So I am coming from an LCD screen to the Nokia's Amoled screen and I am curious on Amoled screen is the white supposed to be a "rainbow" color? Like on my LCD screen White is well WHITE no other colors bleeding through. On this amoled screen I am see like a rainbow of colors behind the white like reds, blues, etc it's till white sort of but not as crystal white as the LCD.
Is this by design and something I should get used to? I thought Amoled was supposed to be better...
Laquox said:
So I am coming from an LCD screen to the Nokia's Amoled screen and I am curious on Amoled screen is the white supposed to be a "rainbow" color? Like on my LCD screen White is well WHITE no other colors bleeding through. On this amoled screen I am see like a rainbow of colors behind the white like reds, blues, etc it's till white sort of but not as crystal white as the LCD.
Is this by design and something I should get used to? I thought Amoled was supposed to be better...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whites on Amoled appear to be off-white. It's been this way with every Amoled device. I've never seen it to appear "rainbow" colored.
Amoled produces richer more saturated colors and outstanding black levels.
LCD and SLCD is a lot brighter than Amoled (hence the crystal white) but the black levels do not compare.
Before my 900, I was an SLCD fan. But Amoled with the clearblack looks like SLCD on steroids. Minus the lower white levels. Of course this is just my opinion.
So it's possibly just the ultra saturation bleeding through the "whites" that give it the "rainbow" effect. I don't know how else to to describe it. White is simply no white but like a multi spectrum white with other colors bleeding through.
Looking at mine right now the white looks pretty darn white.
The thing I have noticed is for instance when I bought a samsung focus I was torn between it and two HTC Devices... I forget the names. Both were SLCD. I just COULD NOT get past the washed out look of the HTC devices over the samsung.
The nokia is even richer in color than the samsung.
hx4700 Killer said:
Looking at mine right now the white looks pretty darn white.
The thing I have noticed is for instance when I bought a samsung focus I was torn between it and two HTC Devices... I forget the names. Both were SLCD. I just COULD NOT get past the washed out look of the HTC devices over the samsung.
The nokia is even richer in color than the samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed - I've had the Focus, HD7s, and now the Nokia 900 and the Nokia is so far my favorite. I feel I should point out that the 'Nokia Blue' theme is sharper than the default windows phone blue theme, making the other devices appear washed out when in fact it's the correct color.
But the ability to use the device outdoors was a huge factor in my selection, certainly.
I like all the colors in the amoled except white. White really looks washed out compared to LCD screens and this is the only disappointment I have with amoled screens.
the benefits of an amoled are color saturation, deep rich blacks, and energy consumption on non-white backgrounds
SLCD create more "accurate" colors, that some see as washed out - generally are a bit brighter (lumens) and more white whites
the amoled produce off whites - if you compare the two, but you should not really notice it on an amoled unless you compare it to a true white
also, off angles can produce a slight blue hue to the whites
to each his own - I prefer the amoleds blacks (with the WP7 metro themes), to the washed out colors of an SLCD - but that does not mean you or someone else will too
could it be that your screen might be dirty?
i know on mine if i have some water or oil on the screen it will create a prism effect, which will rainbow the colors, especially with a white screen.
personally i haven't seen whites get a rainbow effect, but they are a little dim, which could be partly due to the screen tech (amoled) and could also be the hardware dimming them intentionally to save on battery (white is a battery killer on amoled screens)
but the inky blacks and pop of color from amoled makes me not really care, as the screen looks brilliant.
and the clearblack display on the nokia is great in the sun.
rainbow colors are only suppose appear on pentile displays. this phone has a true rgb screen so i dont see why
Nissan350 said:
Whites on Amoled appear to be off-white. It's been this way with every Amoled device. I've never seen it to appear "rainbow" colored.
Amoled produces richer more saturated colors and outstanding black levels.
LCD and SLCD is a lot brighter than Amoled (hence the crystal white) but the black levels do not compare.
Before my 900, I was an SLCD fan. But Amoled with the clearblack looks like SLCD on steroids. Minus the lower white levels. Of course this is just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AMOLED does not inherently have dim whites. Samsung just programs a dimming condition into the firmware on some its AMOLED panels that make it dim the brightness based on the % of white pixels on the screen (as a sneaky way to improve battery). The Focus S has an extra setting that lets you disable this, but the L900 does not have that setting.
drleospaceman said:
AMOLED does not inherently have dim whites. Samsung just programs a dimming condition into the firmware on some its AMOLED panels that make it dim the brightness based on the % of white pixels on the screen (as a sneaky way to improve battery). The Focus S has an extra setting that lets you disable this, but the L900 does not have that setting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see. Bummer
A dim AMOLED screen also helps prolong the panel life span a lot. AMOLED screens are extremely prone to burn in. Avoid extreme brightness and avoid leave screen on for extended period.
Just remember this: it is very easy to bump up a screen's brightness (brighter back light on LCD) but it is extremely difficult to produce true blackness on a screen. The strength of AMOLE is the true black because it has no back light. Each pixels emit light. Darker black = higher contrast. No LCD can ever match the black level of an AMOLED screen.
foxbat121 said:
A dim AMOLED screen also helps prolong the panel life span a lot. AMOLED screens are extremely prone to burn in. Avoid extreme brightness and avoid leave screen on for extended period.
