2017 OLEDLifetime only 5000 hours with OLED Light 100 - Page 6 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 141Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #151 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 02:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,638
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4303 Post(s)
Liked: 3733
Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisPNW View Post
Yeah I hear ya on that. My panel is by no means perfect, but it's close enough where I decided I won the panel lottery and let it go. The banding is very minimal... I haven't seen it during content... only during a couple stress tests of shows I don't even watch.

I have a slight yellow tint that shows up on certain whites. Whatever your viewing angle is (left/middle/right) is where you'll see it. Move and the tint moves with you. I asked ChadB what it was when he calibrated and he said it's a slight color uniformity issue. Doesn't bother me, but it's there.

Hopefully my next panel will be better (I'm thinking 2020 for the upgrade) but I'm totally happy with my 65" B7. There is no perfect TV tech and I'm not going to worry myself to death over these flaws in what I consider to be the best option for premium PQ. I went straight to OLED from plasma and recently purchased a bedroom LCD and man can I see the differences.
Yes, likewise from plasma to OLED here due to not being happy with plasma blacks (the prospect of 0 blacks was too enticing)! Good news is the comp. cycle returned the screen to baseline, which isn't quite up to my standards but at least an improvement over what I was seeing.
video_analysis is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #152 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 02:47 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 15,356
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4344 Post(s)
Liked: 3082
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post
Thanks for posting this. I had no idea that this was something that happened. That being said, my LG B6 purchased in January 2017 is on 5015 hours of mixed content. I had my TV calibrated a month after buying it by ChadB. For normal content, the Backlight is set to 58. A majority of my content is DirecTV, followed recently by a lot of PS4 games in HDR (650 hours of Monster Hunter World) and 4K movies about once a week.

I just quickly put up a full red screen (4:3 Test Pattern is all I had) and took a picture with my crappy phone.

Why do people keep posting pictures of solid red screens to try dispute lifetime claims? It's like no one understands what the thread is about. If you had measured the luminance of the screen every 100 hours and had a graph of that you'd have some interesting data, but a photo doesn't demonstrate anything about luminance regardless of how uniform the screen still looks.
fafrd and KidHorn like this.
Stereodude is offline  
post #153 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 03:04 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Why do people keep posting pictures of solid red screens to try dispute lifetime claims? It's like no one understands what the thread is about. If you had measured the luminance of the screen every 100 hours and had a graph of that you'd have some interesting data, but a photo doesn't demonstrate anything about luminance regardless of how uniform the screen still looks.
Amen (at least there is a member or two out there who understands the intended subject of the thread ).

In all honesty, when I first started the thread it was out of concern that the nonuniformity that materialized in the center of the red field in the rtings.com 2017 CNN Max test represented aging/nonuniformity from truly random content(which would be quite bad).

With the passage of a few more weeks and a few more hundreds of hours of CNN, the shadow has developed into a clear outline of a talking head, so the center the screen of a TV displaying CNN is not truly random and on the one hand the concern about 5000 hour lifetime @ OLED Light listed in the title was misplaced and on the other hand, burn-in has understandably polluted the discussion.

What would really help this or th 10,000 hour thread would be to get a calibrator to join in - perhaps I should reach out to Buzz767 .
fafrd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #154 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 03:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JonW747's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Confuzzeled23 View Post
Anyway, my question in relation to this thread. I run my set at Brightness 100 with the light sensor on. Is this an okay setting? Due to the lighting in my living room it rarely actually is displaying at 100% brightness as darker movies I will disable the light sensor setting and the TV will drastically brighten. I don't want to watch dim television just because there may be some potential risk. I want to view this TV at it's max beautiful picture which is what I spent my hard earned money on.

As long as you're not abusing the TV, the only thing you'd be "harming" by watching at a high brightness setting is the brightness of your TV. Best case is to adjust the brightness to your needs, and it sounds like the light sensor is doing exactly that for you. Beyond that ... when watching something non-critical with a lot of static content, you could switch to a lower light setting.


The brightness of the OLEDs is a feature over the Plasma's and RPTV's that came before. Of course you should take advantage of it and enjoy it.
fafrd likes this.
JonW747 is offline  
post #155 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 04:57 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 78
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
Amen (at least there is a member or two out there who understands the intended subject of the thread ).

In all honesty, when I first started the thread it was out of concern that the nonuniformity that materialized in the center of the red field in the rtings.com 2017 CNN Max test represented aging/nonuniformity from truly random content(which would be quite bad).

With the passage of a few more weeks and a few more hundreds of hours of CNN, the shadow has developed into a clear outline of a talking head, so the center the screen of a TV displaying CNN is not truly random and on the one hand the concern about 5000 hour lifetime @ OLED Light listed in the title was misplaced and on the other hand, burn-in has understandably polluted the discussion.

What would really help this or th 10,000 hour thread would be to get a calibrator to join in - perhaps I should reach out to Buzz767 .

Well, I've tried something for you :

here is the red slide from RTINGS' 20/7 burn in test (week 64 = 8960 hours ) . I've measured the red luminance on three different points :

-the "T" from the RTINGS logo in the upper left part of the screen : this letter has been totally black since the beginning of the test , so it's like new .

-the upper letterbox bar ( 3258 hours black , 5700 hours with content .)

-the center of the screen ( 8960 hours with content )


The results show no difference at all between the three points :


Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	week-64-uniformity-b6-red-large_1.JPG
Views:	132
Size:	80.6 KB
ID:	2494828  
Kenbar likes this.

Last edited by bombyx; 12-11-2018 at 07:37 PM.
bombyx is offline  
post #156 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 07:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
tokerblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 5,068
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 230 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post
Why do people keep posting pictures of solid red screens to try dispute lifetime claims? It's like no one understands what the thread is about. If you had measured the luminance of the screen every 100 hours and had a graph of that you'd have some interesting data, but a photo doesn't demonstrate anything about luminance regardless of how uniform the screen still looks.
Just posting what I thought would add to the discussion. I guess I was wrong.

That being said, the red pattern looks very bright to me. If there was a loss of luminance, I wouldn't know. I was also posting to show that after 650 hours of HDR gaming of a single game and about 500 hours of other games, I haven't had any issues with burn in or screen uniformity. I'm also over 5000 hours of lifespan, which I didn't see too many others having.
Reflex-Arc and Kenbar like this.
tokerblue is offline  
post #157 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 07:30 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by bombyx View Post
Well, I've tried something for you :

here is the red slide from RTINGS' 20/7 burn in test (week 64 = 8960 hours ) . I've measured the red luminance on three different points :

-the "T" from the RTINGS logo in the upper left part of the screen : this letter has been totally black since the begining of the test , so it's like new .

-the upper letterbox bar ( 3258 hours black , 5700 hours with content .)

-the center of the screen ( 8960 hours with content )


The results show no difference at all between the three points :


Wow! thanks for this effort!

This is pretty convincing proof that even 9000 hours of truly random content at 170cd/m^2 peak results in inconsequential aging (ie: none ).

I don't know how much effort was involved, but your methodology could prove very interesting to analyze the 2017 rtings.com CNN Max burn-in results.

The most recent red field will give you a degraded/dimmer reading in the center of the darkened 'head' - if you take a reading from the same position of earlier red fields until they max-out / saturate at the same peak reading as the surround, you should be able to plot the progression of the burn-in caused by random-but-correlated content (talking heads and newscasters).

Aside ftom rhe central 'head' area, the same approach out to allow burn-in of the CNN logo itself to be plotted...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpeg
Views:	11
Size:	9.5 KB
ID:	2494922  
Kenbar likes this.
fafrd is offline  
post #158 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 07:33 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Nyc
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 10
7k hours ..2016 65B6 and it has the cycle comps or panel comps built in ..no fading of colors and looks new
Kenbar likes this.
Vic2186 is offline  
post #159 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 07:40 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post
Just posting what I thought would add to the discussion. I guess I was wrong.

