Final Words

As far as accuracy relative to the sRGB standard goes, the OnePlus 3 is now in a great position. The last questions that need to be answered are what the relevance of this is, and how it changes my opinion about the phone. I'll start with the question of relevance, as it has generated some interesting discussions in the time since I published my original review.

In my view, having your phone target the color space used for content on the web is an important feature. Clearly not everyone shares this view, and we're all welcome to have differing opinions on this topic. However, from an objective perspective there is no question that targeting an irrelevant color gamut which causes severe distortions to content is not a good thing. When looking at things from a more subjective point of view, the situation becomes much less clear. Many people enjoy the oversaturated colors that wide gamut displays provide when software isn't color managed. I have no issue with that, but users who want an accurate display should have the option to enable an sRGB color mode, and that was the issue with the OnePlus 3 when it launched.

What I do have to disagree with is the idea that sRGB accuracy is a niche feature. Many readers and other commentators have made that assertion since I posted my review, and OnePlus maintains that stance as well. I think people value display accuracy more than some may think, and it isn't spoken of much purely because if your display is accurate then there's no discussion to be had about it; it simply looks as it should. While this is by no means a definitive piece of evidence, it is worth noting that Apple, the company bringing in most of the profits in the smartphone market, values color accuracy quite highly across all their devices. When moving to a wider gamut they put a great deal of effort into updating their operating system to enable the use of a wider color space for designing applications and artwork, while maintaining accuracy and compatibility with older devices, and they are really the only vendor that has properly executed the transition to wide color.

Targeting a common color standard has benefits beyond simply being "accurate" relative to some arbitrary gamut. It means that what you see on one device will look the same on another device, and this means that you can rest assured that the people you share content with will see the same colors that you did. In the world of creative arts you have people who spend hours editing photos and videos, drawing artwork, and designing websites and apps. In all of these situations, someone spent a great deal of time choosing exactly the right colors to bring their content to you. I think they would all disagree with the idea that being able to view their creations as they intended is just some niche feature that isn't worth the effort. sRGB is certainly not the widest gamut, and things are finally moving away from it, but that transition needs to be handled properly. The important thing is not that everything targets sRGB, but that everything targets whatever color standard has been chosen to be used across all platforms, and for the time being that standard is sRGB whether we like it or not.

While not everyone feels that offering an sRGB mode matters, and seemingly not everyone at OnePlus feels that it matters, it is apparent that there are engineers there who do. After my review was posted they were exceptionally quick to publish an update for review units that included an sRGB mode, and as you've seen, they did an excellent job of bringing the display in line with the sRGB standard considering that there must be some degree of variance from unit to unit that prevents precise tuning. Creating, validating, and publishing updates takes considerable engineering effort, so it looks like sRGB calibration is not too niche to be worth it after all. I haven't gotten a firm answer on when this update will rolling out to every OnePlus 3, but I've heard that it should be happening quite soon.

Now for the second question: how does this change my view of the phone? I mentioned this on Twitter the other day, but with this update the OnePlus 3 has become my daily Android device, as I had originally hoped it would before the display accuracy disappointed me. OnePlus has addressed the only issue about the phone that I felt truly hampered my enjoyment of it. My original recommendation was conditional in that you needed to not really care about display accuracy for the phone to be worth buying. It's unfortunate that OnePlus can't fix the relatively low brightness or address the low effective resolution that a 5.5" 1080p PenTile display provides, but every phone has issues and these are ones that I can live with. My only other complaint about the phone now is that the video recording isn't great, but it's still functional and not a deal-breaker at all unless you record a ton of video. After this update I can safely say that if OnePlus leaves these settings as they are then the OnePlus 3 should be seriously considered by all smartphone buyers, and it's a phone that I would personally recommend based both on its technical merit and how I simply enjoy using it on a daily basis.

Display Accuracy
POST A COMMENT

81 Comments

View All Comments

  • Brandon Chester - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link

    Yes, using our internal search is unfortunately a mistake. I believe it just sends the queries into a black hole. Best to use Google for search :) Reply
  • pillai86 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link

    Have you noticed that apps like Skype does not remain online and even some apps don't notify when it's pushed to the background? Skype status turns offline!! Reply
  • name99 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link

    Be careful that you are not confusing two different things.
    "Color Management" and True-Tone solve two (apparently OPPOSITE) problems.

    Color Management solves the PROFESSIONAL's problem: I want this content to be captured by a camera here, displayed on a device there, printed on a printer somewhere else, and to look IDENTICAL in all those situations, regardless of the camera, screen, and printer technology.