Just remember this: it is very easy to bump up a screen's brightness (brighter back light on LCD) but it is extremely difficult to produce true blackness on a screen. The strength of AMOLE is the true black because it has no back light. Each pixels emit light. Darker black = higher contrast. No LCD can ever match the black level of an AMOLED screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i wouldnt keep saying that lol, htcs IPS SLD 2 can almost match against the blacks of a super amoled and has better colors all around without having to be pentile. unless you were to compare side to side you would be completely happy with the blacks on the one x.
edit: http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/05/htc-one-x-vs-one-s/ compare the blacks, barely a difference unless you were looking hard
i would go with the ips slcd 2 anyday considering no burn, great viewing angles, great battery life especially whites and cloes to as good battery life on blacks, visable outdoors, realistic looking colors/not over saturated, etc. its a balance between good blacks, and good whites. still wouldnt touch the one x though
^^^ above poster have never used an amoled display
slpin said:
^^^ above poster have never used an amoled display
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I most definitely have. from samsungs first amoled screens the behold 2. and both gens of galaxy s.
and i take it you have used the one x? no? since its the only phone with the IPS SLCD "2". not talking about regular SLCD, i have the amaze and the blacks look like crap.
almost every reviewer that has had their hands on nearly every android handset has stated its the best screen they have seen. just my 2 cents.
LCD is growing, OLED is still failing with screen burn.
also, im no htc fanboy (anymore). i really want the lumia 900 actually
Any reviewer says SLCD2 is better or equal to AMOLED has no clue what they are talking about. For the most part, they equal high brightness to better display. Read those reviews carefully. They are probably the same idiots who prefer LCD TVs to Plasma TVs. They made no scientific measurements of the contrast ratio of the screens. So, basically they are simply talking out of their a**.
Yes, LCD has more accurate colors. But it can never have better or equal blacks. There is no way to make LCD panel to block backlight completely.
foxbat121 said:
Any reviewer says SLCD2 is better or equal to AMOLED has no clue what they are talking about. For the most part, they equal high brightness to better display. Read those reviews carefully. They are probably the same idiots who prefer LCD TVs to Plasma TVs. They made no scientific measurements of the contrast ratio of the screens. So, basically they are simply talking out of their a**.
Yes, LCD has more accurate colors. But it can never have better or equal blacks. There is no way to make LCD panel to block backlight completely.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess almost every reviewer that has reviewed this phone talks out of their ass, technobuffalo, engadget, phonedog, telegraph? lol, nearly every review that i have read said that. people who love the galaxy s 2, and both aaron from phonedog and john from technobuffalo used the note as their daily and preferred the one x screen.
just because the blacks are one notch off doesnt mean it's not superior. considering it will have better battery life, much more accurate colors, sharper images (when compared to pentile especially), no screen burn (plasma tvs have that horribly, so id stick with my lcd tv). blacks arent the most important color on a phone lol, and i never said they are better or as good. they are pretty damn close though. especially for being a LCD. after seeing screen burn on plasma tvs and oled screen its hard to say id rather have one. people who want a little bit more black screens are okay with screen burn?
and horrible whites?
also, people who dont stay in a cave all day. the ones who go out side, ips is far superior lol considering you have grea viewing angles and its completely viewable outside.
compared to the galaxy nexus the blacks almost looks exactly the same.
i would rather have amoled screen on wp7, but on android i would probably rather have the sld2
http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/13/lg-renames-optimus-lte-to-optimus-true-hd-lte-disses-samsungs/
look at this photo: http://i43.tinypic.com/2wn7jfd.jpg
you can barely tell a difference between the menu dots and the bezel. opposed to other lcds. it could be comparable to amoled defintely.
outside photo with low brightness: http://i44.tinypic.com/ipqgzs.jpg
still compeltely visible
overal its all about personal preference, but im sure saying that the new screen is comparable and would even be hard to choose from even over super amoled. i was about to ditch LCD honestly (my amaze has horrible blacks) before seeing this screen. too bad its not in other phones.
Screen quality better be left to those know how to compare, e.g. those who review hdtv for a living. lmao the stuff you quoted above.
Remember, contrast ratio = brigest / darkest. The slight difference in black level significantly changes the contrast ratio. Not so much on brightness.
Yes, there are magic coatings on LCD screens that make them appear dark then actually is. The problem is such coating could cause black crush or false contour. Of course those phone reviewer didn't test those important aspect of PQ of a panel, did they?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA
foxbat121 said:
Screen quality better be left to those know how to compare, e.g. those who review hdtv for a living. lmao the stuff you quoted above.
Remember, contrast ratio = brigest / darkest. The slight difference in black level significantly changes the contrast ratio. Not so much on brightness.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really something to even think about. OLED hasnt been seen on a mobile devices over WVGA resolution WITHOUT pentile, we all know pentile sucks. colors, sharpness, etc. we have HD screens with IPS completely sharp, great colors, etc. just my 2 cents
http://i-cdn.phonearena.com/images/articles/48137-image/100-Crop-Red.jpg <- pentile
you dont need to review tvs to know if a mobile screen is good or not. these people have had their hands on nearly every android/wp7/blackberry/wm6 handset. pretty sure they have some say, especially for engadget always hating on every company besides apple then says the one x has the best screen they have seen lol.
both AMOLED/SAMOLED, and IPS SLCD have 16m colors. except the IPS has better viewing angles, no screen bleed, able to see the screen outside, whites to look blue, etc. you dont need to be a reviewer to know which is better.
unless your like everything on your phone to be black, and nothing but black then i dont see the point of saying oled is better just because the blacks are a notch better..
on different OS i would prefer different types of screens. LCD would be crap on wp7 i think unless you used whites a lot. we have yet to see IPS SLCD on wp7 i dont ever think we will. on android though i and other people like having high resolution, good looking colors, etc. cant have that with amoled unless you like pentile. wvga doesnt cut it with android anymore
take a look at the nokia 701, has lcd with clearblack and the blacks look great one it.
FYI, iPhone 4/4s has IPS screen and yet it looks hazey and has the lowest contrast ratio among almost all smartphone screens. IPS maybe better than other LCD screens. But it is still LCD screen. It is physically not possible to completely block the backlite. Otherwise, we don't need local dimming technology on high end LCD TVs anymore.
Related
As you all know, the new batch of Desire for Telus will come with SLCD.
androidpolice.com/2010/07/15/htc-desire-headed-to-canada-on-telus
I'm not from Canada so just wondering should I wait for SLCD to available worldwide or just grab the current AMOLED.
