>>198606660
i don't know

Yes.

>>198606660
Yes, if you get a good one it literally makes everything better.
Even older shit looks amazing because of the color/contrast ratio, and new stuff looks crips asf

LGs are the best (unless you're a richfag and want Sony) with the C series being the best price/performance,
but you can get an A or B series and still get a great experience.

Might be worth getting at least a 3.1 soudbar too since all tv speakers suck now.

Source: I work in the Home theatre department at Best Buy

>>198606660
No. You should get a quality QLED TV, similar nits and frequency, and longer subpixel life

>>198606660
yes, dont listen to the cope above me

>>198606660
I prefer my 4K projector to any of my OLEDs, so YMMV.

>>198606660
You need to get a job and save up. Once you have saved a lot, go buy the most expensive tv you can carry home in your trunk. If you do this, you might find yourself needing even more fun stuff. You will discover that in your search for more, you will always find yourself uncovering less than what you deserve. I just use a 2 year old tv, some guys need to always have the newest. This is a great way to keep our receptors firing. Nobody is here.

I bought an OLED last year, after having an LED for years. The picture is definitely better if you're using legit 4k content. If you're playing a 5gb rip, it won't matter, but you can easily tell the different with real 4k. Don't know about video games.

>>198608394
To ride on this, 4K streaming is not legit 4K content, and a good OLED TV will show those compression defects and horrible black levels to their full ugliness.

>>198606660
get a ULED and save hundreds of dollars for the same thing

>>198608427
>>198608394
Thank you for posting this, I enjoy when pieces of shit post quick facts for me. I actually do. I love to read your thesis. I've been meaning to tell you something important. Something significant. A plot twist. There's somebody in your brain. And he doesn't like you. If he liked you, you wouldn't be my slave WOULD you? If you keep reading beyond this point, it will be the last thing youll ever get to do. The last thing you'll ever get to see. I suggest you stop reading this. Stop reading this. Don't keep reading. You've now been confined to the rape zone for 10,000 years. I will be raping you in this zone every Wednesday afternoon after lunch. The only sounds in this zone are cold screams of the fallen stars of the seven hells. Calling it a seven hell is really real. Isn't that just the worst thing you could read? Were in hell.

>>198606660
Yes
Yes
Some will, some won't but overall it will be better
Yes

Look into Miniled's too if you need to budget

>>198608583
see you next wednesday anon... :(

>>198608583
sent :)

>>198608427
meh, for most scenes it's not that noticeable. disney, netflix etc have proprietary H265 encoders, not FOSS encoders (like x265). and web-DLs are still like 30 GB. in practice it's only noticeable in heavy foliage or sky shots and other slight gradients, which can have banding and blocking.

also I went from WOLED LG C9 -> QD OLED samsung and the QD OLED uniformity is 6 million times better. really almost flawless uniformity, which had a far bigger impact on picture quality than the brightness and top emission or lack of white subpixel IME

>>198606660
>Should I get and OLED tv?
They have all the flaws of LCD and Plasma combined, as well as some new ones of their own.
They are absurdly priced.
They are temporary stop-gap technology.

You are honestly better off getting a second hand plasma.

>>198608758
>disney, netflix etc have proprietary H265 encoders, not FOSS encoders (like x265)
They're ass. Proprietary or not,H265 encoding is lossy, and an examination of Bitstream from Netflix or D+ or the others shows just how badly the bitrate suffers (easily 50% reduction). The core streaming problem is getting it quickly across the wire, and that inherently means bitrate must be both variable and shit.
>in practice it's only noticeable in heavy foliage or sky shots and other slight gradients, which can have banding and blocking
It's also noticeable in motion shots and any scene that has stark black levels which is one of the points of getting an OLED TV to begin with

>>198608799
cope s90c has 75% rec 2020 coverage lol plasma is boomer tech. i got 77" for $1900

>>198608820
*examination of bitrate

>>198608820
bitrate is a meme anyway. picture quality is way more reliant on the display. the most important things by far are uniformity, delta error, and contrast/HDR pop. more than double bitrate looks nowhere close to 2× better PQ

OLED is a must if you enjoy kino. No question.

>>198608988
>bitrate is a meme anyway
Uh huh.
This is true when comparing bitrates of uncompressed sources of equivalent resolution. It's very much untrue when comparing a lossless source to a compressed video stream.

>>198608799
>second hand plasma
Aren't those really dim by now and have burn in?

>>198609017
remuxes aren't lossless, baka. the audio stream is, but the video stream is still lossy encoding.

for example if you're watching memevengers, you have to get the web-dl anyway to remove the artificially added letterboxing and it looks indistinguishable from the remux

>>198609094
I don't watch remuxes. I watch off original source.
Even then, there are lossless remuxes.

They still aren't as good as plasmas

>>198609062
>burn in
>plasma

>>198608820
>bitrate must be both variable and shit.
why would you ever want CBR for lossy encoding? different scenes are harder to compress. you want to allocate the bitrate whither it's needed

>>198609158
>why would you ever want CBR for lossy encoding?
Your premise is flawed. You don't want lossy encoding.
Also, variability is fine, it's a problem when your pipe is constrained by having to push video packets across the internet instead of from a player or local NAS to a TV.