    True-Tone solves the AMATEUR's problem: I want this content to look "optimal" under different lighting conditions. Optimal is a vague sort of word but it is not the same as "identical".

    It's kinda like the difference between what a dermatologist wants to see when looking at skin (accuracy!) vs what a fashion photographer wants to see looking at the same skin.

    The reason we need the color management is because we need an agreement as to exactly WHAT "240 units of red, 180 units of green, and 27 units of blue" MEANS. This meaning is given in terms of objective physical measurements.

    The reason we need the second is that your brain doesn't actually see color in terms of objective physical measurements. This is not obvious --- after all your eye DOES see color that way. But your brain reinterprets the signal the eye sends to it depending on lighting conditions. So the question is --- do you want your visual device to be aware of and compensate for those lighting conditions or not.

    And the answer depends on what you are trying to do. If you are trying to "see movies and pictures looking as nice as possible" the answer is "hell yes, compensate"; if you are trying to match colors for whatever professional purpose (even something as simple as shopping for a dress) the answer may range from yes to no depending on the exact purpose, but no is probably the usual situation.

    [I do wonder how Apple handles this in terms of shopping for dresses. Has anyone tried this sort of thing? Are the shifts in color from True Tone enough that it would really make a difference?]
    Reply
  • stephenbrooks - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link

    I thought the distinction was even simpler than that: do you want colours that are intrinsically luminous (like lightbulbs, stars or fireflies) or colours that reflect the light around them (like paint, ink, most surfaces)? Reply
  • jlabelle2 - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link

    Not really. Issue raised by Brandon was about the OnePlus screen targetting a wider gamut screen without propre color managed OS. This resulted in oversaturated colors. ALL the time. Plus, targetting the NTSC color space, they were also completely wrong..
    Now, TrueTone is not impacting the saturation level, to make it simple, it is shifting the white balance. We cannot say this is intrinsically wrong as there is not one true universal white point value as the external lightning is impacting how we see colors. It derived from the 6500K "standard", that's it.
    Still, the impact is very different because you do not end up with fluorescent grass or red carmin tomatoes.
    Reply
  • BenSkywalker - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link

    Thank you Brandon, genuinely appreciate the follow up on several different levels. Couple things I wanted to point out following your article-

    Many people enjoy the oversaturated colors that wide gamut displays provide when software isn't color managed. I have no issue with that, but users who want an accurate display should have the option to enable an sRGB color mode, and that was the issue with the OnePlus 3 when it launched.


    I am not disagreeing with your sentiment *at all*- but would like to point out a bit of a double standard here. You find it a major issue if a person wants calibrated display but can't have it, but not once, not ever, have I heard you lament a sRGB calibrated display for *not* offering a wider color gamut option. In that same vein, I have what was, last time I looked, the best calibrated display for multi use purposes available and out of the two extremely accurate color modes and the one 'Vivid' option- every person I have asked liked the Vivid option the best(*horribly inaccurate*- this is with the option for ARGB or sRGB).

    You bring up Apple places a great deal of importance on this matter, along with mentioning they have the highest profits. The Tab S from Samsung beat the iPads pretty easily and were in relative terms a catastrophic failure(in terms of profits vs the iPads). Just saying, calibrated displays are just that.

    One final point, and one that I actually think is rather important.

    I walked outside the other evening when the sun started getting low on the horizon and, with the utmost sincerity- the first thing that popped in my head was 'it looks like sRGB out here'- yeah yeah, what a geek, whatever. Point being, the location in which you live and the ambient light you are adjusted to will *greatly* impact what you think looks natural. 30 degrees below zero pictures calibrated for sRGB white points look comically bad and insanely unnatural- just as a summer evening picture from Florida calibrated for Japan's NTSC white point would.

    One other minor thing, you bashed on the display pretty hard in your first review and I understand the point you were trying to make- but the reality of the situation seems to be that most of your issues had to do with the software the phone was using, outside of the pentile layout which nobody is a big fan of, it doesn't seem you had any issues with the screen. Not criticizing, mainly mentioning that you may want to stress the point in future phone reviews about the problems with the physical display(pentile) versus problems with the software(NTSC color target) that may or may not ever be fixed.

    Once again, truly appreciate your follow up, it was a good read and I do greatly admire follow through when there is controversy :)
    Reply
  • 3DoubleD - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link

    I appreciate your argument that the perception of natural color point is based on an individual's experience and perspective. One who lives in a cold, grey environment versus someone who lives is a warm, tropical environment, will have vastly different perspectives on white point and colors.