The main concern of mine is AMOLED with pinkish issue.
Anyone can tell me which is better ? Please to explain to me as I'm totally don't have any knowledge regarding SLCD & AMOLED.
Many thanks
kelvintan said:
The main concern of mine is AMOLED with pinkish issue.
Anyone can tell me which is better ? Please to explain to me as I'm totally don't have any knowledge regarding SLCD & AMOLED.
Many thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it comes down to personal preference. I kind of like the AMOLED screen, and mine has a very soft neuance of a pinkish hue. But nothing that is annoying or anything. The SLCD is as you know the secondary preference of HTC, but it seems to be as good as the first choice..
I genuinely think if I wasn't a member of this forum and read pretty much everything about the desire, I wouldn't have noticed the pinkish tint to grey colours... That's just me, it really isn't bad and certainly not a deal breaker. For how often that colour even shows up, its not worth concerning yourself about. If you want AMOLED over an SLCD screen which I think is probably wiser seeing as it was HTC's first choice then get one now.. All I can say is the screens beautiful and full of colour, not having seen SLCD screens I can't say if it will be any different but unless its an improvement, then get an AMOLED one
Nit3m4re said:
I genuinely think if I wasn't a member of this forum and read pretty much everything about the desire, I wouldn't have noticed the pinkish tint to grey colours... That's just me, it really isn't bad and certainly not a deal breaker. For how often that colour even shows up, its not worth concerning yourself about. If you want AMOLED over an SLCD screen which I think is probably wiser seeing as it was HTC's first choice then get one now.. All I can say is the screens beautiful and full of colour, not having seen SLCD screens I can't say if it will be any different but unless its an improvement, then get an AMOLED one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't agree more. Haven't seen a SLCD live but I really like the shiny colors and this is enough reason for me to choose AMOLED over lcd I really don't care about the slight pink effect and anyway it's almost gone in 2.2.
I'm really happy with my desire
Regards
If you don't notice anything wrong with the screen on a Desire with amoled screen then don't bother with the canadian version.
Some people are just more geeky and uptight about these things.
Personally the oversaturated colors was the first thing I noticed when I saw the phone in a shop without having read about the issue on the internet.
Amoled: The colors is punchier and fuller, the blacks will be deeper.
This sounds really good and most people dont find the oled on the desire bad
at all. Because of the type of amoled they used on the desire the screen wont
seem as sharp as a hvga screen should be. If you want to see amoled screen
done right, check out the samsung omnia hd, just perfect.
Lcd: The colors arent as full but after having had a tp2 for 6 months i think it looks really good anyway. Any lcd screen with hvga resolution will appear alot sharper than the one on the desire. Also i found while the colors werent as deep as on a oled i found the color spectrum to appear wider than on desire. Dont know if thats true that just the way it appears to me and what I prefer.
The Slcd they will use on the canadian Desire will be a lcd with a
ips panel. ips panels arent normally used on cell phones but alot of
graphics artists use them on lcd monitors when doing photo work.
I think theyre supposed to show colors more accuratley than
tn or pva panels.
I know the viewing angles on them are really good,
like 160 degrees. The downside has been that they don't have quite as
fast response time as tn or pva panels but it isnt a big deal if youre
not a twitch fps player.
Also, I read that SLCD drains more power than AMOLED.
abvmoose said:
Also i found while the colors werent as deep as on a oled i found the color spectrum to appear wider than on desire.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is a contradiction. If colors are deeper then spectrum is wider. Amoled can display colors which LCD can't, and which doesn't even exists in any normal (sRGB) picture
abvmoose said:
The Slcd they will use on the canadian Desire will be a lcd with a
ips panel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you share a source of that info?
phentex said:
Also, I read that SLCD drains more power than AMOLED.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have two horses, one drinks 5 liters of water per day no matter what is doing, and other drinks 2 liters doing nothing and 10 if runs all day in full gallop, which one drinks more?
Consider you need additional 200 liters everyday to clean them and stables. Does it matter at all which one drinks more?
vlasac said:
It is a contradiction. If colors are deeper then spectrum is wider. Amoled can display colors which LCD can't, and which doesn't even exists in any normal (sRGB) picture
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think that the colors are deeper and the color spectrum or color space is the same thing, maybe im wrong. I found the colors the desire screen showed were deeper, by deeper i mean more intense and fuller, as one should expect from a oled display. To me, the colorspace didnt seem as wide as on my tp2's lcd screen. That's my personal impression of it. It could be because of the pinkish hue wish also might add to the oversaturation of some colors. I found the color red specially to be oversaturated wich gave me the impression of the colorspace not to be so wide.
It's true that Amoled can show more colors than lcd, at least when oled
is done right.
Can you share a source of that info?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know what, im not sure that I can. I was pretty sure that ive read somewhere that S-lcd is the buzzword for Samsung's and Sony's joint venture for creating newer generation lcd displays with ips panels.
But now that I look for it im not so sure. I was certain i read an post on Engadget where they clearly stated that it was ips panel but I cant find that now.
There is one source vaugley explaining it here:
http://androidcommunity.com/htc-for...ft-lcd-from-amoled-due-to-shortages-20100625/
But it says:
"But, the big question is: what is Super TFT LCD? Well, you’ve actually heard of it before, because it has a nickname that’s come up recently in the news (after the announcement of a certain tablet). Super TFT LCD’s nickname is IPS. Which, yes, became “famous” thanks to Apple’s iPad tablet. It provides a wide viewing angle, and provides very clear images — even if the colors aren’t as “distinguished” when compared to an AMOLED display."
But the source of those news is:
http://www.oled-display.net/the-sma...tc-must-switch-the-display-from-amoled-to-lcd
Wich really doesnt say anything about being an ips panel
If the SLCD is even vaguely readable in direct sunlight, go for it. Because the AMOLED isn't, I don't care what people claim.
