Do OLED and mini-LED screens fully surpass the image quality of even the best commercial cinemas?
Why is green overrepresented?
>>100192020probably no, but those best commercial cinemas have very huge projection equipments, so probably even the cheapest OLED panel in the market is better than the average cinema
>>100192044We see green better than other colors? Although that would have led me to think that it would be under represented
>>100192020just look at your pic and tell me it's the same quality as a 15000 watt lamp shining through celluloid
if you're don't something retarded like comparing the pixel density of an iPhone when put up against the screen of an IMAX theatre, sure
>>100192069it *is* underrepresented in OP pic. I guess anon just had a brainfart there
>>100192044https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicinghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter
>>100192044systemic racism
>>100192100>15000 watt lampDoesn't tell me anything without the image size to go with it.
A $300 TCL LED LCD television from the last few years has a better image quality than most cinemas that aren't Imax or Dolby Vision. Which is 99% of commercial cinemas.
>>100192179it's about 600x brighter than your pathetic display
>>100192921Without knowing the screen size there is no way to know how bright it is, anon. The brightness is divided over the area of the screen.
>>100192020Mini-LED has the halo effect which a typical 3-DLP cinema projector won't have. This is a fairly small disadvantage and overall the Mini-LED still has a better picture. But it does disqualify the specific phrase of "fully surpass".
OLED and mini-LED screens can have a flaw called "Dirty Screen Effect" which diminishes the quality of the image. This is usually a *very* minor flaw. But it doesn't exist with a 3-DLP projector (which has its own set of innate flaws).
>>100192921Consumer direct view LCD and mini-LED televisions can reach peak nits brightness levels far beyond anything any cinema projector (or home projector) can deliver.
>>100192100>celluloidA good majority of movies don't bother with film anymore. It's only really IMAX where things can be in 70mm film.
>>100194097It's more than "a good majority". It's 99.9%. Only 30 locations worldwide had the capability to play Oppenheimer in real 70mm.
I don't know the numbers but a big percentage, maybe the majority of commercial cinemas, don't even have the capability of 4k resolution. They are showing movies in 2k. People are paying to see what is basically a 1080p blu-ray blown up on a 20' screen.
>>100192020some commercial theaters already use miniLED, and will likely switch to microLED when it becomes affordable. However, DLP projectors have evolved and it is unlikely that your consumer display will surpass a high-end commercial cinema projector anytime soon.research this: https://www.christiedigital.com/products/projectors/all-projectors/christie-eclipse/
>>100194247While the projector is impressive, OLED can equal and exceed its performance. Recall that there are 8k OLEDs available today.Additionally, there are far more 4k blu-ray releases than films which are distributed in cinemas in 4k. Even if the cinema has a 4k projector it may only receive a 2k file to show.
My local cinema uses a shit-tier LCD projector with lots of ghosting and terrible blacks. It's also underpowered for the screen size so the image is dull. The kids working there have no idea how to change the settings so everything that isn't 16:9 gets the sides cut off.
...whatchu say whiteboy?
>>100194451nigga what size is that OLED? what it the refresh rate? how does it handle 3D? go the fuck back to redd!t
>>100192020absolutely not
>>100194816>sizeThey get extremely huge. Not as big as a cinema screen but the OP is specifically about image quality, not screen size. >3dSome OLEDs have this feature. It's not often requested by home users so only a few units get it. >refresh rateVastly higher than cinema projectors will display.
>>100194838Elaborate with technical details pls.
>>100194816>what it the refresh rate?A high-end professional 3DLP cinema projector like the one mentioned here >>100194247is still only 120hz refresh rate maximum.OLEDs go up to 480hz these days.
>>100195074Because cinema content does not go up to 60hz let alone 120hz. It's a nice to have but the cost of higher isn't worth it
>>100195074>buying a 480hz screen for 24fps filmspure retardation. go back to /v/
no
>>100195871You're argument has become incoherent. First you imply the refresh rate matters, then you don't.
>>100195884clickbait
>>100193970>DLPI remember seeing dlp had a real grainy look from all the tiny mirrors.
>>100192020>best commercial cinemasThey will surpass reality. Monitors already did at one aspect, which is refresh rate. Went way beyond 24 FPS of human limit.
>>100195884i want to make out with her
>>100198104That was probably rear projection DLP, right?These days the successor to the big boxy rear projection DLP TV is the Laser TV. Which is actually just an Ultra Short Throw projector with a TV tuner bundled with an ambient light rejecting screen all sold as one piece of kit. They are quite good at what they do for the price point.
This is a photo of a Formovie laser TV in operation.If I saw this and didn't know I'd just think it was a digital screencap.
Another example. Here you can get more of the sense it's a projected image.
>>100198293Only in a very dark room. As soon as you have any significant ambient light the image quality dives below the shittiest LCD televisions. Plus they still have rainbow effect even with the new three laser designs.
>>100198689But, turn down the lights...
Theoretically a person could build a rear projection television using a laser TV. There would be some degradation of the image quality but it would result in a HUGE television for not that much money that is viewable* in the daytime. *as much as any rear projection TV ever was, curb expectations harshly
>>100192044Purely socioeconomic factors
>>100198157Maybe your limit.I can see 60hz flicker
Most people here don't even look at display models and have no understanding of human perception. All those "huge" number changes matter a lot less in person in most real content you would actually watch. + no display is perfect no matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise. MicroLED is the closest we'll get and those won't be affordable for another decade. And even then, sample and hold is still a cancer among us and won't be mitigated enough until 500Hz+ becomes commonplace, and that's probably even further away than microLED. So buckle up like an adult and just buy something good enough. It won't be your last display and everything available today will look like junk in next to the new stuff in 3-5 years anyway. You are not a camera. You are most likely not a video professional (if you truly are, you'll be supplied an appropriate display).
>>100199505Just answer the question please.
>>100192103Every 2x2 block has one blue, one red, but two greens.
