"Super" AMOLED? No thanks...

[EnergyPlus]

I have been surprised at the rather complacent response from many regarding the proliferation of so called "Super" AMOLED screens. For me, that alone is sufficient to keep me from purchasing a device that might, in all other comparisons, excell. After all, it is the screen that is the most obvious impression of a phone. I would rather make a sacrifice in battery or speed or something else and keep an acceptable screen.

As a professional photographer, I'm very focused (no pun intended) on screen presentation. I've spent more than a few hours in the stores comparing images stored on my website from phone to phone. I've never seen Super AMOLED (I have to laugh at the word "super" as I feel it's anything BUT "super!") that displayed anything near even minimally acceptable. Dull, off tint colors that are super saturated to compensate simply don't do it for me. One of my best comparisons is to compare a black and white image from screen to screen. All of the SA screens display the blacks and anything but black and with an underlying tint. The whites are totally unacceptable, with a yellow/green cast that simply ruins the image for me.

Honestly, the best and most accurate display is the iPhone, but I'm not even thinking of going there, shoot me if I do. My Bionic is a great comprimise in my opinion. For a phone, the color accuracy and contrast is more than satisfying, sharpness and resolution is acceptable (I don't get the whole pentile argument, the images, even when examined up close and critically, are more than acceptable) and performs better outside then any SA I've seen.

All this being said, most folks I talk with are rather complacent and accepting of the SA shortcomings. I wanted to upgrade my phone to extend my unlimited contract but really, nothing out there was satisfactory. I sure wish SA would get it's act together and give us a quality that was at least somewhat better. Oh, wait, that's what the "super" part was supposed to do! Fail!

 

[jonathanm1978]

I'm going to just say this, because it's my honest feelings on the matter:

I'm not going to give up my 55" LCD, my 46" LCD or even my 24" Toshiba LED that's on my desktop to use a phone screen instead...

I look at simplicity in the matter...a phone is just that... : A phone. In two years, there'll be something bigger + better + more tech advanced...so just because the screen isn't the latest, greatest there is or doesn't have 1080p x2 hi-def graphics doesn't mean much. It is only going to serve a purpose for so long, then it'll be outdated and put in a drawer, IF it's lucky...if it's like most of my phones, after contract is up, there either are given to my kids to play with, or used to prop up a table.

 

[EnergyPlus]

Jonathan: I agree 100% with your comments. That being said, I should have added a small caveat to my post. As a photographer, screen display is important to me. So, while I agree I don't feel compelled to jump in on every advancement that comes along, I do feel the need for an acceptable display that at least does my photography justice. I would hate to show my clients on-the-spot samples of my work that don't even do a cell phone display, justice. I spent a lot of money buying a high end display for my computer and then more money to purchase a screen calibration device and sotware and I run it every two weeks so that I KNOW what the correct gamma/contrast is supposed to be there (I know, a moot point if my client's monitor has never been calibrated since they purchased it 4 years ago, but at least I have solid ground to stand on).

I love big phone displays, but I just regret the fact that so many of the newest phones seem to rely on this rather crummy technology.

I'm going to just say this, because it's my honest feelings on the matter:

I'm not going to give up my 55" LCD, my 46" LCD or even my 24" Toshiba LED that's on my desktop to use a phone screen instead...

I look at simplicity in the matter...a phone is just that... : A phone. In two years, there'll be something bigger + better + more tech advanced...so just because the screen isn't the latest, greatest there is or doesn't have 1080p x2 hi-def graphics doesn't mean much. It is only going to serve a purpose for so long, then it'll be outdated and put in a drawer, IF it's lucky...if it's like most of my phones, after contract is up, there either are given to my kids to play with, or used to prop up a table.

 

[Mooncatt]

I'm right there with you on the display. I tried the Razor and promptly exchanged for the Bionic because of the green tint. (oddly enough, while the Bionic processor is a bit slower, it's the exact same one as used in the Razor) I work and drive a lot at night and use the GPS a lot, and the darker you make the backlight, the worse the tinting. Adding a screen filter app to darken more only makes it worse.

From what I've determined after talking to people and sales reps, the green isn't too noticeable to the average person in bright ambient light. It wasn't until I did a side by side comparison between the Bionic and Razor that people noticed the difference. I had also heard of a new AMOLED screen that's supposed to have a pure white pixel to do away with the tint issue, but no idea what phone it's on or going to be on.