    However, I think this is one of the many cases where the masses need smarter people than them to make the correct decision for them. When you tested your colleagues' color mode preferences, you presented them with a choice of which they prefer, and they gave you their honest answer. This approach to validating usage of technology is fraught with peril though. A stronger metric is what people prefer in daily usage. One test gives an opinion of the moment, another test factors in the gamut (pun intended) of experiences that the person has with the technology.

    Now, consider a world where equipment manufacturers abandon sRBG for gamuts of their choosing, each pushing to have their own unique super-wide gamut that they think appeals to their customer base the most. I would argue that in such a world, customers (and businesses/artists/ect) would become frustrated with the inconsistency of how their content is being delivered (as argued by Brandon above). For example, online clothes shopping becomes perilous when the red tie bought ends up not matching... whatever a tie is supposed to match. In many ways, we just came from that world, with displays that notoriously poorly calibrated unless they were professional monitors. Why would we take a step backwards?

    I think everyone acknowledges that sRBG is in no way a superior choice, but it is a standard that is widely adopted. Brandon is correct, Android (as all OSes) should be updated to properly manage color spaces to facilitate the transition to wider gamut standards. Apple really led the way here (as much as it pains me to say that).

    Great update Brandon, way to hold OnePlus's feet to the fire! A friend of mine received his OnePlus 3 and was also super disappointed with the blue tint, he'll be thrilled to hear it will be fixed.
    Reply
  • BenSkywalker - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link

    However, I think this is one of the many cases where the masses need smarter people than them to make the correct decision for them.


    That, in a nutshell, is the difference between a loyal Apple enthusiast and the rest of the world. Personal choice vs decree from up high.

    Now, consider a world where equipment manufacturers abandon sRBG for gamuts of their choosing


    Like Adobe RGB which has been around and a vastly superior choice since the 90s? Wider color gamuts received no attention, until Apple decided they were important. Much like the abhorrent pixel density iPhones suffered for many generations- not important until Apple's "Retina" marketing campaign. OLEDs staggering advantages in contrast and pixel response also ignored- until Apple makes the swap at which point it will be the greatest thing since sliced bread.

    For example, online clothes shopping becomes perilous when the red tie bought ends up not matching... whatever a tie is supposed to match.


    That's as close to the worst scenario you could have used that I can think of. You want to make your decisions on what to wear under artificial cool lighting based on an afternoon sunlight model? Ambient light in a business environment is significantly 'cooler' than sRGB- it actually falls much closer to what would be considered a hard blue push versus what it seems most people are championing.
    Reply
  • Impulses - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link

    Asking people for their preference in colors WITHOUT a source image that's also accurately captured AND presents a familiar subject is pointless... Skin tones (on an accurately metered photo) are a good test that will often quickly dethrone the preference for over saturation.

    It's like audio testing, crank one device just slightly louder than the other and people will generally prefer the louder one, the doesn't even really mean they like listening louder... It just means we're terrible at assessing certain things when presented with unfamiliar choices.
    Reply
  • name99 - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link

    I think you have to look at this from Apple's point of view.
    Consider a person who owns a Mac, an iPhone, and an Apple Watch. Now suppose they see the same content on all three of them. It looks surprisingly irritating if the content looks different across the three. (I know this for a fact because it irritated me all the time.) This is especially obvious with faces because we are so sensitive to them --- it only takes a very slight color imbalance for a face to look too red or too green on one screen vs another, even when it is supposed to the same picture (eg the picture you have in Contacts for a person you communicate with frequently via messages).

    That is why Apple cares so much about color accuracy --- it is part of their larger them that you are not so much buying individual Apple products as that you are buying "modules" that represents different user interfaces into a single common Apple Computer held together by your Apple ID and iCloud.

    There's also (to put it bluntly) the issue of taste and price. I don't want to start a flamewar, but my experience is that the same people who are willing/able to pay more care more about visual fidelity/accuracy.
    I see lots of cheap TVs set up to stretch 4:3 content across a 16:9 screen; but I don't see the expensive TVs of my wealthier friends set up that way --- they're not prepared to put up with that visually inaccurate s***.
    Same thing going all the way back to QuickTime. Early MPEG (and some other codecs) used slightly non-square pixels (eg 1.1x wide compared to high). QuickTime, from day one, did the work necessary in the blitter to rescale the image to look correct on screens, whereas every Windows MPEG player of the era that I saw just couldn't be bothered --- it displayed the image with heads that were mis-shapen spheroids and nobody in the world of Windows appeared to care.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now