AVS Forum banner

41 - 60 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
Oh; ya mean the imaginary non-abuse burn-in that everyone constantly embellishes? You mean the burn-in, that after 6,000 hours of playing the SAME game with the HUD on tested to have ZERO burn-in in the latest RTINGS report? That burn-in?
I'm not sure why you are so sensitive to the concern of burn-in on OLED. Using OLED as a computer monitor is definitely worthy of atleast considering the topic. A video game is one thing. What about the user interface of Windows and applications? That would be abuse of OLED by your standard? Yet this Dell OLED display is sold a PC display.

BTW, the FIFA18 RTINGS test is showing uneven aging on the green and red screens around the HUD elements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,713 Posts
I'm not sure why you are so sensitive to the concern of burn-in on OLED. Using OLED as a computer monitor is definitely worthy of atleast considering the topic. A video game is one thing. What about the user interface of Windows and applications? That would be abuse of OLED by your standard? Yet this Dell OLED display is sold a PC display.

BTW, the FIFA18 RTINGS test is showing uneven aging on the green and red screens around the HUD elements.
Yes, after 3500 cumulative hours of displaying those FIFA HUD elemens, first signs of overcompensation for burn-in have appeared on the Rting.com test (burn-in is darker, when areas where thebTV determines burn-in may be occuring have been overcompensated, the result is lightened areas).

Anyone planning to display bright fully-saturated static logo/HUD elements for thousands of cumulative hours on their display would be better off sticking to LCD...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
Yes, after 3500 cumulative hours of displaying those FIFA HUD elemens, first signs of overcompensation for burn-in have appeared on the Rting.com test (burn-in is darker, when areas where thebTV determines burn-in may be occuring have been overcompensated, the result is lightened areas).

Anyone planning to display bright fully-saturated static logo/HUD elements for thousands of cumulative hours on their display would be better off sticking to LCD...
Sort of like Windows taskbar, application menus and such?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,713 Posts
Sort of like Windows taskbar, application menus and such?
It's funny, but white is far less likely to burn-in than colors (especially red).

The white subpixel has no color filter, so it is able to generate about 300% the light ouput of a colored subpixel like red (or said another way, white is able to generate equivalent brightness at 1/3rd the drive current needed for a color like red).

So at a minumum, white static elements will need 3 times the number of cumulative hours to develope a similar degree of burn-in as red static elements.

There are very few reports of WOLED burn-in from monitor use, so PC usage seems to be much safer that watching CNN...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
718 Posts
Discussion Starter #46
Sort of like Windows taskbar, application menus and such?
lol you think windows task-bars and web browsers are full bright saturated colors? You must use some crazy themes on your desktop.

Anyone using a 55" OLED as a PC display isn't going to be blasting 300+ nits in their face for long periods of time on a huge screen. Well anyone with a brain that values their eyes. Desktop use is typically recommended around 120 nits or below. With that low of brightness and with pixel shift on, the propensity for desktop burn-in is virtually zero.

We now return to the regularly scheduled hyperbole programming.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,175 Posts
Anyway, Sony and LG have been making progress year-over-year on custom resolution support. for example, the a9f officially lists 1080 P 120 Hz as a supported resolution. mainly for gaming purposes, but it helps both my interest in gaming and interpolation. so eventually I believe I'll get what I want, along with other gamers who would like to game at custom resolutions and frame rates.
Founder of Blur Busters / Inventor of TestUFO here.

The refresh rate race will continue for quite a long time.

120fps HFR isn't even the final frontier! Now that resolution and dynamic range has nearly gone retina, this pushes other unturned stones such as refresh rates, especially if it becomes cheaper and cheaper to milk true-Hz (not fake Hz) in the coming decades.

Jump the uncanny valley and try UltraHFR. 240fps realtime at 240Hz. 1000fps realtime at 1000Hz.
It actually "feels" better to my brain than 48fps HFR and 120fps HFR.

