my eyes . However, the basic mode on the tab s2 doesn't go pink but a more warmer yellow type mode.
I agree with you , the basic mode in my eyes on the N8 is rubbish.
Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk