We characterized the spatial resolution of organic light‐emitting diode displays of various sizes and formats including handheld and workstation devices. We observed in some cases significant signal crosstalk between adjacent pixels resulting in degraded resolution characteristics. Handheld displays showed improved resolution characteristics as evidenced by modulation transfer functions.

We report on the resolution and noise characteristics of handheld and workstation organic light-emitting diode (OLED) displays in comparison with liquid crystal displays (LCDs). The results demonstrate advantages, in terms of sharpness, of handheld OLED displays with modulation transfer function (MTF) values exceeding 0.60 at the Nyquist frequencies. The OLED workstation included in this study exhibits significant signal contamination among adjacent pixels resulting in degraded resolution performance indicated by horizontal and vertical MTF values of 0.13 and 0.24 at the Nyquist frequency. On the other hand, its noise characteristics are superior to the LCD workstation tested. While the noise power spectral (NPS) values of the OLED workstation are 8.0×10(-6) mm2 at 1 mm(-1), the LCD workstation has NPS values of 2.6×10(-5) mm2. Although phone-size OLED displays have superior resolution and noise per pixel, the perceived resolution characteristics at appropriate viewing distances are inferior to tablet-size and workstation LCDs. In addition, our results show some degree of dependency of the resolution and noise on luminance level and viewing orientation. We also found a slightly degraded resolution and increased low-frequency noise at off-normal orientations in the handheld displays.

The tone reproduction curves of an OLED display were measured and modeled as a function of three on-screen display (OSD) settings. The optimal OSD settings, derived from the model, outperformed two ICC profile-based color calibration kits by reducing the calibration errors from 2.89% to 0.25% and the quantization errors from 9.28% to 0%.

The goal of this study is to develop quantitative metrics for evaluating color tracking and gray tracking in a color medical display. Color tracking is the chromaticity consistency of the red, green, or blue shades. Gray tracking is the chromaticity consistency of the gray shades. Color tracking and gray tracking are the most important colorimetric responses of a color medical display because they directly indicate the color calibration quality and can therefore be used to compare color performance between displays. Two metrics, primary purity and gray purity, are defined to measure the color shift of the primary shades and gray shades of a color display, respectively. The area under the curves of primary purity and gray purity can then represent the quality of color tracking (C_AUC) and gray tracking (G_AUC), respectively. Fifteen displays including medical, professional-grade, consumer-grade, mobile, and special displays were tested to compare their C_AUC and G_AUC. The OLED displays have the greatest C_AUC values. The medical and professional-grade displays have the greatest combinations of C_AUC and G_AUC values. Most consumer-grade displays have lower C_AUC and G_AUC values, but some show better gray tracking than color tracking. The special displays exhibit particularly poor color and gray tracking. Using C_AUC and G_AUC together can quantitatively predict and compare color performance of different displays.

The goal of this study is to develop quantitative metrics for evaluating color tracking and gray tracking in a color display. Chromaticity consistency of red, green, or blue shades is color tracking, while chromaticity consistency of gray shades is gray tracking. Gray tracking and color tracking are the most important colorimetric responses of a color display because they directly indicate the color calibration quality and can therefore be used to compare color performance between displays. Two metrics, primary purity and gray purity, are defined to measure the color shift of the primary shades and gray shades of a color display, respectively. The area under the curves of primary purity and gray purity can then represent the quality of color tracking (C_AUC) and gray tracking (G_AUC), respectively. Fifteen displays including medical, professional‐grade, consumer‐grade, mobile, and special displays were tested to compare their C_AUC and G_AUC. The OLED displays have the greatest C_AUC values. The medical and professional‐grade displays have the greatest combinations of C_AUC and G_AUC values. Most consumer‐grade displays have lower C_AUC and G_AUC values, but some show better gray tracking than color tracking. The special displays exhibit particularly poor color and gray tracking.