1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Sony Develops Hybrid FPA Technology, Lowers LCD Response Times

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Dec 2, 2010.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,201 (11.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,572
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Sony Corporation has developed "Hybrid FPA (field-induced photo-reactive alignment)", a new liquid crystal alignment technique which enables a significantly faster response time for liquid crystal displays. Fast responses of less than 3ms have been achieved in test cells through this technology. Aside from contributing to 'picture quality enhancement in 3D and high frame rate video', this technology will improve 'product stability' during the display panel manufacturing process as well as after long-term use. Additionally, this technology will achieve production efficiencies by reducing the manufacturing process and time.

    Sony previously developed the "FPA *1" high-speed liquid crystal response alignment technique based on vertical alignment (VA) liquid crystal modes. One method for improving liquid crystal response time is to generate pre-tilt of the liquid crystal molecules. "FPA" technique uses the alignment layer developed by Sony and maintains pre-tilt of liquid crystal molecules by irradiating UV while applying voltage in manufacturing process. This facilitates the stable and even alignment of the liquid crystal molecules *2, thus achieving improvements in both liquid crystal response time and the contrast ratio. In addition, this has made it possible to eradicate the Mura (uniformity problem) in the display as well as to eliminate the 'sticking image' that can occur after long-term use.

    [​IMG]

    The new "Hybrid FPA" technology is the result of further development of the aforementioned "FPA" technology with its superior features. "Hybrid FPA" technology has achieved an even faster liquid crystal response time by maintained the pre-tilt on just one side of the substrate alignment layer (see illustration). Furthermore, this new technology has succeeded in facilitating drastic improvements in liquid crystal response time, especially faster movement of liquid crystal molecule when decreasing the voltage which was previously difficult to achieve, as well as higher contrast.

    This technology will be presented on December 2 at IDW '10 (International Display Workshops), a display technology conference to be held in Fukuoka City, Japan from December 1 to 3.

    Sony is jointly developing alignment layer materials with JSR Corporation, a leading company in electronic materials and display materials, for early commercialization of this technology. Hereafter, Sony plans to further accelerate its development of the technology with JSR's highly functional alignment layer materials and stable material quality.
  2. FreedomEclipse

    FreedomEclipse ~Technological Technocrat~

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,394 (5.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,188
    truth be told - its not really the quoted response time of a monitor that makes a difference is weather that monitor can KEEP UP with that response time.

    most people wont be able to tell the difference between a 2ms and 8ms certified monitor. and in the real world - going from 8ms to 2ms makes very little difference if any at all and if there was you probably wouldnt notice it and the ONLY time you'd notice it was if the screen was 'ghosting' like a motherf**ker. only douchebags like Fata1ity Wendel would run an ad saying how he upgraded from a 8ms tft to a 2ms and really 'upped-his-game' and made him totally pro.

    trust me, most manufacturers have really low ms monitors. - you get the good ones, and then you get the bad ones. just because a screen is rated/certified for 2ms doesnt mean it wont lag and be more like 24ms. this happends all the time as TFT panels arent made totally equal just like processors. just because one dude can clock his i5 to 4.5Ghz doesnt mean that yours will do the same.

    though - saying that. manufacturering of TFT panels have really stepped up and they are generally getting a lot lot better meaning that if you buy a Samsung 8ms TFT - the same performance will be observed through out every single monitor of the same model number so their not all over the place unless you just picked up a duff screen
  3. 63jax

    63jax

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    47 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Location:
    Romania
    why do they still struggle with lcd's? oled is just around the corner and is better in any way than lcd. they better invest their money in oled production lines.
    D4S4 says thanks.
  4. BorgOvermind

    BorgOvermind New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    44 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    True, although the tendency for some tech like this is to be prolonged as much as possible.
  5. wahdangun

    wahdangun New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,512 (0.72/day)
    Thanks Received:
    114
    Location:
    indonesia ku tercinta
    because oled right now still expensive and hard to produce.

    btw i don't give a crap about response time, we need better quality LCD and higher density Dpi


    tbh i really confuse if LG can make super High Dpi density on apple iPhone 4G why the hell they can't make it for normal LCD monitor its not like its hard to make it bigger :rolleyes:
  6. Tartaros

    Tartaros

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    194 (0.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Location:
    Madrid, Spain
    It must be because of production cost. Maybe it's so expensive to make that type of screen and keep the monitors and tvs in an affordable price.
  7. FreedomEclipse

    FreedomEclipse ~Technological Technocrat~

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,394 (5.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,188
    good call but not a valid point IMO. A few years ago a 32" flatscreen TV would set you back about £800-1000+. EVEN NOW there are flatscreen TVs that can cost anywhere inbetween £2000-3000+ and obviously SOMEONE must be buying these TVs or else they wouldnt bother making them.

    Keeping stuff affordable is an entirely different subject as people are still willing to pay £2000+ for a flatscreen tv.

    a good 32" tv costs around £300-400 now.
  8. DRDNA

    DRDNA

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,768 (1.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    561
    Location:
    New York
    lol..... I work for the company that invented and patented the OLED technology.
  9. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,498 (1.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    930
    Give me a 240 hz, quick response, led, IPS, 21 inch 1080p monitor and maybe I'll buy another LCD. I have this same issue with smart phones, nobody has the balls to make a super product or the smarts to realize people will buy it, instead we end up having to pick between an assortment of half-assed crap. As for the future, at this point OLED is moving so slow QLED may beat it out as the true LCD replacement.
  10. Mandown

    Mandown New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Messages:
    303 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    That brings up a question, is it really necessary to have a 240Hz refresh rate. Isn't 120Hz more than enough?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page