PDA

View Full Version : LSD or not to LSD???



jonarcade
21st February 2010, 10:21 PM
If i were to use a LSD in a cocktail cab.Would viewing most LSD,s on the angle(in player 1 or 2 position)make the screen look a bit faint or loss of colour?
What's you guys opinion on this ????:blink:

narf_
21st February 2010, 10:27 PM
lsd mate makes really tripped out rainbow colours,slow movements and other funky shit

i think you mean LCD :lol

Homepin
21st February 2010, 10:29 PM
but he wouldn't get bogged easily :lol

headkaze
21st February 2010, 10:30 PM
I think you should get off the LSD. If you meant LCD's then I changed my cab to use one and the viewing angle is pretty shit. Some are better than others so I would definately be careful about that if you intend on buying one. I switched from a CRT because it was discolouring due to the car speakers I was using and nothing I tried could fix it. Now you have to be looking right at the screen to see what is going on (kinda sucks like that). I'd be extra careful on a cocktail cab.. I think OLED screens have better viewing angles but probably more expensive as it's a relatively new technology.

fringert
21st February 2010, 10:43 PM
lsd mate makes really tripped out rainbow colours,slow movements and other funky shit

i think you mean LCD :lol

:lol:lol:lol

jonarcade
21st February 2010, 10:49 PM
:redface

Red Series 3
21st February 2010, 10:50 PM
A LCD is ok, but a pc crt is usually a better price and easier to fit in my opinion.

retrogamer
21st February 2010, 10:53 PM
Yeah dude...like shit yeah, you know......I would...umm...like definitely go the LSD ....but forget that nasty LCD stuff.....its a bad trip man!

Just stirring! :D

Like Headkaze said, lcds are not generally real flash for the whole viewing angle side of things, but that said i have been fiddling about with some LCD TVs as opposed to LCD computer monitors and the viewing angle seems to be pretty good...have not actually put one in a cab yet so :unsure

narf_
21st February 2010, 11:10 PM
crt for the win

just so much easier and cheaper

elvis
22nd February 2010, 09:09 AM
I think OLED screens have better viewing angles but probably more expensive as it's a relatively new technology.
It also looks like OLED is not going to be what was originally hoped:

http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/02/21/1244257/Is-OLED-TV-Technology-In-Jeopardy

Apparently manufacturers are having major troubles getting decent lifespans out of anything bigger than 10-12 inches (you up the back, no rude jokes).

Lots of watches, music players and other small-screen devices are using OLED today, but in the 20" and bigger screen arena of monitors and TVs, it doesn't seem like the technology has the capacity to scale.

At this point, other than OLED, only SED seems to be a valid progression past LCD:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display

SED sounds pretty cool actually. Basically it's a micro cathode ray per pixel. So it's got all the pros of CRT (vivid colours, true blacks, etc) and all the pros of flat screens (huge size, thin, etc).

Crafty
22nd February 2010, 09:27 AM
I used a 15"LCD screen in a table top and for both players it's no problems. For spectators it can be difficult to view at some angles.

jonarcade
22nd February 2010, 04:55 PM
Thx 4 the LSD ...er.... LCD advice:redface (need more sleep:sleep)

Homepin
22nd February 2010, 05:01 PM
LSD = Lysergic acid diethylamide

LCD = Liquid Crystal Display

Nothing like each other....:lol

Prof
22nd February 2010, 06:17 PM
but do about the same damage when taken orally :D

Homepin
22nd February 2010, 06:29 PM
but do about the same damage when taken orally :D

The glass would be a bit crunchy I imagine???

Prof
22nd February 2010, 06:59 PM
Crunchy and gritty :D

@lien_Zed
22nd February 2010, 08:03 PM
:lol:lol:lol

nigelicious
22nd February 2010, 08:35 PM
+1 on the LSD.

headkaze
23rd February 2010, 12:34 AM
Apparently manufacturers are having major troubles getting decent lifespans out of anything bigger than 10-12 inches (you up the back, no rude jokes).

You have me worried now as my MacBook has a 15" OLED display :blink:

I'm interested in the iPad's IPS display and wonder if Apple will be changing it's MacBooks to use it.

elvis
23rd February 2010, 08:58 AM
You have me worried now as my MacBook has a 15" OLED display
MacBooks (and MacBook Pros) don't use OLED. They have a LED-backlit LCD display. (As opposed to standard fluorescent tube backlit displays).

