We always figured the digital photo frame market would have to grow up one day, and we're thrilled to know that day is coming soon. Over in Korea, Human-Rh has apparently showcased a couple of new frames that not only up the ante in terms of panel quality but also toss in a much-needed extra: mobile TV. The 7.6-inch HDPF-760D steals the show with a gorgeous AMOLED display and a built-in DMB tuner; the 8-inch HDPF-800D sticks with the traditional LCD, but it's available with a variety of tuners (1seg, T-DMB, DVB-T and CMMB) for regions around the globe. Naturally, both frames still do their basic duties of playing back slideshows, but the built-in WiFi also enables them to display information from internet-connected widgets. We're told that these arrive with 2GB of integrated memory, a multicard slot and a USB port, but mum's the word on pricing and release. Vid's after the break.
Erm....why exactly do we need TV on a digital photo frame? It's not like they're very portable, and they usually sit in a living room where a TV usually sits as well.
This is all cool and all, but is OLED or AMOLED cheaper to produce versus LCD?
That's really the overriding question about this technology, it's not a quality issue, it's a cost issue and whether or not OLED, is a cheaper technology to produce.
Most people, 89% of folks will just buy the cheapest technology, regardless of quality or battery life.
* Higher picture contrast * Lower power consumption * Much more generous viewing angles. This seems particularly important to me, since most digiframes on the market, even those in higher ~$200 price bracket, are made with notoriously cheap grade LCDs with viewing angles so narrow, it's impossible to really appreciate the pics unless you're standing squarely in front of frame. You may have a higher res in a larger digiframe product, but as the pixelcount is bumped the viewing angles still stay poor.
Having seen the Kodak OLED digiframe I can totally understand why they should have TV capabilities. They look nothing short of amazing (though a bit extremely reflective... think of newer Apple screens). But my god are the colours beautiful, the viewing angle is amazing, the blacks are just black, ...
I have to agree with r3loaded. Is it a TV that shows digital pictures or a digital picture frame that has a TV in it? Not sure this is going to fly with the public.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
posted May 26th 2009 9:29AM
Erm....why exactly do we need TV on a digital photo frame? It's not like they're very portable, and they usually sit in a living room where a TV usually sits as well.
well, it's almost the size of SONY's OLED panel.
This is all cool and all, but is OLED or AMOLED cheaper to produce versus LCD?
That's really the overriding question about this technology, it's not a quality issue, it's a cost issue and whether or not OLED, is a cheaper technology to produce.
Most people, 89% of folks will just buy the cheapest technology, regardless of quality or battery life.
An interesting product. But It'd toss out TV but kept AMOLED and WiFi, and packaged it in a more traditional-looking frame.
The advantages of AMOLED are:
* Higher picture contrast
* Lower power consumption
* Much more generous viewing angles. This seems particularly important to me, since most digiframes on the market, even those in higher ~$200 price bracket, are made with notoriously cheap grade LCDs with viewing angles so narrow, it's impossible to really appreciate the pics unless you're standing squarely in front of frame. You may have a higher res in a larger digiframe product, but as the pixelcount is bumped the viewing angles still stay poor.
Having seen the Kodak OLED digiframe I can totally understand why they should have TV capabilities. They look nothing short of amazing (though a bit extremely reflective... think of newer Apple screens). But my god are the colours beautiful, the viewing angle is amazing, the blacks are just black, ...
Looks very similar to the Kodak OLED photo frame, and in fact uses the same CMEL-made display:
http://www.oled-info.com/kodak-wireless-oled-picture-frame-0
Ron
Does it support FrameChannel?
Somebody tell them that glossy is totally 2008. No longer acceptable. Regardless, that's an interesting product. Looks pricey though.
I have to agree with r3loaded. Is it a TV that shows digital pictures or a digital picture frame that has a TV in it? Not sure this is going to fly with the public.