 

[EnergyPlus]

Thanks, Moon. For a while there, I was thinking I was the oddball. Your point about side-by-side is exactly what I've been saying. No matter the device, TV/Pad/Phone, when evaluating a display, you should always do side-by-side, of the same image or video, to tell the difference. NEVER look at the images independantly or else, flaws may escape you. Unless you have a trained eye (which, after thirty years as a photographer, I do), things will slip by. The problem is, those faults will begin to become recognizable to you over a period of time. Or, you might get headaches or suffer from eye strain.

I remember back when color TVs first were becoming popular (yeah, there was a time....I'm an old fart). I would be visiting a friend's house and the TV might be on in the background. Purple faces, green hair, orange ocean, etc., drove me nuts. Many a time I would find myself saying "Excuse me, but would you mind if I made some adjustments to your tv picture?" Usually, they'd look at me as though I was from Mars, but say "sure, go ahead, but what's wrong with it?" Two minutes of adjusting and I'd step back and suddenly, they'd all be saying "wow, yeah, that looks MUCH better!"

A few months back, while in the Verizon store, I was perusing the then new Razors. I was so disappionted in the displays. When I mentioned this to my favorite VZW rep, she was puzzled. So, I pulled my Bionic out, navigated to my own website, to a particular black and white photo, and then did the same on the Razor. Laying the phones side-by-side, I asked "notice anything different?" She was astonished, saying, "I will never be able to look at these the same again!"

The very weird thing is, rarely do I see any mention of this in critical reviews. If they mention it at all, it's usually something akin to "amazing display." On very rare occasions, I'll read "slight yellowish cast." SLIGHT??? LOL!

Interesting point your bring up about some future version. I would greatly welcome seeing that!

 

[jonathanm1978]

In the end, yes the displays might suck... but I wouldn't buy a van Gogh final print based on the picture on a phone display..
I think the reason it gets somewhat of a free pass is everyone knows it's just a phone and can only show such detail before you're paying $1000 for the screen and $25 for the cell radio inside.

 

[Mooncatt]

I don't think you have to go to extremes. I mean look at the Bionic's Super LCD. It shows pure white and isn't even Verizon's flagship phone. So when they are so heavily pushing something like the Razor, you'd expect it to have at least a comparable display. Sure, being thin is nice, but are people that gullible to advertising that they would choose form over function?

Well, the Smart Actions would be a killer app to have on the Bionic too, but is considered incompatible with that app in the market.

 

[1812dave]

I have been surprised at the rather complacent response from many regarding the proliferation of so called "Super" AMOLED screens. For me, that alone is sufficient to keep me from purchasing a device that might, in all other comparisons, excell. After all, it is the screen that is the most obvious impression of a phone. I would rather make a sacrifice in battery or speed or something else and keep an acceptable screen.

As a professional photographer, I'm very focused (no pun intended) on screen presentation. I've spent more than a few hours in the stores comparing images stored on my website from phone to phone. I've never seen Super AMOLED (I have to laugh at the word "super" as I feel it's anything BUT "super!") that displayed anything near even minimally acceptable. Dull, off tint colors that are super saturated to compensate simply don't do it for me. One of my best comparisons is to compare a black and white image from screen to screen. All of the SA screens display the blacks and anything but black and with an underlying tint. The whites are totally unacceptable, with a yellow/green cast that simply ruins the image for me.

Honestly, the best and most accurate display is the iPhone, but I'm not even thinking of going there, shoot me if I do. My Bionic is a great comprimise in my opinion. For a phone, the color accuracy and contrast is more than satisfying, sharpness and resolution is acceptable (I don't get the whole pentile argument, the images, even when examined up close and critically, are more than acceptable) and performs better outside then any SA I've seen.

All this being said, most folks I talk with are rather complacent and accepting of the SA shortcomings. I wanted to upgrade my phone to extend my unlimited contract but really, nothing out there was satisfactory. I sure wish SA would get it's act together and give us a quality that was at least somewhat better. Oh, wait, that's what the "super" part was supposed to do! Fail!