That being said, the red pattern looks very bright to me. If there was a loss of luminance, I wouldn't know. I was also posting to show that after 650 hours of HDR gaming of a single game and about 500 hours of other games, I haven't had any issues with burn in or screen uniformity. I'm also over 5000 hours of lifespan, which I didn't see too many others having.
The fact that you've got 5000 hours on your B6 without any apparent loss of brightness is worth highlighting. If you had a meter and a reading from both Day 1 and recently, that would be worth more, but just the fact that you have not had to i crease OLED Light setting after 5000 hoyrs to get the brghtness you expect is worth something (anecdotally).

Discussion of burn-in is more appropriate for another thread, but the fact that you have no signs of nonuniformity after 5000 hours just proves that your viewing habits are close to truly random...
fafrd is offline  
post #160 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 08:15 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Stereodude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Detroit Metro Area
Posts: 15,356
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4344 Post(s)
Liked: 3082
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
The fact that you've got 5000 hours on your B6 without any apparent loss of brightness is worth highlighting.
"apparent" being the key word. It could be half as bright with a gradual loss over 5000 hours and it wouldn't be apparent. This is somewhere that measured data talks and perceived impressions don't.
Stereodude is offline  
post #161 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 08:26 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 78
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
Wow! thanks for this effort!

This is pretty convincing proof that even 9000 hours of truly random content at 170cd/m^2 peak results in inconsequential aging (ie: none ).

I don't know how much effort was involved, but your methodology could prove very interesting to analyze the 2017 rtings.com CNN Max burn-in results.

The most recent red field will give you a degraded/dimmer reading in the center of the darkened 'head' - if you take a reading from the same position of earlier red fields until they max-out / saturate at the same peak reading as the surround, you should be able to plot the progression of the burn-in caused by random-but-correlated content (talking heads and newscasters).

Aside ftom rhe central 'head' area, the same approach out to allow burn-in of the CNN logo itself to be plotted...

Thank you .
I am already working on the 2017 RTINGS test , but I was waiting for the burn to develop a little more , so I could have more data . BTW, I'm not using the red slides because a lot of them are overexposed (the red channel reads 255 everywhere) so I'm working on the magenta slides .
bombyx is offline  
post #162 of 197 Old 12-10-2018, 10:21 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by bombyx View Post
Thank you .
I am already working on the 2017 RTINGS test , but I was waiting for the burn to develop a little more , so I could have more data . BTW, I'm not using the red slides because a lot of them are overexposed (the red channel reads 255 everywhere) so I'm working on the magenta slides .
Whatever data you manage to extract from the rtings.com 2017 CNN Max slides (of any color) will be if interest to all (at least all on this thread ).
bombyx likes this.
fafrd is offline  
post #163 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 10:56 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 78
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
Whatever data you manage to extract from the rtings.com 2017 CNN Max slides (of any color) will be if interest to all (at least all on this thread ).

Well, the magenta slides are not very good either but here are the data :


Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	graphes_15.png
Views:	109
Size:	24.3 KB
ID:	2495148  
spear likes this.

Last edited by bombyx; 12-11-2018 at 11:37 AM.
bombyx is offline  
post #164 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 11:16 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
KidHorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 5,442
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1862 Post(s)
Liked: 1287
People worry too much about stupid things. Reminds me of people who buy an exotic car and never drive it. Or buy an action figure and never take it out of it's packaging. Just enjoy the TV and don't obsess over it not being perfect in 5 years. Worst case scenario is the TV gets an unbearable defect in a few years and truth be told, 90% of AVSers would welcome it, as they could show everyone the issue and it would give them an excuse to get a new TV.
KidHorn is offline  
post #165 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 11:51 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by bombyx View Post
Well, the magenta slides are not very good either but here are the data :


You really are my hero - this data is FANTASTIC!!!

Some immediate observations:

Once compensation was exhausted, CNN Max took ~10 weeks to degrade by 30% (meaning to 70%) while CNN took 22 weeks for the same degredation, so CNN Max degraded at ~220% the rate of CNN.

