Has the upcoming LG G3 & Samsung S95C's BFI improved?

[Clear Motion Seeker]

I can't wrap my head around the people that get ecstatic over Dolby Vision & HDR strictly in terms of movie/TV watching. You're sacrificing motion clarity & persistence with both since using BFI defeats the purpose for both formats. You can't have it both ways. You CAN get HDR + 120fps when gaming, with zero sacrifices and if the HDR is actually quality HDR, then you're good to go! But with Movie/TV watching it's a double edge sword. I don't care how beautiful the DV or HDR looks, because the motion will just look sloppy and artificial.

Usually, that's the job of motion interpolation. Japanese manufacturers are usually more performant in this area than their korean rivals.
I can watch a movie without any motion processing of any sort because it's already a low FPS content (24 fps) and plan-by-plan filming is much more common than travelling and other fast moving scenes.
But with action games, you're permanently orienting the camera, so it's much more frustrating.

120 fps gaming is a bit better than 60 fps in a way that it feels more responsive as a higher framerate reduces the delay of input, but it's not the night-and-day difference from 30 to 60 fps.
And it barely reduces blur, which means that flicker is really necessary to eliminate this blur perception.

HDR is bit overhyped. Yes, it can be impressive sometimes, but it requires a significant amount of light, and therefore entry-level HDR screens are pretty much pointless. But other times it can look darker and washed out.

They can be nice options, like extra luxury features, but they are much behind motion in terms of priority.

At this point, in terms of movie/TV watching on HD TV's, overall, plasma is still king for those that actually value motion. far less flicker(looks natural), up to 1080p motion clarity & below 8ms persistence depending on the plasma, and noticeably less film Judder. Plus 1080p Blur-rays look better than on a 4K TV since there's zero upscaling, and there's less upscaling with DVD's.

It clearly depends on the upscaling quality. Sometimes the upscaling can be very good and can provide a sharper image with 1080p blu-ray than native resolution panels.
Honestly the difference between a 1080p blu-ray and a 4K one is almost pointless (or subtle, to give a better term) in terms of perceived sharpness gain.
The experience varies a lot depending on the master quality and the display itself.
Whereas the difference between DVD and 1080p blu-ray was obvious on a fairly small screen.

But ya, I'm throwing in the towel with my LG C1's Motion Pro HIgh/BFI setting just because the flicker is eye straining and super agressive on whites. If that weren't the case, and it delivered flicks in line with plasma or if they were just slightly worse I'd be content. BFI on my TV has near black gamma issues and excess shadow detail crushing, both both can be improved with a pro calibration. But you're still left with choppy film judder. It just makes certain character movements and panning shots look awful. Plasma has film judder too, but it's a lot smoother and more natural. Movies look more like movies on Plasma and CRT when all said and done.

Yes, these impulse based displays are naturally more efficient, tolerant and polyvalent with all kind of sources. Plasma is not as good as CRT motion clarity wise, but it's not far behind either.

BFI sacrifices too many important aspects of viewing comfort to obtain motion clarity, hence why it never feels satisfying overall.

I already feel like a sucker having forked over $3000 CAD for my LG C1 2 years ago. The colour volume and WRGB color in general are terrible unless you're opting for 'native' colour(which artificially changes the colour, but it's essential)but if you don't you're left with unsaturated lifeless colours which look absolutely terrible. This isn't an issue with QD-OLED, thankfully.

Yes, WOLED has always been known for its issues with color accuracy, and now they've completely removed BFI with 120 fps contents.

Plus the C1 has banding/gradient issues that aren't noticeable on my plasma. Sure my panny S60 can't get as bright as my Sony Wega trinitron CRT, nor can it match the 1ms motion persistence, but it's a hell of a lot more pleasing and natural to the eye than watching movies on any WRGB OLED. Yeah, the true blacks, brightness boost and whiter whites look beautiful on OLED, but i hate having to make sacrifices while upgrading in other areas.

Banding, uniformity issues and so on, have always been random even with older panels. I remember that some guys used to return 2 or 3 screens of the same reference before getting a unit that was acceptable to them.
I don't know how frequent it is with oled screens.

That's the bummer with oled : fantastic in a lot of areas yet can't get better than a LCD in a key part of a TV/monitor : motion clarity.

Ideally, i wish i could magically switch between a 65" Panasonic ST60(or Kuro) for Movies/TV shows, and then to a 65" Samsung S95C QD-OLED for Nintendo Switch & PS5. Game mode's motion interpolation option can improve motion drastically by forcing an artificial 120 for any 60fps title with just under 20ms of latency. That's a BIG selling point for somebody like me. Unfortunately, it's BFI still has nasty flicker and according to owners isn't viable for movies/TV. Another big blow, which is why I would only be willing to buy the S95C once it goes on sale

Normally, Oled could provide what we want with a better BFI or rolling scan algorithm. It's not gonna happen though, hence why i have to resort to the "past" by getting a plasma, for lack of better option.

