Some products marketed as ‘QLED’ use conventional lighting architecture (standard phosphors, optical films, diffuser plates) and rely on picture modes or software adjustments to create a more saturated ‘lively’ look.” white paper Read by TÜV Rheinland and QD supplier Nanosys. The paper, titled “Redefining the True ‘Quantum Dot Display’,” also refers to devices with QD material “at trace levels or in packaging and integration designs that limit the excitation and emission of light at certain wavelengths.”
“In these cases, the display can still achieve competitive head gamut coverage, but the effective QD system has no measurable optical signature or is minimal,” the paper states. “At high brightness, spectrum, color, volume behavior, chromaticity stability and temporal response can remain similar to non-QD LCD solutions.”
For now, the German decision brings due scrutiny to “QLED” and other potentially misleading display terms.
A clear understanding of what constitutes QD displays is also important for QD-OLED displays, and will only become more important if true quantum dot electroluminescent displays are always up. (These displays that use non-backlight technology are also called QDEL or QD-LED.)
“A quantum dot display should be defined by a combination of material concentration and TV performance results that can be measured in terms of color purity, color gamut, etc. Ideally, in a way that consumers can understand,” Virey said.
A technical document from TÜV Rheinland and Nanosys claims that QD displays must meet certain performance requirements that go beyond the color gamut: “The display must provide the optical advantages associated with quantum dots, including spectral accuracy, tunability and stability, improved color accuracy behavior in terms of brightness (not just a 2D display, but where backlighting can be applied).
At a time when TV marketing remains murky and often misleading, examining detailed performance reviews remains the most reliable way to gauge how a display might perform in the real world.