CNN Max was at 380 cd/m2 while CNN was at 200 cd/m2 so the theory would have been that CNN Max degraded at 190% the rate of CNN, but still, your data confirms the theory within measurement error.

All of these 'curves' started from the same starting point (masked by compensation) and we can use that fact to 'go backwards' to eatimate how much headroom was reserved.

CNN Max began degrading on week 13 so if we go back 13 weeks at a rate of 30% over 10 weeks (3%/week) we get to 139%.

CNN began degrading on week 20 so if we go back 20 weeks at a rate of 30% over 22 weeks (1.36%/week) we get to 127%.

The Max shadow degraded ~13.3% over 13 weeks starting on week 31, so if we go back 31 weeks at a rate of 13.3% over 13 weeks (1%/week) we get to 131%.

So for the CNN Max TV, about 30-40% headroom seems to have been reserved (or ~23-29% headroom reserved out of the total range to 130-140% of peak luminance).

And while the Max logo area is degrading at a rate of roughly 3% per week, the shadow Max area is degrading 1%/week, meaning average luminance from the talking heads / newscasters in the shadow area is roughly 1/3 of the average luminance in the logo area.

And finally, without reserving any headroom, these 2017 WOLEDs would have been capable of putting out peak luminance of well over 1100 cd/m2 (800cd/m2 X 130%) assuming the backplane could have handled the additional power consumption.

I knew headroom was being reserved but had no idea it was that significant - thanks again for the effort on this!

(p.s. all of the above analysis is based on simplified linear modeling and the rate of degredation decreases as aging continues, so it's obviously only a ballpark. The data you've collected out to make it possible to estimate current-density from the attached graph - I'll try to have a look at that when I find some time).
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	image.png
Views:	11
Size:	55.6 KB
ID:	2495164  

Last edited by fafrd; 12-11-2018 at 12:13 PM.
fafrd is offline  
post #166 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 12:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1121 Post(s)
Liked: 653
The regular "shadow" (not CNN max) is the one of interest to me. A drop of just 3~5% becomes visible in content...if not sooner. I remember the fellow who's wife watched a lot of cooking shows and ended up with a blooby center area.

Voted most desirable mate by the ladies every year! Klan leader! Mob boss! Love advice expert! Credit cards accepted.
Kenbar is offline  
post #167 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 12:59 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 78
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
You really are my hero - this data is FANTASTIC!!!

Some immediate observations:

Once compensation was exhausted, CNN Max took ~10 weeks to degrade by 30% (meaning to 70%) while CNN took 22 weeks for the same degredation, so CNN Max degraded at ~220% the rate of CNN.

CNN Max was at 380 cd/m2 while CNN was at 200 cd/m2 so the theory would have been that CNN Max degraded at 190% the rate of CNN, but still, your data confirms the theory within measurement error.

All of these 'curves' started from the same starting point (masked by compensation) and we can use that fact to 'go backwards' to eatimate how much headroom was reserved.

CNN Max began degrading on week 13 so if we go back 13 weeks at a rate of 30% over 10 weeks (3%/week) we get to 139%.

CNN began degrading on week 20 so if we go back 20 weeks at a rate of 30% over 22 weeks (1.36%/week) we get to 127%.

The Max shadow degraded ~13.3% over 13 weeks starting on week 31, so if we go back 31 weeks at a rate of 13.3% over 13 weeks (1%/week) we get to 131%.

So for the CNN Max TV, about 30-40% headroom seems to have been reserved (or ~23-29% headroom reserved out of the total range to 130-140% of peak luminance).

And while the Max logo area is degrading at a rate of roughly 3% per week, the shadow Max area is degrading 1%/week, meaning average luminance from the talking heads / newscasters in the shadow area is roughly 1/3 of the average luminance in the logo area.

And finally, without reserving any headroom, these 2017 WOLEDs would have been capable of putting out peak luminance of well over 1100 cd/m2 (800cd/m2 X 130%) assuming the backplane could have handled the additional power consumption.