If it's an IPS panel, the I'd be very tempted to give 'SLCD' a try.
But whenever I pick up another phone since getting my Desire I notice the muddy, bleeding blacks that OLED eliminates.
It's official now. Wondering any review which is better..
youtube.com/watch?v=gY6qpnoziZM
Google chose to stop selling Nexus One instead of putting LCD monitor to it.
This decision says a lot.
fadasma said:
Google chose to stop selling Nexus One instead of putting LCD monitor to it.
This decision says a lot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, but I don't think the AMOLED shortage had *anything* to do with Google shutting up shop on selling the Nexus One!
Regards,
Dave
tomek_fcb said:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gY6qpnoziZM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That video kinda makes me feel good about having an AMOLED screen.
There's no screens named SLCD. S-LCD is the COMPANY that makes the screens wich will replace AMOLED-screens on HTC DESIRE. S-LCD is a joint venture between Samsung and Sony. According to wikipedi, S-LCD makes S-PVA panels (wich is even worse than IPS). The video showing the "new" screen on desire is clearly a S-PVA panel.
janroar said:
There's no screens named SLCD. S-LCD is the COMPANY that makes the screens wich will replace AMOLED-screens on HTC DESIRE. S-LCD is a joint venture between Samsung and Sony. According to wikipedi, S-LCD makes S-PVA panels (wich is even worse than IPS). The video showing the "new" screen on desire is clearly a S-PVA panel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Patterned vertical alignment and super patterned vertical alignment (S-PVA) are alternative versions of MVA technology offered by Samsung's and Sony's joint venture S-LCD. Developed independently, they offer similar features to MVA, but with higher contrast ratios of up to 3000:1.....
PVA and S-PVA offer the best black depth of any LCD type along with wide viewing angles. S-PVA also offers fast response times using modern RTC technologies.
Source: Search Wikipedia for TFT LCD
I've had a new HTC Desire with S-LCD in my hand for a while, along with my old Amoled one.
It's surely a lot better than my old LCD (Touch HD).
What impressed me is the clarity of the display, the whites, the good contrast compared to old LCD and the fact that (I think) the phone is lighter.
Of course blacks and contrast are miles better on amoled.
But where it failed me, is better readability in direct sunlight. It's more or less the same as amoled, which is (for me) average. I can live with that, but I expected the S-LCD to compensate more for its shortcomings.
All in all, I feared worse, but I would take amoled any day.
according to my box, I have the amoled screen.
Must say I'm pleased with whatever it is !!
FYI - Can HTC tell whether your phone has an AMOLED or SLCD screen?
Short answer:
No.
Longer answer:
I bought my phone from Orange and thus the box comes Orange branded. Therefore, it doesn't say on the box whether than phone is AMOLED or SLCD (referred to as multitouch or something like that). I contacted Orange who haven't got a clue and just told me is AMOLED by reading their stock description. I contacted HTC UK and gave them the serial number of the phone. They said that at this present time there was no way for them to decipher whether I had an AMOLED or SLCD screen. There may be in the future but at the moment there is not.
The one bit of interesting information HTC could provide is that 90% of their stock is AMOLED and 10% is SLCD.
The reason I looked into this is because I can't really tell from the videos online what screen I have. There are some murmurings that all SLCD phones are bootloader 0.83 (what I have) but unfortunately not all 0.83 phones are SLCD.
http://pocketnow.com/android/how-to-tell-if-your-htc-desire-has-slcd-or-amoled-screen
Already read that. And I'd say it's actually pretty difficult to tell unless you have their exact screenshots.
And a magnifying glass!
The box for mine said "3.7-inch touch-sensitive screen", but it has the 0.75 HBOOT, so I really need to find a magnifying glass to check it.
tinytjf said:
Already read that. And I'd say it's actually pretty difficult to tell unless you have their exact screenshots.
And a magnifying glass!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it's so hard to tell why bother?
It really is easy to tell
Go into a dark room and go into the settings menu (which has a black background colour). If the black is lit at all or slightly grey, you have SLCD. If it is totally black (and I really mean no light at all) you have AMOLED. I have both and it really is easy to tell them apart in by the contrast of the settings menus, not so easy otherwise.
familyhousing said:
Go into a dark room and go into the settings menu (which has a black background colour). If the black is lit at all or slightly grey, you have SLCD. If it is totally black (and I really mean no light at all) you have AMOLED. I have both and it really is easy to tell them apart in by the contrast of the settings menus, not so easy otherwise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's not entirley correct. I have Amoled, and even in a dark room, it's not 'totally' black.
BarnOwl said:
If it's so hard to tell why bother?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because there are some rooting methods that require you to know whether you're on SLCD or AMOLED... Having said that there are workarounds but it would be nice to know which method before I start.
As for the dark room idea, I'll try it. Thanks.
I'm 99% sure mine has an AMOLED screen because the bootloader was 0.80 (before the 2.2 upgrade)
My box didn't mention AMOLED on the box (so it could have been either)
One thing I have noticed is that a block of white against a darker background appear to have a slight pinkish toothcomb on the left edge of the white block (eg the HTC clock widget that's usually on the main home screen.
I believe this is a sign of the pentile arrangement of pixels that you get in the Desire's AMOLED screen.
ie:
****
****
Without a magnifying glass though its difficult to be certain.
Do what I did:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=7257878&postcount=10
Take a picture of the phone with a macro zoom camera. The pentiles become easily distinguishable.
i had both amoled and slcd side by side and all i can say is that the difference is huge...
if open your browser and set text size to large and than browse to xda forums... with amoled you won't be able to read clearly without zooming in, but on slcd you will be able to read and see everything clearly..
other than that amoled is brighter and has more contrast but slcd has a lot more clearer picture, that is easily visible when you put two phones side by side
for me slcd is a lot better.
mr.vandalay said:
i had both amoled and slcd side by side and all i can say is that the difference is huge...
if open your browser and set text size to large and than browse to xda forums... with amoled you won't be able to read clearly without zooming in, but on slcd you will be able to read and see everything clearly..
other than that amoled is brighter and has more contrast but slcd has a lot more clearer picture, that is easily visible when you put two phones side by side
for me slcd is a lot better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A work colleague has just received his Desire and one of the first things he did was compare it to mine. He has an SLCD screen and I have AMOLED. When placed side by side the difference is gobsmackingly obvious. On the SLCD text appears far smoother, although the colours do appear to be washed out.
