My question is - Why make the LEDs so small that there's 99% black space, when they lose efficiency AND are harder to deposit on the backplane? Just make them 1/4 the size they need to be for a pixel and go with that - it would be way less expensive.... right?
LEDs are the major cost driver in the display so smaller ones are less expensive. It then becomes a trade-off of performance, cost and manufacturability. There is no right solution here, just market options.
Thanks for the wonderful information on micro-LED TV. As you described, Laser-based mass transfer is a very promising method. After placing micro-LEDs on a glass backplane by a Laser process, we need an electrical interconnection process between the micro-LEDs' and backplane's electrodes. Typically, Samsung used ACF(anisotropic conductive film) for this purpose. Do you know what type of interconnection method is used in this 89 inch micro-LED TV?
Thanks Chris but thats Waaaaaay more info than I need. I really just wanted to known when I can buy one on a working persons salary and how much it will cost.
Are we at a stage where you can buy a 6x6 aarray, and upgrade to 7x7 array like 2 years later? Or is the new arrays 2 years lates incompatible with the current arrays
Assuming 4K (3840×2160) on the 89″ display, 6×6 modules implies 640×360-pixel modules. The pixel spacing is then 0.5mm (matching what was stated) and the modules are 328×185mm or 12.9×7.3″. I bet people would buy a 3×3-module, 45″ TV even though it would only have Full HD resolution. One worry for me about this technology is how well it would stand up to physical knocks. Maybe you can't see the borders between all those rectangular glass panels but how much will it take to shift or crack them? Not something you can test in the showroom; we just have to see how they go in people's homes after the price drops to make them more widely affordable. Existing mini-LED and OLED panels are surprisingly robust.
people might want a 3x3 but does rerquire special packaging as these are stand alone units, not built-up module as in digital signage. edge breakage would be a concern, I agree.
The marketing of LCD TVs, photo and video cameras has convinced consumers for too long that the number of K's is the main indicator of PQ)) Therefore, it is not certain that consumers will be able to be so easily convinced that resolution is not the main thing) A very valid point about the stability of the modular structure. The larger the size of the structure and the more individual elements it contains, the less reliable it will be. Now the final quality of the TV will depend not only on the presence of a manufacturing defect or inaccurate calibration, but also on the delivery service:/
@@InsightMediaTV1 You must be saying "off the shelf." But why can't they just make them 2.40:1 and let the picture get bigger for widescreen movies? The whole point of "big" is the picture gets bigger, not smaller.
for a home TV, you are right, power consumoption is not top of mind. But LEDs, even microLEDs need a lot of juice. You can always tell the relative efficiency by feeling how warm they are to the touch. Samsung's latest microLEDs TV were not that warm.
Wow, so cool to hear from an actual engineer on this subject! Glad i found your channel!
If it becomes popular in three to four years, I think this is another revolution in TV history.
it will take at least this long to get even to the top of the premium TV market.
nope
My question is - Why make the LEDs so small that there's 99% black space, when they lose efficiency AND are harder to deposit on the backplane? Just make them 1/4 the size they need to be for a pixel and go with that - it would be way less expensive.... right?
LEDs are the major cost driver in the display so smaller ones are less expensive. It then becomes a trade-off of performance, cost and manufacturability. There is no right solution here, just market options.
Thanks for the wonderful information on micro-LED TV. As you described, Laser-based mass transfer is a very promising method. After placing micro-LEDs on a glass backplane by a Laser process, we need an electrical interconnection process between the micro-LEDs' and backplane's electrodes. Typically, Samsung used ACF(anisotropic conductive film) for this purpose. Do you know what type of interconnection method is used in this 89 inch micro-LED TV?
I am not sure of the connection material but it shopuld be part of the laser mass transfer process. This is probably proprietary.
I do not. they did not reveal the solution.
Thanks Chris but thats Waaaaaay more info than I need. I really just wanted to known when I can buy one on a working persons salary and how much it will cost.
May I boldly ask how they are priced and when they will be available in Europe?
sorry, did not ask that question. It is the equivalent of $60K in Korea now.
@@InsightMediaTV1at least the price is going down
@@InsightMediaTV1 You mean 60k USD for the 89 inch microled? I heard it was around 100k USD in Korea.
Are we at a stage where you can buy a 6x6 aarray, and upgrade to 7x7 array like 2 years later?
Or is the new arrays 2 years lates incompatible with the current arrays
my understanding is this is not really an option as each TV is a fully packaged stand alone TV
Assuming 4K (3840×2160) on the 89″ display, 6×6 modules implies 640×360-pixel modules. The pixel spacing is then 0.5mm (matching what was stated) and the modules are 328×185mm or 12.9×7.3″. I bet people would buy a 3×3-module, 45″ TV even though it would only have Full HD resolution. One worry for me about this technology is how well it would stand up to physical knocks. Maybe you can't see the borders between all those rectangular glass panels but how much will it take to shift or crack them? Not something you can test in the showroom; we just have to see how they go in people's homes after the price drops to make them more widely affordable. Existing mini-LED and OLED panels are surprisingly robust.
people might want a 3x3 but does rerquire special packaging as these are stand alone units, not built-up module as in digital signage. edge breakage would be a concern, I agree.
The marketing of LCD TVs, photo and video cameras has convinced consumers for too long that the number of K's is the main indicator of PQ)) Therefore, it is not certain that consumers will be able to be so easily convinced that resolution is not the main thing)
A very valid point about the stability of the modular structure. The larger the size of the structure and the more individual elements it contains, the less reliable it will be. Now the final quality of the TV will depend not only on the presence of a manufacturing defect or inaccurate calibration, but also on the delivery service:/
Speaking of efficiency, I wonder what is the power consumption of these tvs.
not disclosed. Still a bit warm to the hand at front of screen, but cooler than most LED displays.
wen?
They don't have to be 16 x 9 do they?
of the shelf are 16x9, so other aspects are custom
@@InsightMediaTV1 You must be saying "off the shelf." But why can't they just make them 2.40:1 and let the picture get bigger for widescreen movies? The whole point of "big" is the picture gets bigger, not smaller.
Who cares about display display power consumption people only care about picture quality, response time , motion Blur and input lag.
for a home TV, you are right, power consumoption is not top of mind. But LEDs, even microLEDs need a lot of juice. You can always tell the relative efficiency by feeling how warm they are to the touch. Samsung's latest microLEDs TV were not that warm.
Drooling....