I a way, i can't believe we have to remain frustrated so much. Motion clarity should be one of the main goals of visual comfort.

lol...By the Time Micro-LED(Since they'll have a lot more brightness to spare for BFI) becomes affordable, and TV manufactures actually TRY with BFI, and possibly deliver a 1ms motion persistence, 1080p+ motion clarity, with less film judder and BFI flicks I'll probably won't even care by that point. Seeing as how advanced AR & VR will be with companies like Apple etc.

The PSVR2's motion persistence(with brightness slider set to zero) is FAR better than ANY OLED using BFI on the market. I could of sworn that i read it was around 2ms...I've seen it first hand and it's very very good. But it isn't practical nor comfortable watching movies with a big chunky VR headset on your head. .....Apple VR is entirely different story, which would absolutely work!

With VR, motion clarity is essential in order to avoid headache. I don't know why they don't aim the same results with TVs.

[NeonPizza]

I can't wrap my head around the people that get ecstatic over Dolby Vision & HDR strictly in terms of movie/TV watching. You're sacrificing motion clarity & persistence with both since using BFI defeats the purpose for both formats. You can't have it both ways. You CAN get HDR + 120fps when gaming, with zero sacrifices and if the HDR is actually quality HDR, then you're good to go! But with Movie/TV watching it's a double edge sword. I don't care how beautiful the DV or HDR looks, because the motion will just look sloppy and artificial.

Usually, that's the job of motion interpolation. Japanese manufacturers are usually more performant in this area than their korean rivals.
I can watch a movie without any motion processing of any sort because it's already a low FPS content (24 fps) and plan-by-plan filming is much more common than travelling and other fast moving scenes.
But why action games, you're permanently orienting the camera, so it's much more frustrating.

120 fps gaming is a bit better than 60 fps in a way that it feels more responsive as a higher framerate reduces the delay of input, but it's not the night-and-day difference from 30 to 60 fps.
And it barely reduces blur, which means that flicker is really necessary to eliminate this blur perception.

HDR is bit overhyped. Yes, it can be impressive sometimes, but it requires a significant amount of light, and therefore entry-level HDR screens are pretty much pointless. But other times it can look darker and washed out.

They can be nice options, like extra luxury features, but they are much behind motion in terms of priority.

At this point, in terms of movie/TV watching on HD TV's, overall, plasma is still king for those that actually value motion. far less flicker(looks natural), up to 1080p motion clarity & below 8ms persistence depending on the plasma, and noticeably less film Judder. Plus 1080p Blur-rays look better than on a 4K TV since there's zero upscaling, and there's less upscaling with DVD's.

It clearly depends on the upscaling quality. Sometimes the upscaling can be very good and can provide a sharper image with 1080p blu-ray than native resolution panels.
Honestly the difference between a 1080p blu-ray and a 4K one is almost pointless (or subtle, to give a better term) in terms of perceived sharpness gain.
The experience varies a lot depending on the master quality and the display itself.
Whereas the difference between DVD and 1080p blu-ray was obvious on a fairly small screen.

But ya, I'm throwing in the towel with my LG C1's Motion Pro HIgh/BFI setting just because the flicker is eye straining and super agressive on whites. If that weren't the case, and it delivered flicks in line with plasma or if they were just slightly worse I'd be content. BFI on my TV has near black gamma issues and excess shadow detail crushing, both both can be improved with a pro calibration. But you're still left with choppy film judder. It just makes certain character movements and panning shots look awful. Plasma has film judder too, but it's a lot smoother and more natural. Movies look more like movies on Plasma and CRT when all said and done.

Yes, these impulse based displays are naturally more efficient, tolerant and polyvalent with all kind of sources. Plasma is not as good as CRT motion clarity wise, but it's not far behind either.

BFI sacrifices too many important aspects of viewing comfort to obtain motion clarity, hence why it never feels satisfying overall.

I already feel like a sucker having forked over $3000 CAD for my LG C1 2 years ago. The colour volume and WRGB color in general are terrible unless you're opting for 'native' colour(which artificially changes the colour, but it's essential)but if you don't you're left with unsaturated lifeless colours which look absolutely terrible. This isn't an issue with QD-OLED, thankfully.

Yes, WOLED has always been known for its issues with color accuracy, and now they've completely removed BFI with 120 fps contents.