I agree that the SLCD is better, but I will say that I am more than happy with my AMOLED screen.
stats101 said:
that's not entirley correct. I have Amoled, and even in a dark room, it's not 'totally' black.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, I exaggerated a little. I actually have an AMOLED Legend and an SLCD Desire. Just for my own sanity I checked again and the Legend AMOLED screen does have totally 100% blacks, even in a completely dark environment. I assume an AMOLED Desire would be the same and hence as easily identifiable.
If you think about it, AMOLED will always produce complete blacks as each pixel is not even powered for black output. The light you report to see on an AMOLED screen can only be explained by reflection. If your screen emits light from 100% black areas then you have SLCD.
Sent from my HTC Legend using XDA App
Well,one easy way is to put it next to your computers monitor while it shows a black image.The phone should be in the settings menu.If both seem about the same colour,you have an SLCD.If the monitor's picture seems grey while the phone's is pitch black,it's AMOLED.
I hope it helps those who don't have two devices to compare.
I have both the AMOLED and SLCD Desire. It's a clear difference. Mine has no bleeding around the edges. But It's clear to see the SLCD when the Call screen is on. The AMOLED is a lot blacker where as the SLCD is more gray than black.
The colours are also a lot more vibrant and alive on AMOLED, the SLCD looks washed out. The brightness is also higher on AMOLED.
You dont need magnifying glass. Droplet of water on screen will do.
I will be getting a Desire tomorrow or the next day and I don't know whether I'll get AMOLED or SLCD, so I want to know, are their quality worlds apart? Would it really make a difference to have either one of those? Is one better? How does both of them compare to iPhone 3GS's screen?
To the average person both are very very similar and you would not notice a difference without knowing there was two sorts of screens.
Chances are you won't get a choice of which to get, it just depends what is in stock.
Stat wise SLCD takes it on paper as being the best, but only marginally.
Honestly it really doesn't matter which you get, unless you compare two devices side by side you won't even know.
Because of the pentile matrix on the AMOLED, I would go with the S-LCD. The AMOLED is said to be over saturated in dark environments, and unable to read in the sun. I'd rather have balanced colors inside and readable screen outdoors. Also, the S-LCD have a real 800x480 resolution
Had both side by side for a while.
They are absolutely equal in bright sunlight. That said, people suspect that some amoled screens come out of the factory better than others.
Blacks, contrast and bright colours are absolutely better on the amoled
Bright whites and overall colour balance is probably a bit better on S-LCD
Pixel smoothness and small text readability is a bit better on S-LCD. That said, after you have amoled for a while you will realize that unless you keep your nose touching the screen, your vision will process the amoled screen the same way as the S-LCD. Takes some time though.
Battery usage: we made -accurate- -measured- tests, of the battery drain in milliamperes/milliwatts. They came out very close, the main difference is obviously that amoled display is optimized for displaying dark stuff. Overall I think you save a bit of battery with amoled, but anyway the results were that:
- on low-medium brightness (inside) amoled is almost always better. If you are displaying all white screen, they are closer
- on medium brightness it depends on what you are displaying (light vs dark) but there is not a lot of difference, although amoled tends to save a bit more
- on high brightness (outside) amoled almost invariably drains more than S-LCD, except when the screen is very dark. When displaying almost completely white screens at max brightness, amoled loses big time compared to S-LCD, but that is the only situation where this big difference happens.
One last noticeable difference is colour temperature, but that also varies from handset to handset. Amoled tends to be a bit on the warm side (at least on mine) and S-LCD on cool. The old 'problem' of the pinkish tint is gone with the froyo update, those few displays still affected by it could be counted as defective.
Oh and by the way, here almost invariably if the box doesn't say 'amoled' you are getting a S-LCD screen. I have to admit I was very surprised at first by the quality of S-LCD and mistaken it for a differently calibrated amoled for some minutes. Blacks are good, but not close to amoled, if you go into a dark room you should notice
Many people believe that SAMOLED screens on Samsung devices are far superior in every way to other devices. Recently with the addition of all these new and similarly spec'd WP7 phones, it seems like a big deciding factor is the screen display.
I have used a focus and a htc surround for a week in addition to my iphone 4. Watching avatar on both devices, I realize that both screens have their setbacks, thats right even the AMOLED!
The general consensus with htc devices is that the viewing angles are terrible. Check out any video review of a HD7 or Surround and you can see that the screens are extremely washed out when viewed at an angle, and unfortunately, many of these reviewers shoot their videos not head on for obvious viewing reasons.
But when viewed normally, the wp7 htc devices are definitely not as awful as at an angle. Still, it is nowhere near SAMOLED crispness or vibrancy. One thing I did notice, however, is that when watching the same video or viewing the same webpages on my iphone 4, I can rightfully say that the lcd screens from htc are just as good as the overly praised retina display. The differences of colors and sharpness between the two are too subtle to tell.
The SAMOLED screens "pop" in color and vibrancy. Whites are glowing white and blacks are dead on black. No one can say that the Samsung did a bad job on their new screens. However, one thing that people tend to misjudge is the color production on their devices like the focus or omnia 7. It seems that while the surround may not produce white and dark as vibrantly, the ACTUAL colors (red, blue, green) are pretty close to what they should appear. What I am saying is the SAMOLED screens are TOO SATURATED. Again this could all be subjective, but I find that the SAMOLED screen just goes for as vibrant and colorful as they can get, disregarding true color tones. For instance, skin in pictures looks intensely orange and I have never seen skies so blue in real life. Webpage colors can be a bit to contrasting as well. And my opinion is from comparing the SAMOLED to my macbook pro LED screen.