>>198609114
wdym original source? remux means you insert the UHD Blu-ray and you run makeMKV and the remux is the mkv it spits out. the video stream in that is not lossless, that's lossy.
do you know how big uncompressed 4K HDR is? it's way bigger than 100 GB, the max size for a UHD Blu-ray allowed by the spec

>>198609192
I watch the blu-ray.

>>198608427
>>198608394
Basic bitch animal documentaries look stunningly beautiful on my lg c1 tv. Night and day difference tier. Everything looks better.

>>198609192
to be clear since you seem ESL, that means the video file burned on the UHD Blu-ray disc by the distributor is NOT lossless. it is lossy, encoded with a high bitrate that peaks above 100 megabits/s

>>198609215
you really seem to have no idea how basic video encoding or distribution works

No OLEDs are fucking trash lmao. It will enhance your gaming experience but do the opposite for movies. Literal dogshit tech. Watching HDR movies on an OLED is like watching SDR movies on LED. Shit is dimmer than a fucking theater.

>>198609222
I suspected this might be your argument, and it's smoothbrain tier. The blu-ray is effectively the original source for the purpose of consuming media. Watching the bluray or extracting a MKV is lossless in reference to that bluray.
If you prefer instead to consider original source to be a high resolution filn reel or digital master, then (1) you make a bold assumption that master is what streaming services are transcoding, and (2) their transcodes are still far worse than bluray source due to the nature of the streaming problem.

File: 1661125458836982.png (296 KB, 600x583)

296 KB PNG

>c2 costs twice as much as c1 while only being marginally better
This is stupid.

Sony is already ditching OLEDs so make of that what you will.

>>198609303
get a sony miniled

>>198609244
absolute poorfag cope
picture quality is literally about contrastmaxxing. the absolute number of nits is meaningless compared to how hard any emissive display contrastmogs any non-emissive display. 1080p HDR would look far better than 4K SDR
any LED with 6 gorillion nits still has shit contrast so it's pointless

>>198609331
You don't know how to read. Watching HDR on OLED is like watching SDR on LED. Watching HDR on LED has no comparison cause OLED can't even come close lmao

>>198609275
>you make a bold assumption that master is what streaming services are transcoding
??? what are you saying, you think they encode using the consumer blu-ray encode? that would be retarded and pointless
do you know what a DCP is?

>>198609369
>muh 6 million nits but it only looks good in outdoors scenes with 0 dark spots or contrast
>compared to any emissive display which looks good day or night any scene
actual poorfag

>>198609414
You're the poorfag if you have seen an LED tv with more than 5 local dimming zones lmao. Lg OLEDs are the cheapest tvs out there

>>198609379
Unironically yes, especially for shows thst aren't in house.
But more to the point, you as the consumer have no way of knowing or verifying.
And even more to the point, it doesn't matter anyway because the bluray is definitively superior in quality to what netflix and the like both want to and can serve you due to (again) the distanced nature of the streaming problem.

>>198609323
OLED, that is white OLED with diluted colors a la LG, is already obsolete

the future is inorganic inkjet gallium nitride nanorods. same brightness and durability as LCD except it's emissive like OLED, also cheap as shit to manufacture. the goy likely won't be allowed such tech

>>198609436
gave the LG to my mommy not my problem. samsung QD OLED brightness mogs anything

OLEDs are dead tho. MiniLED is the new king

>>198609323
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/04/meet-qdel-the-backlight-less-display-tech-that-could-replace-oled-in-premium-tvs/

It's weird lol

OLED is just something you have to sit down and immerse yourself in to fully be able comprehend how different it is

KINO

But at the same time, some people just don't care and just want a tv that works, same people who still buy dvd's

>>198610598
there are also a million steps where retarded default settings can screw you over
for example, on my fire stick it plays 4K HDR fine but by default it was set to 8-bit (16 million colors) when all HDR TVs support 10 bit (1.07 billion colors)
fucking pajeets man
most boomers don't realize you need pay extra for 1080p on netflix etc as well on top of the ads they have now

>>198606660
yes
yes
yes
so long as you don't pull out the icky hdmi cable

File: 1685557612535749.jpg (36 KB, 876x632)

36 KB JPG

>>198606660
I don't like seeing my reflection every time there's a dark scene
Might be something I'm doing wrong

File: 1547360886077.jpg (14 KB, 474x429)

14 KB JPG

>mfw rewatching all the movies on my new OLED

I'm interested but you need to have good control of the light in your room. I think mini/micro-led might be a more practical option as they become more popular

>>198606660
Oled is shit hence every top brand dropping it besides lg because its their baby.

>>198609515
As long as you have good amount of dimming zones 1000+ it will shit on oled.

Reading this thread has reinforced my satisfaction with deciding to not be an autist about video displays.

They are starting to make very bright TVs that use less power this year. OLED is good for certain content (films, video games, blu rays). If you only are interested in HDR I would get something new from Sony or wait. How many people watch OLED in pitch black areas? Probably not a lot. The benefit is color accuracy, view angles, and dark blacks for those, which is most content. In another few years you will enjoy HDR content and super bright TVs more.

>>198606660
No, it will burn in.

>>198608190
QLED is dogshit, even the highest-end models have image retention.

>>198613225
are you high? why would anyone use LCDs if they had burn in or image retention?

>>198612695
>he has fewer than 8,294,400 zones
ngmi in 6 million yrs