Plus the C1 has banding/gradient issues that aren't noticeable on my plasma. Sure my panny S60 can't get as bright as my Sony Wega trinitron CRT, nor can it match the 1ms motion persistence, but it's a hell of a lot more pleasing and natural to the eye than watching movies on any WRGB OLED. Yeah, the true blacks, brightness boost and whiter whites look beautiful on OLED, but i hate having to make sacrifices while upgrading in other areas.

Banding, uniformity issues and so on, have always been random even with older panels. I remember that some guys used to return 2 or 3 screens of the same reference before getting a unit that was acceptable to them.
I don't know how frequent it is with oled screens.

That's the bummer with oled : fantastic in a lot of areas yet can't get better than a LCD in a key part of a TV/monitor : motion clarity.

Ideally, i wish i could magically switch between a 65" Panasonic ST60(or Kuro) for Movies/TV shows, and then to a 65" Samsung S95C QD-OLED for Nintendo Switch & PS5. Game mode's motion interpolation option can improve motion drastically by forcing an artificial 120 for any 60fps title with just under 20ms of latency. That's a BIG selling point for somebody like me. Unfortunately, it's BFI still has nasty flicker and according to owners isn't viable for movies/TV. Another big blow, which is why I would only be willing to buy the S95C once it goes on sale

Normally, Oled could provide what we want with a better BFI or rolling scan algorithm. It's not gonna happen though, hence why i have to resort to the "past" by getting a plasma, for lack of better option.

I a way, i can't believe we have to remain frustrated so much. Motion clarity should be one of the main goals of visual comfort.

lol...By the Time Micro-LED(Since they'll have a lot more brightness to spare for BFI) becomes affordable, and TV manufactures actually TRY with BFI, and possibly deliver a 1ms motion persistence, 1080p+ motion clarity, with less film judder and BFI flicks I'll probably won't even care by that point. Seeing as how advanced AR & VR will be with companies like Apple etc.

The PSVR2's motion persistence(with brightness slider set to zero) is FAR better than ANY OLED using BFI on the market. I could of sworn that i read it was around 2ms...I've seen it first hand and it's very very good. But it isn't practical nor comfortable watching movies with a big chunky VR headset on your head. .....Apple VR is entirely different story, which would absolutely work!

With VR, motion clarity is essential in order to avoid headache. I don't know why they don't aim the same results with TVs.

120fps on my LG C1 OLED when gaming makes a HUGE difference Vs regular 60fps without BFI. You're cutting down half the motion blur, doubling up on motion clarity, getting that life-like buttery smooth 120 and shelving latency down to 5ms without ANY compromises and it can be used in tandem with HDR(as long as it's quality HDR). The difference is Night and day if you have the right TV. Unfortunately, LED's have a slower motion response time resulting in more blur, so 120fps wont have as great of an effect compared to OLED.

Gaming on the S95C @120fps, or a fake 120fps by using it's game mode's motion interpolation feature is probably my best bet. It has BFI too, but you're losing half the brightness or more, there's flicks, most likely bfi shadow detail crushing and latency most likely wont be less than motion interpolations 19.4ms

[Clear Motion Seeker]

120fps on my LG C1 OLED when gaming makes a HUGE difference Vs regular 60fps without BFI. You're cutting down half the motion blur, doubling up on motion clarity, getting that life-like buttery smooth 120 and shelving latency down to 5ms without ANY compromises and it can be used in tandem with HDR(as long as it's quality HDR). The difference is Night and day if you have the right TV. Unfortunately, LED's have a slower motion response time resulting in more blur, so 120fps wont have as great of an effect compared to OLED.

Gaming on the S95C @120fps, or a fake 120fps by using it's game mode's motion interpolation feature is probably my best bet. It has BFI too, but you're losing half the brightness or more, there's flicks, most likely bfi shadow detail crushing and latency most likely wont be less than motion interpolations 19.4ms

I'm not denying the benefits of 120 fps, but it's still blurry overall despite the blur reduction induced by the higher refresh rate. That's the very limit of sample-and-hold displays.

To me it's not as enjoyable as 60 Hz on a plasma in terms of motion clarity, and CRT is even better in this category.

It's bit comparable to resolution : the difference is less and less obvious as much as you push higher definitions on settings. 4K offers 4 times the resolution of 1080p, yet the difference doesn't look 4 times better to our perception.

And i presume that future console games won't feature 120 fps, because the ones that are currently playable with such framerate are previous and cross gen titles, so it's easier to spare resources for better resolution and fluidity.

The S95C isn't the screen of my dreams as its BFI method seems to be comparable to what have been done so far, and still no Dolby Vision support as usual with Samsung TVs, which is a bummer for blu-ray 4K movies. Completely unforgivable at this price range.