I watched avatar on my blu ray and compared it to the surround and the focus. unfornately to say, the focus just makes the navis look almost syrup-y bubblegum blue. The high contrast of samsung screens are good in some ways but in others, it just seems overdone.
HTC may have made their screens to warm in color, thus appearing a bit washed out when comparing to other wp7 devices. But the AMOLED screen seems too saturated in color production, not just compared to my surround, but also my macbook's screen as well as my LED tv.
So in the end which would you pick? What are your guy's thoughts?
I've never done that kind of testing but my captivate has an awesome screen and I would put it against any other screen. The ritna screen isn't as impressive as apple makes it out to be. At least for me. But I will say these are the best out of all of them. My friend just picked up the x10 and boy does the screen look like $h!#, next to mine.
Sent from my cogcap
I 100% agree with you, infact I have had alot of iphone 4 users comment on how good the screen is on the HD7 which shows what a difference using the phone in a normal way makes when compare to viewing at some obsure angle.
I also have always though the colours look wrong on OLED screens, but having said that, I have always though that about samsungs HDTVs, they seem to over exagerate all the colours and sharpness to make you initially go "WOW", then when you think about it, they just look wrong.
Personally, im happy with my HD7 LCD, and would take SLCD over OLED at the moment.
The over-the-top vibrance is a reason why I went SLCD.
That and the Pentile pattern. My eyes are still well enough to notice fringing on rendered text as well as the pattern generally on evenly lit surfaces.
I had a Nexus One, the OMG-in-your-face colors get old quickly.
thanks for input, the captivate looks amazing running android and playing videos I agree.
But do you think there is a line between displaying vibrancy vs true colors?
Sometimes when I view images in the focus, it feels like I opened a photo in Lightroom or Photoshop and just cranked up the vibrancy settings to the max, resulting in some drastic color contrasts.
But then again, the LCD screens of HTC do seem last generation. If only they could meet in the middle.
@ Tom Servo, I actually think the Nexus One did a good job on their screens. They use regualr AMOLED screens just like the Zune HD from microsoft.
Color production was beautiful. Only complaint with those screens are that they practically turn invisible in sunlight haha.
For me, WindowsPhone7 is all about white letters on black background and some coloured squares in between.
I do not watch videos on the phone and I don't have much photos to display.
So I chose the Omnia7 with that gorgeous SAMOLED screen because it's superior for my use.
SAMLOED ftw. IPSLCD (retina display) is old, Apple just upped the pixel count. Put that many pixels in a SLCD and would look gorgeous.
Take a peek at this article, it has all you need to know:
displaymate.com/Galaxy_S_ShootOut.htm
Scroll down to section 8: Gamut.
You'll see that the SAMOLED is way over-saturated and that the
iPhone4 is very washed-out.
I own a Focus and a Droid, as well as an e-IPS and s-IPS panels, and I can
tell you that the article is spot on. Colors on the Focus are like crayola simple.
If you want accurate colors, then go somewhere else, but if you want the
"wow factor" then go SAMOLED hands down.
Hope that helps.
mrroey said:
@ Tom Servo, I actually think the Nexus One did a good job on their screens. They use regualr AMOLED screens just like the Zune HD from microsoft.
Color production was beautiful. Only complaint with those screens are that they practically turn invisible in sunlight haha.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I went from Nexus to Trophy. Looking at the same pictures, I actually preferred SLCD. That and as I said, some people notice the Pentile pattern. Which also makes text fuzzier. With Metro being pretty sparse in busy textures and mostly text based, I think it makes more sense to use the display technology that has full resolution on all color channels. AMOLED has currently half the horizontal resolution on the red and blue channels.
In relation to Samsung devices, it's possible they're running their Digital Natural Imagine Engine in background. I haven't had a direct Samsung device with AMOLED, so I can't say.
Oranjoose said:
Take a peek at this article, it has all you need to know:
displaymate.com/Galaxy_S_ShootOut.htm
Scroll down to section 8: Gamut.
You'll see that the SAMOLED is way over-saturated and that the
iPhone4 is very washed-out.
I own a Focus and a Droid, as well as an e-IPS and s-IPS panels, and I can
tell you that the article is spot on. Colors on the Focus are like crayola simple.
If you want accurate colors, then go somewhere else, but if you want the
"wow factor" then go SAMOLED hands down.
Hope that helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was a GREAT article and very informative, though it can get a bit technical at times. To quote some interesting conclusions from the articles...(NOTE THAT THIS ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN PRIOR TO WP7 PHONE RELEASE)
"We compared the Galaxy S side-by-side to a calibrated Professional Sony High Definition Studio Monitor using a large set of DisplayMate Calibration and Test Photographs. All of the photos on the Galaxy S had too much color saturation, to the point of appearing gaudy, particularly faces and well known objects such as fruits, vegetables, flowers, grass, even a Coca-Cola can. Photos that include very color saturated objects, such as a fire engine, were in some cases painful to look at. These effects are similar to setting an HDTV to a Vivid picture mode and then turning up the Color and Sharpness Controls. The punchy and excessively vibrant looking images on the Galaxy S may initially get lots of oohs and aahs, like in many of the early reviews, but after a while the gaudy looking images will become tiresome and unpleasant."