It's very easy to get the terminology confused. LED-backlit LCDs are often advertised as "LED screens", which confuses the issue. I've had a number of people recently tell me they're using large OLED screens in their TVs, not realising that it's still LCD technology, just with LED back lighting. Again, the marketing materials that places are using don't give a very clear distinction (which I cynically believe is intentional).

OLED is a newer technology where organic semiconductors can emit light directly when given a charge. LED backlit LCD takes the normal LCD technology, and merely uses an array of small white LEDs behind them to provide a light source through the LCD colour filter.

The advantage of LED backlit LCD is that it's cooler to run (no big inverters needed for the fluoros), and you get a more even light source (you can see light and dark patches in most LCD monitors and TVs driven by fluoros where the tube snakes around the display).

Homepin
23rd February 2010, 09:41 AM
The advantage of LED backlit LCD is that it's cooler to run (no big inverters needed for the fluoros), and you get a more even light source (you can see light and dark patches in most LCD monitors and TVs driven by fluoros where the tube snakes around the display).

and they use a LOT less power and so suit mobile/battery operated devices better IE laptops

elvis
23rd February 2010, 10:09 AM
Yes, absolutely. For the short term, they're ideal for mobile phones, netbooks, tablets and other small devices, as mentioned.

Interestingly enough, OLED has found a bit of a market in watches. The small screen size and low res seem to suit that technology better than monitors and TVs do.

AskJacob
23rd February 2010, 11:33 AM
At this point, other than OLED, only SED seems to be a valid progression past LCD:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display

SED sounds pretty cool actually. Basically it's a micro cathode ray per pixel. So it's got all the pros of CRT (vivid colours, true blacks, etc) and all the pros of flat screens (huge size, thin, etc).

Hmm.

Isn't this what we know as 'Plasma' TVs these days? SED never took off as a good marketing name.

They do have the same flaws as CRTs too (e.g. burn in) as we have nutted out in the past.

Until I get my u-power flexible oled/eink/whatever panel film we have been promised for about the past 10 years now, I will continue to grumble.

Cheers
Jacob

elvis
23rd February 2010, 03:30 PM
Isn't this what we know as 'Plasma' TVs these days?
No, Plasma is different. Plasma pushes electrons through inert gasses to excite them into the next state of matter, generating the colours and light.

SED uses a cathod/anode combination to illuminate the phosphors on the screen. This is much closer to how a CRT works. Much like transistors went from vacuum tubes to semiconductors, CRT -> SED is a similar sort of evolution.


Until I get my u-power flexible oled/eink/whatever panel film
From what I hear from my engineering buddies overseas, it sounds like the much-hyped e-ink is already dead!

Prof
23rd February 2010, 04:04 PM
What about the one with the butterfly technology? That would be nice, the brighter the area its displayed in, the brighter the picture. Can't remember the name of it tho.

elvis
23rd February 2010, 04:27 PM
What about the one with the butterfly technology? That would be nice, the brighter the area its displayed in, the brighter the picture. Can't remember the name of it tho.
Never heard of it, but it sounds interesting.

I'm assuming it uses a crystalline structure similar to butterfly wings to split light into colours and reflect/refract the correct wavelengths? As you mentioned, the more light coming in, the better that technology would look, which makes it perfect for daytime viewing.

Prof
23rd February 2010, 04:35 PM
thats about it. Read it in PopSci a few months ago. The pull the lower layer to the colour they want.

http://upcoming.current.com/search?q=Color+e-reader+uses+butterfly-based+technology+to+save+power

http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/02/15/color-e-reader-uses-butterfly-based-technology-to-save-power/

heres something
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light-emitting_Electrochemical_Cell

Electrofluidic Display Technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Wiki_letter_w.svg" class="image"><img alt="Wiki letter w.svg" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Wiki_letter_w.svg/40px-Wiki_letter_w.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/6/6c/Wiki_letter_w.svg/40px-Wiki_letter_w.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrofluidic_Display_Technology)

http://www.mirasoldisplays.com/index-mirasol-display-technology.php

is the makers