I knew headroom was being reserved but had no idea it was that significant - thanks again for the effort on this!

(p.s. all of the above analysis is based on simplified linear modeling and the rate of degredation decreases as aging continues, so it's obviously only a ballpark. The data you've collected out to make it possible to estimate current-density from the attached graph - I'll try to have a look at that when I find some time).

Thank you again !


I agree with your analysis and I've completed my graph to make it easier to understand :




The new OLED panels have far bigger red sub pixels : 64% bigger than 2017 OLED for the C8/A8/A9 and 100% bigger for the 55 Philips 803 : the headroom reserved now seems to be huge .
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	graphes_15_2.png
Views:	114
Size:	32.2 KB
ID:	2495170  
bombyx is offline  
post #168 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 01:02 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenbar View Post
The regular "shadow" (not CNN max) is the one of interest to me. A drop of just 3~5% becomes visible in content...if not sooner. I remember the fellow who's wife watched a lot of cooking shows and ended up with a blooby center area.
Yeah, that CNN shadow is reaching the point it probably will start becoing visible on actual content.

The CNN shadow has drropped ~2.5% in ~5 weeks, or 0.5% / week. That transates to 100 weeks or 14,000 hours to 50% degredation or 35.7% degredation after 10,000 hours, meaning ~65% brightness after 10,000 hours (again, using a simplified linearized model).

From the data in the aging curve I posted, 20mA/cm^2 results in ~70% brightness after 10,000 hours, so we know the average current density in the CNN shadow atea exceeds that. And 40mA/cm^2 results in 65% brightness after something like 2000 hours, so we know the current density is way below that. 20mA/cm^2 is the closest of those curves and 20-25mA/cm^2 is probably an accurate bracket.

Turning to the CNN Max logo area which is degrading at a rate of 3% per week (6 times faster), it degraded to 50% brightness over 19 weeks or 2660 hours. The 60mA/cm^2 curve degrades to 50% after ~2000 hours, so that's an upper limit on current density and 55-60mA/cm2 is probably an accurate bracket.

And if we look at the CNN logo area which is degradng at a rate of 1.36% per week, that translates to 37 weeks or just over 5000 hours to 50% brightness putting it somwhere near the midpoint of the 20mA/cm^2 and 40mA/cm^2 curves (so let's call it 30mA/cm^2 +/-).

So CNN Max Logo is being driven at an average current density of 55-60mA/cm^2 associated with OLED Light 100 for 380cd/m2 peak.

CNN logo is being driven at an aveage current density of ~30mA/cm^2 associated with OLED Light of ~60 for 200 cd/m^2 peak.

And the CNN Max Shadow area is being driven with an average current density of 20-25mA/cm^2 with the same Max OLED Light setting of 100.

Everything seems to tie up pretty consistently and if we ever see any degredation in the Live NBC test we should be able to estimate the underlying aging rate for truly random content at 200cdm2.

For what it is worth, my ultra-simplified model for random content has been ~10% the average current density of a static logo.

So if the CNN logo is being driven at ~30mA current density, that would correspond to a an average current density of ~3mA/cm^2 or an aging rate of 0.14% per week. If the headroom is as much as 40% as we now suspect, that would translate to 285 or more than 5 years before any degredation.

I love rtings.com but doubt that they are likely to keep their 2017 burn-in test running that long...
fafrd is offline  
post #169 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 01:06 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1121 Post(s)
Liked: 653
How many hours are they on again each week?

Voted most desirable mate by the ladies every year! Klan leader! Mob boss! Love advice expert! Credit cards accepted.
Kenbar is offline  
post #170 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 01:13 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by bombyx View Post
Thank you again !


I agree with your analysis and I've completed my graph to make it easier to understand :


OK, now you just are showing off!!! .

Seriously, that is a great way to make the point clear - thanks.

Quote:
The new OLED panels have far bigger red sub pixels : 64% bigger than 2017 OLED for the C8/A8/A9 and 100% bigger for the 55 Philips 803 : the headroom reserved now seems to be huge .
Yes, as the subpixel sizes change, the slope of these curves should change as well.