"There is no decisive winner as each of the three “Super” displays significantly outperforms the others in more than one important area and significantly underperforms in other areas. The iPhone 4 by far has the brightest and sharpest display and is the most power efficient of the displays. The Motorola Droid by far has the best picture quality and accuracy. The Samsung Galaxy S by far has the lowest screen reflectance and largest Contrast for both bright and dark ambient lighting, and the best viewing angles. On the flip side, the iPhone 4 has a weak color gamut and viewing angles, the Motorola Droid has weak screen reflectance and viewing angles, and the Samsung Galaxy S has lower brightness, excessive color saturation, higher power consumption and some sharpness issues. "
so there you have it. according to Displaymate,
iphone 4 = best mobile display
motorola droid (surprisingly) = best mobile picture quality
Samsung vibrant = best mobile display technology
Samsung is notorious for producing display panels with oversaturated color pallet.
It is true for their Plasma, LCD, LED's on the consumer grade television sets and now SAMOLED displays on the mobile devices.
the oversaturation of the AMOLED's have been well documented prior to now. it doens't seem to be a problem for many as everyone has different interpretation of colors in their own eyes anyway.
I just think when u put these phone side by side...and contrast and vibrance of the samsung phones is just ridiculous...true color representation kinda falls to the side
The Retna screen is very impressive because the pixel density is much higher than on other screens. That makes reading on the screen MUCH easier on the eyes than on other screens. You may not consciously know it, but eye fatigue does happen and it's a huge consideration when buying a device you will spend so much time looking at. It also means the text will look much better when/if you zoom in on it.
It's like comparing a crappy CRT monitor to a high class LCD.
The color reproduction on sAMOLED is nice.
However, there's more to a phone than the screen.
HD7 has more RAM than other WP7 devices. It has a bigger screen than other WP7 devices. It has more storage than many other WP7 devices.
The only major downside to that phone, IMO, is small battery and the fact that the screen is flush with the front of the phone. Unlike something like a Vibrant, if you drop an HD2 or HD7 on its face it can destroy your screen.
Of course, that can be somewhat fixed with a case... Some people don't like cases, though...
I like the SAMOLED screens, but when I looked at the HD7 it was better than I thought it would be. That being said I do still want the SAMOLED. The other factors leaning me toward the focus (or samsung in general) are the fact that the screen has gorilla glass, making it much less likely to be scratched and when I was playing with the Focus and the Quantum/Surround/HD7 the screen on the Focus also seemed much more sensitive and responsive compared to the others.
Omega Ra said:
...the screen on the Focus also seemed much more sensitive and responsive compared to the others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This might have to do with the fact Samsung places the SAMOLED display directly beneath the capacitive screen. Other phones have a much larger space between the two.
The result is Samsung phones are often thinner, and they appear to be more accurate and responsive.
i put my omnia 7 up against a hd7 in the flesh ( metal/plastic) and there is no comparison. Theres just no going back to LCD now. and as for viewing angles, seriously?, viewing angles on a mobile phone? are you kidding me? no one holds their phone at an angle! its not like we are going to mount our phones onto walls and have 10 people gathered around to watch it.
Since having my desire with amoled display for about half a year I won't go back to lcd/slcd because I think the colors are far more superior at least to me.
I went for the Omnia 7 as business device and I couldn't be happier. Build quality is surprisingly very good, perfect screen size for my needs and all in all I'm glad that I didn't choose the HD7 imho.
Regards
It may not be the sharpest of display and not produce the most accurate colour and I wasn't particularly impressed with Galaxy S S-AMOLED screen on android!
However IMHO S-AMOLED looks stunning on WP7 OS, it really compliments the Metro-UI and when put side by side with S-LCD running the same OS it's just not the same! It's for this very reason that I went for Omnia 7 over HD7.
lqaddict said:
Samsung is notorious for producing display panels with oversaturated color pallet.
It is true for their Plasma, LCD, LED's on the consumer grade television sets and now SAMOLED displays on the mobile devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung plasma and in general any plasma is not as oversaturated as other technologies. LCD and LED displays from all manufacturers are setup to be in the "torch" mode (sometimes called dynamic by the manufacturers) to stand out on the floor. And to compensate for the grayish black level they oversaturate the color.
After you calibrate though, they all look the same, almost. LEDs will have a bit of blooming, LCDs will not be as black as plasmas and plasmas will lack the brightness in case you want to watch in a sunlit room.
The iPhone 4's screen looks pretty good, but 3.5 inches? Ugh.
Hey guys, just wondering how good the screen on the Desire is. I've heard some pretty bad things about it and was wondering if the "pixel problem" actually affects the display.
How are HQ youtube videos/regular videos? How is picture viewing? How's the phone while in bright sunlight?
Well.. talking of the screen.. I'm having the AMOLED version.. first generation Desire's.. It's actually very clear.. although, I'm having a similar 'problem' ? With some light angles.. I see a pattern of very small dots in the AMOLED screen.. those are not dead pixels.. but in the glass I asume. Anyone having similar stuff ?
A8183 with SLCD here.
Screen is awesome! I have moved from a HTC Touch Diamond 2 to this. Great screen.
I haven't tried Youtube, as I have a computer for that. Pictures are as good as any phone I have seen, including the iPhone 4. Bright sunlight can be an issue, but much better than my TD2, which I can only assume has an LCD, not an SLCD.
The screen is great! I haven't noticed the pinkish tint that some people reported, i think it was fixed. Mines the Amoled version
I've had both AMOLED and SLCD and can honestly say that neither screen will detract from the wonders of the Desire.
The AMOLED display has amazing viewing angles (IE from every possible angle, it looks great), blacks are black, and colours are fantastic.
With the SLCD display, colours are more 'natural' (less vibrant, which can sometimes, though not to me, seem overwhelming). That is about the only thing i can think of that is better than the AMOLED in comparison. A downside is that blacks are backlit, and look a dark dark blue-grey. This bothered me greatly to begin with, but I have become accustomed to it now. Also, the viewing angles are nowhere near as gooda as the AMOLED display.
In sunlight - neither display is better than the other, and both are pretty terrible at maximum brightness. But then again, I don't really make it a habit of using it in the sunlight.
