- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LG OLED vs Sony OLED
Posted on 10/9/24 at 7:37 am to mchias1
Posted on 10/9/24 at 7:37 am to mchias1
The issue with Samsung is that they do not support Dolby Vision. Their logic is that the image quality is good enough already and that Dolby Vision adds nothing... In reality they likely don't want to pay the licensing fee.
3
Posted on 10/9/24 at 8:12 am to The Eric
quote:
The issue with Samsung is that they do not support Dolby Vision. Their logic is that the image quality is good enough already and that Dolby Vision adds nothing... In reality they likely don't want to pay the licensing fee.
I agree it is most likely about the licensing fee but I will say after using DV for about 5 years now, really good HDR10 content is just as enjoyable for me. It is still the case that few TVs fully utilize 1000nit+ content where DV can really stretch its legs. The captured details in dark content of DV is nice but the non-dark content generally has more pop in HDR10 format.
If I had to pick between two TVs where one did DV and the other did HDR10/HDR10+ and was cheaper, I'd pick the non-DV TV.
Vincent Teoh and FOMO on youtube have many great side-by-side comparisons of TVs and many times they will find the high quality HDR10 set has a better picture than a similar or lesser priced Dolby Vision TV. There is so much more that goes into producing the picture than just the content container.
This post was edited on 10/9/24 at 8:14 am
Posted on 10/9/24 at 8:31 am to notsince98
at 57 years old i'm probably going to need to upgrade my eyes first before i can enjoy any of this 
Posted on 10/9/24 at 3:46 pm to The Eric
Yeah DV is mostly just marketing when compared to HDR10 and HDR10+.
Some good articles out there about no real difference and that's why sites like Rtings say Dolby vision support should never influence your decision on a new TV.
A lot of people don't understand none of that stuff matters if you're just streaming content at 15-20% compression loss. You'd have to be a videophile with a nice 4K Blu-ray player and even then it's still minimal difference but that's the only time DV has any visible difference from HDR10/+.
Some good articles out there about no real difference and that's why sites like Rtings say Dolby vision support should never influence your decision on a new TV.
A lot of people don't understand none of that stuff matters if you're just streaming content at 15-20% compression loss. You'd have to be a videophile with a nice 4K Blu-ray player and even then it's still minimal difference but that's the only time DV has any visible difference from HDR10/+.
This post was edited on 10/9/24 at 8:18 pm
Posted on 10/9/24 at 8:36 pm to UltimateHog
quote:or a Ugoos AM6B+ running Corelec with full FEL Dolby Vision support and HDR10 and HDR10+ conversion to DV.
You'd have to be a videophile with a nice 4K Blu-ray player and even then it's still minimal difference but that's the only time DV has any visible difference from HDR10/+.
Posted on 10/10/24 at 11:24 am to UrbJones33
What is OT poor?
Posted on 10/11/24 at 9:00 am to UrbJones33
The newest round of OLED's solve the brightness issue (lack thereof) that turned me off from OLEDs, but the whole burn-in risk is something I would have no interest in needing to worry about with a TV.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 9:45 am to TheBoo
quote:
but the whole burn-in risk is something I would have no interest in needing to worry about with a TV.
the risk is so infinitesimal that it can be disregarded entirely. The mitigation tech is far more advanced than it was a few years ago.
By the time you had any slight burn-in, it'd be time to upgrade the TV anyway. Do people really keep TVs for 10+ years?
Posted on 10/11/24 at 9:58 am to Carson123987
quote:
the risk is so infinitesimal that it can be disregarded entirely. The mitigation tech is far more advanced than it was a few years ago.
By the time you had any slight burn-in, it'd be time to upgrade the TV anyway. Do people really keep TVs for 10+ years?
My interpretation of the risk is, if I have the TV on full brightness and leave it on the news for a day by accident, the logo would be burnt in.
If that isn't the case then I'm completely wrong.
You say that, these new TV's seem nice, but I'm having a hard time justifying moving on from my Sony X930E. It's been 6, going on 7 years already.
Posted on 10/11/24 at 10:05 am to TheBoo
quote:
My interpretation of the risk is, if I have the TV on full brightness and leave it on the news for a day by accident, the logo would be burnt in.
If that isn't the case then I'm completely wrong.
I leave my TV on ESPN/news all the time and have no burn-in after 5 years.
I have an OLED monitor for my PC which obviously has a ton of static elements - desktop icons, task bar, etc. No burn-in at all
You would have to use your TV in the most extreme use case to manifest any sort of burn-in, and even then, it would take 6-7 years to be noticeable
Posted on 10/12/24 at 4:40 am to Carson123987
quote:
Do people really keep TVs for 10+ years?
I'm still rocking my Sharp LE820 from 2010 good sir.
Tv is rock fricking solid.
Posted on 10/12/24 at 7:57 am to UrbJones33
I've always liked Tom's guide, he does not seem to be to Brand centric when it comes to his ratings on most tech.
https://www.tomsguide.com/best-picks/best-oled-tvs
In reality, the top end or near tope nd LGs, Samsungs, and Sonys will all be very good.
Here is tech radars guide as well.
https://www.techradar.com/news/best-oled-tvs-our-pick-of-the-best-oled-televisions-you-can-buy-today
https://www.tomsguide.com/best-picks/best-oled-tvs
In reality, the top end or near tope nd LGs, Samsungs, and Sonys will all be very good.
Here is tech radars guide as well.
https://www.techradar.com/news/best-oled-tvs-our-pick-of-the-best-oled-televisions-you-can-buy-today
Posted on 10/12/24 at 7:59 am to CAD703X
quote:
at 57 years old i'm probably going to need to upgrade my eyes first before i can enjoy any of this
As a 62 year old, I approve this message.
Posted on 10/14/24 at 7:22 am to Carson123987
quote:
the risk is so infinitesimal that it can be disregarded entirely. The mitigation tech is far more advanced than it was a few years ago.
For light users this is true but you can still find floods or reports of damaged screens on reddit, avsforums, etc. For some moderate to heavy users burn in or burn out of the center of the screen is still happening. Even panels less than 2 years old are still having bad issues.
This post was edited on 10/14/24 at 7:24 am
Posted on 10/20/24 at 9:06 pm to The Eric
Go with size and price. You won't notice any difference in the TVs once in your house
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News