If you have the time to extract similar data from the 2016 rtings.com burn-in test, we can probably confirm a couple things:

-confirm that aging rate per color has changed with subpixel area (someone has posted subpixel areas for 2016, 2017 and 2018 subpixels).

-confirm that 2016 WOLEDs had no headroom reserved (and no compensation deployed).

It would also be interesting to measure the aging rate for the different colored subpixels in the 2016 test since this relative ratio wil apply to aging on average content as well and could give an indication of how quickly whitepoint shift due to different aging rates of different colored subpixels could be significant enough to warrant recalibration...
bombyx likes this.
fafrd is offline  
post #171 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 01:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1121 Post(s)
Liked: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by bombyx View Post
Thank you again !


I agree with your analysis and I've completed my graph to make it easier to understand :




The new OLED panels have far bigger red sub pixels : 64% bigger than 2017 OLED for the C8/A8/A9 and 100% bigger for the 55 Philips 803 : the headroom reserved now seems to be huge .
I wonder if there's anyone brilliant enough to mathematically add that 64% into the graph and re-estimate how the graph would look. Maybe ask the US military if they could put a Cray computer to work on it for a week or two.

Voted most desirable mate by the ladies every year! Klan leader! Mob boss! Love advice expert! Credit cards accepted.
Kenbar is offline  
post #172 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 01:51 PM
Member
 
whforde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 88
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidHorn View Post
...Worst case scenario is the TV gets an unbearable defect in a few years and truth be told, 90% of AVSers would welcome it, as they could show everyone the issue and it would give them an excuse to get a new TV.
Are...are you my wife? We literally had this exact conversation a week ago.
whforde is offline  
post #173 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 01:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1121 Post(s)
Liked: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by whforde View Post
Are...are you my wife? We literally had this exact conversation a week ago.
And...how did it go?

Voted most desirable mate by the ladies every year! Klan leader! Mob boss! Love advice expert! Credit cards accepted.
Kenbar is offline  
post #174 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 02:12 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenbar View Post
How many hours are they on again each week?
140 (20 hours per day 7 days a week).
fafrd is offline  
post #175 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 02:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1121 Post(s)
Liked: 653
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
140 (20 hours per day 7 days a week).
Alright. Now my math sucks, but 38 weeks + 64% = 62-ish weeks... X 140 = 8,724 hours of CNN before a C8 should see effects of watching talking heads on the center screen (not CNN MAX)? Right...no?

Voted most desirable mate by the ladies every year! Klan leader! Mob boss! Love advice expert! Credit cards accepted.

Last edited by Kenbar; 12-11-2018 at 02:37 PM.
Kenbar is offline  
post #176 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 03:16 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JonW747's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post
Just posting what I thought would add to the discussion. I guess I was wrong.

That being said, the red pattern looks very bright to me. If there was a loss of luminance, I wouldn't know. I was also posting to show that after 650 hours of HDR gaming of a single game and about 500 hours of other games, I haven't had any issues with burn in or screen uniformity. I'm also over 5000 hours of lifespan, which I didn't see too many others having.

My E6P is at 5306 hrs ... I looked at it earlier today when it was pretty light in the room and just now as it's getting pretty dark and the slides here all looked good:




Of course that doesn't tell us anything about how much the TV has dimmed since I first got it, but it also means no gross burn-in has occurred from video game HUDs, sports tickers, or channel logos, etc; and certainly no reduction in brightness that I can notice.


I use a mix of ISF night (OLED light 40), ISF day (75), and Game (95) plus HDR, so, clearly my 5000 hrs is not the same as a TV at 100 all the time either. Maybe when I get up around 8000 hours or so....

edit: Isf night oled light setting is 40 not 45
XpanD likes this.