Pictures look great on both, and so does video, with the exception of dark scenes, where the blacks on the AMOLED look fantastic, and no so fantastic on the SLCD.
At any rate, neither suffer from any problems that affect usability in the way you describe.
Oh! And in response to the comment about the dots: I think they are part of the touchscreen circuitry. I can see them in certain angles, too.
Very nice screen indeed, the AMOLED version at least. Kind of annoying in direct sunlight though
I have a pvt1 1st generation desire with an amoled screen, and have never had a pixel problem :-D
Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk
I have the amoled disire, the display is fantastic unless you're beneath the midday sun
I actually prefer the slcd screen on my desire to the super amoled on my dads sgs. the colours just look to in your face on the sgs, and much more natural and easier on the eyes on the desire
The screen is amazing! Although the touch part of it is horrible.
It's actually a serious question. From what I've been reading, I'm supposed to dislike it, but no website I've found had been able to give a quantitative reason why. The screen on my GNex looks perfectly fine to me. Not perfect, but color reproduction is at least reasonable. If I don't have the brightness on full, whites look a little grey, but nothing that would make me say it's terrible. response time for pixels is very good. Images look very sharp and clear to me. I even looked at it with a magnifying glass, and lines looked really clear up close even.
So, what's wrong with Pentile that I'm missing?
Traditional pixels on an LCD have three sub-pixels, red, green and blue. Each lights up at a different level to give you whatever color you need to. For yellow, the red and green pixels light up 100% and blue stays down at 0%. For white, they all light up 100%, gray, they're all ~50%. Etc.
PenTile, in essence, uses some clever tricks to use only two subpixels in each pixel. Every pixel might have a green pixel, but only every other one has a red pixel, with each empty spot being filled with blue. So when you want the same yellow color as before, some pixels will light up 100% (R&G) and others will light up 50% (since it has a green subpixel at 100% and a blue at 0%), creating a slight checkerboard effect that can be visible if the pixels are too large (like on the Nexus One).
However, the pixels on the GN are tiny. You don't see them in normal use. They don't cause many of the problems people ascribe to them (I've read complaints about color accuracy, banding and other crap), thus anyone complaining about them are usually being neckbeards or trolls. It would be preferable to have an RGB 720p vs PentTile 720p, but again you're really not going to notice unless you go look for it.
Archpope said:
It's actually a serious question. From what I've been reading, I'm supposed to dislike it, but no website I've found had been able to give a quantitative reason why. The screen on my GNex looks perfectly fine to me. Not perfect, but color reproduction is at least reasonable. If I don't have the brightness on full, whites look a little grey, but nothing that would make me say it's terrible. response time for pixels is very good. Images look very sharp and clear to me. I even looked at it with a magnifying glass, and lines looked really clear up close even.
So, what's wrong with Pentile that I'm missing?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you will find that a lot of the hate comes from people associating what are screen defects with pentile, rather than pentile issues themselves.
So it was poorly-implemented Pentile that they were complaining about, I suppose. People really seem to hate it, though. There's a group on FB for people who hate Pentile, but none for people who like it. If even the best implementation just means people are OK with it, is there some other benefit, like faster rendering, better battery life, or thinner panels?
Archpope said:
So it was poorly-implemented Pentile that they were complaining about, I suppose. People really seem to hate it, though. There's a group on FB for people who hate Pentile, but none for people who like it. If even the best implementation just means people are OK with it, is there some other benefit, like faster rendering, better battery life, or thinner panels?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cheaper manufacturing and better battery life.
Archpope said:
So it was poorly-implemented Pentile that they were complaining about, I suppose. People really seem to hate it, though. There's a group on FB for people who hate Pentile, but none for people who like it. If even the best implementation just means people are OK with it, is there some other benefit, like faster rendering, better battery life, or thinner panels?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Given the state of technology, you can only make the subpixels so small. So given the timeframe last year, Google/Samsung probably had to choose between having a PenTile AMOLED 1280x720 or an RGB AMOLED 960x540, or go with an LCD which may have worse contrast or power drain. Given the amount of defects on early GN screens, they were clearly pushing the state of the art of AMOLED, even using PenTile. As technology improves, expect PenTile to eventually disappear. It already has on LCD's.
Pentile on resolutions below 720p - sucks and thats a fact. Those ppl on fb are/have used Pentile screens at lower res, 840*48X or even below, as the pixels can be seen and every object looks like as if they were stitched (lil dots) and not glossy smooth.
mythamp said:
Pentile on resolutions below 720p - sucks and thats a fact. Those ppl on fb are/have used Pentile screens at lower res, 840*48X or even below, as the pixels can be seen and every object looks like as if they were stitched (lil dots) and not glossy smooth.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of those people talking about that are probably using Moto devices, which many use a Pentile rgb-w arrangement.
Makes everything look like cheesecloth is overlayed on it.
ATnTdude said:
Traditional pixels on an LCD have three sub-pixels, red, green and blue. Each lights up at a different level to give you whatever color you need to. For yellow, the red and green pixels light up 100% and blue stays down at 0%. For white, they all light up 100%, gray, they're all ~50%. Etc.
PenTile, in essence, uses some clever tricks to use only two subpixels in each pixel. Every pixel might have a green pixel, but only every other one has a red pixel, with each empty spot being filled with blue. So when you want the same yellow color as before, some pixels will light up 100% (R&G) and others will light up 50% (since it has a green subpixel at 100% and a blue at 0%), creating a slight checkerboard effect that can be visible if the pixels are too large (like on the Nexus One).
However, the pixels on the GN are tiny. You don't see them in normal use. They don't cause many of the problems people ascribe to them (I've read complaints about color accuracy, banding and other crap), thus anyone complaining about them are usually being neckbeards or trolls. It would be preferable to have an RGB 720p vs PentTile 720p, but again you're really not going to notice unless you go look for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the issue is not wanting 720p rgb, it's about prefering having like 580p rgb over 720p pentile