As a serious non-professional (hobbyist) photographer, I am very very critical about color too. I find it laughable to even entertain the thought of viewing (prior to printing or sending a file to a print service) or critiquing a photo of mine on anything less than my color corrected, wide gamut monitor. Every thing else I view images on is so far off of accurate, that I only view images on other screens for anything other than for my hobby.

 

[Sandman333]

I have a Razr MAXX. The screen is satisfactory for now. There were other factors besides the screen that influenced my decision. I'm hoping by the time I'm ready for my next phone that OLED will have matured and be the new standard (with full 1080P displays on a phone).

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[The Hustleman]

I see why display is important to you but without a side by side comparison, most people wouldn't notice or care.

They talked how bad the evo screen is, but I never noticed or cared until I had an htc one s for a few days

*swyped from the evo so excuse any typos*

 

[WebOS Refugee]

Smart Actions would be a killer app to have on the Bionic too, but is considered incompatible with that app in the market.

There is a version for the BIONIC -- I downloaded it from somewhere a while back, but darned if I can find the source right at the moment. In any event, I found it to be fairly lame, and I replaced it with Tasker: not free, but way more capable.

 

[jding88]

I agree with you 100%. I think that the "Super" AMOLED screen makes everything look too cartoony for my taste. I got the bionic when it first came out, and my brother got the galaxy S II. Personally I'd rather have my screen over his. This is probably one of the few things that i'll say Apple has over android. Those retina displays are very nice. Fortunately being a Bionic owner who bought the phone when it first came out, I can only hope that when it is time to upgrade my phone there will be better technology out there than super AMOLED. (hopefully something like apple's retina display)

 

[KillerG]

Have you looked at the LCD screens on the One X and EVO4GLTE? Phil continues to say that they're the best screens he's seen.

 

[KillerG]

I don't think you have to go to extremes. I mean look at the Bionic's Super LCD. It shows pure white and isn't even Verizon's flagship phone. So when they are so heavily pushing something like the Razor, you'd expect it to have at least a comparable display. Sure, being thin is nice, but are people that gullible to advertising that they would choose form over function?

Well, the Smart Actions would be a killer app to have on the Bionic too, but is considered incompatible with that app in the market.

The new ICS leaks have Smart Actions baked in. Everyone will have it when we get the OTA.

 

[BasPilot]

. The whites are totally unacceptable

Now that's just racist.

 

[Mooncatt]

Now that's just racist.

*facepalms* XD

 

[anon(40232)]

I was under the impression that the super saturation of the Super AMOLEDs was to boost the screen's performance in bright outdoor ambient lighting. Most of the time when comparing screens side by side, one is indoors under florescent lighting.

I went from a Fascinate to a Bionic, and I found the Bionic's screen just as good. I'm not picky.

 

[jonathanm1978]

I was under the impression that the super saturation of the Super AMOLEDs was to boost the screen's performance in bright outdoor ambient lighting. Most of the time when comparing screens side by side, one is indoors under florescent lighting.

I went from a Fascinate to a Bionic, and I found the Bionic's screen just as good. I'm not picky.

I picked up SGS3 and I love it. Pictures are absolutely wonderful for my liking, like this one...check out a quick pic I snapped of my niece yesterday...no time to adjust for perfection or quality..a really fast snap-n-go and it turned out to be one of the best pics I have (phone-taken) of my niece. It captures her smile at just the right time..shows enough detail of the scenery..etc. Outdoors, sunlight, sitting in my Expedition.
View attachment 32091

 

[malignanttheories]

@jonathanm1978:

Everyone seems to be discussing the way the phone displays colors, not the way the camera captures images... To see what they're comparing, take a look at the photo viewed on the phone right next to the photo on your computers' screen.

 

[jonathanm1978]

@jonathanm1978:

Everyone seems to be discussing the way the phone displays colors, not the way the camera captures images... To see what they're comparing, take a look at the photo viewed on the phone right next to the photo on your computers' screen.

I realize that, but looking at the same pic on my 24"Toshiba LED doesn't show many anything I can really complain about (I'm also viewing this on my phone right now). Just to the average user, I think this screen is great...and if I'm not mistaken doesn't this phone (S3) have gorilla 2? I'm just average with photo stuff though, I love snapping pics though.

Swype'd with my Sammy Galaxy S3