Last edited by JonW747; 12-11-2018 at 07:22 PM.
JonW747 is offline  
post #177 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 03:20 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenbar View Post
Alright. Now my math sucks, but 38 weeks + 64% = 62-ish weeks... X 140 = 8,724 hours of CNN before a C8 should see effects of watching talking heads on the center screen (not CNN MAX)? Right...no?
If we assume that LG increased red subpixel size by 64% and used all of that increased efficiency for additional headroom to be used for burn-in compensation, the math works out as follows:

2018 red subpixel is 164% of 2017 red subpixel area so same luminance can be driven by 1/1.64 or 61% current density.

The headroom that took 13 weeks to be exhausted by the CNN Logo at OLED Light 100 would now take 1/61% or 164% that long, meaning 21.3 weeks (3000 hours). From there, if you want to take some threshold like 5% degredation to represent 'visible burn-in', the 1.67 weeks it took in 2017 increases to 2.73 weeks or 383 hours, which means 24 weeks / 3360 hours total before CNN logo burn-in becomes noticable at OLED Light 100.

For the 'talking head / newscaster' shadow area on [email protected]/m2, the 44 weeks it took to develop 2.5% damage would increase to over 72 weeks or 10,000 hours.

All of this is my long-winded way of saying your math is correct .
bombyx likes this.
fafrd is offline  
post #178 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 03:22 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
fafrd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 4902
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonW747 View Post
My E6P is at 5306 hrs ... I looked at it earlier today when it was pretty light in the room and just now as it's getting pretty dark and the slides here all looked good:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNdt7TzJbhU&t=21s


Of course that doesn't tell us anything about how much the TV has dimmed since I first got it, but it also means no gross burn-in has occurred from video game HUDs, sports tickers, or channel logos, etc; and certainly no reduction in brightness that I can notice.


I use a mix of ISF night (OLED light 45), ISF day (75), and Game (95) plus HDR, so, clearly my 5000 hrs is not the same as a TV at 100 all the time either. Maybe when I get up around 8000 hours or so....
Helpful info - thanks. You did not have your E6P calibrated by any chance, did you?
fafrd is offline  
post #179 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 04:18 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 78
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
OK, now you just are showing off!!! .

Seriously, that is a great way to make the point clear - thanks.



Yes, as the subpixel sizes change, the slope of these curves should change as well.

If you have the time to extract similar data from the 2016 rtings.com burn-in test, we can probably confirm a couple things:

-confirm that aging rate per color has changed with subpixel area (someone has posted subpixel areas for 2016, 2017 and 2018 subpixels).

-confirm that 2016 WOLEDs had no headroom reserved (and no compensation deployed).

It would also be interesting to measure the aging rate for the different colored subpixels in the 2016 test since this relative ratio wil apply to aging on average content as well and could give an indication of how quickly whitepoint shift due to different aging rates of different colored subpixels could be significant enough to warrant recalibration...

I found a 9% headroom reserved for the red sub pixel in my old dataset :





And my latest data about sub pixels size :





with pictures :


Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	graphes_R_15.png
Views:	92
Size:	26.2 KB
ID:	2495342   Click image for larger version

Name:	donnees_pixels_oled_bis.png
Views:	387
Size:	15.0 KB
ID:	2495364   Click image for larger version

Name:	comparaison_55.jpg
Views:	392
Size:	123.0 KB
ID:	2495370  

Last edited by bombyx; 12-11-2018 at 04:59 PM.
bombyx is offline  
post #180 of 197 Old 12-11-2018, 04:44 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JonW747's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by fafrd View Post
Helpful info - thanks. You did not have your E6P calibrated by any chance, did you?

I did not. When I got it I compared it side by side with my KRP-600M which was cal'd by D-Nice back when it was new, and after tweaking a couple of things, was happy enough with it as-is. The colors were very accurate out of the box, but the E6 sure gets a lot brighter than the old plasma.



I do not have a perfectly dark room (sky lights and sometimes some lamps on), so, I imagine my OLED light setting for dark viewing is higher than those who've had their sets calibrated in a light controlled room.


I've tried to be sensible with the TV, but I wouldn't say I've babied it. I've treated my plasma's the same and they are both still awesome.
JonW747 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off