- Cinematography of 2030s: Ultra HFR! I have witnessed realtime 1000fps on real 1000Hz
- Ultra HFR 240fps Real Time Video Now Possible Today, 1000fps Tomorrow
- Blur Busters Law And The Amazing Journey To Future 1000Hz Displays
- Photo Proof of Benefits Beyond 120fps HFR

Large leap up the diminishing curve is needed for big jump
60Hz = 1/60sec = 16.7ms
120Hz = 1/120sec = 8.3ms (8.3ms improvement)
1000Hz = 1/1000sec = 1ms (7.3ms improvement)

Basically, CRT motion clarity achieved strobelessly/flickerlessly. Blurless sample-and-hold. No motion blur & no stroboscopics. Film 1000fps @ 1000Hz, 1ms shutter, and get zero stroboscopics & zero blur, and less dizzying than 48fps HFR / 120fps HFR since it jumps the uncanny valley for me. Real life doesn't strobe, real life doesn't inject motion blur above human vision limitations. Ultra-Hz is the closest ever approaching analog-motion (framerateless displays). [email protected] eliminates camera-blur & display-blur, and avoids wagonwheel/steppy/stroboscopic/phantomarray effects without needing to re-add motion blur to fix the stroboscopics. That is a "have cake and eat it too" effect. And no flicker of traditional yesteryear blur reduction to sear the eyes.

The guaranteed minimum display motion blur of a flickerless display at "X fps at X Hz" is always equal to 1/X sec motion blur -- same as a photographic camera shutter (1/60sec shutter versus 1/120sec shutter versus 1/1000sec shutter). The world's best flickerless 120Hz dislplay can never achieve better than the motion blur of a 1/120sec camera shutter, unless you add flicker (e.g. phosphor, black frames). Instead, having fully continuous display frametimes (with no black frames in between, no black frame insertion, no phosphor, no strobing, no scanning backlight) -- full refresh cycle display persistence exactly match shutter persistence is very magical at fast sports shutter speeds! (filling the entire millisecond with fully unique sports-shutter-speed images). 1000fps UltraHFR a less nauseating to my eyes than 48fps HFR and 120fps HFR.

While I'm also a fan of HFR, for traditional films I have always tended to prefer 24fps film and personally am mixed on interpolation (it has its uses, especially for sports).

I know some people who have eyestrain from motion blur & eyestrain from flicker -- so certainly respect beneficial interpolation uses though (Especially with rapidly improving AI interpolation that is parallax-smart). The only way to reduce low-framerate headaches and motion blur headaches (without using flicker-based motion blur reduction) is to use interpolation (or true HFR) for these individuals who gets searing eye pain from (stutter of low framerates) and also sensitive to flicker (of motion blur reduction). Different humans are sensitive to different thing, excess brightness, excess blur, low framerates, etc. Widely quoted is 12% of the population is colorblind but lesser known is that surprising separate >10% has many forms of undiagnosed motion sensitivities that are solved by various things. You know that grandma who always gets headaches when going to the cinema, or that brother who says that he loves the interpolation because "it's easier on his eyes"? All those old anecdotes. They're true. Little studied, there's actually a segment of population that gets less eyestrain from improved temporal resolution of HFR (even artificially interpolated HFR). Different humans see slightly differently from another. Whether you're seeing a primary a few nanometers differently, or whether you're 20/10, or whether you're slightly color blind, or whether you've got a partially undiagnosed motion-sickness, or a partial weird Akinetopsia, or people unusually sensitive to the blue light (getting headaches unless you go Low Blue Light) while others aren't very sensitive to it at all. There's a wide gamut of different vision sensitivities. So... I totally respect interpolation since it help cures for some people.

So, that means one person's garbage-motion is another person's nirvana of eye-relaxation (solving a headache or two).

Either way,

That said, genuine HFR and UltraHFR is even superior (especially as standardizations begins to occur) -- the latter preferred. Depending on the material played -- UltraHFR (480fps+) is more easy on my eyes and less nauseating for me than 48fps HFR than 120fps HFR, there is a "leap-beyond-the-uncanny-valley" effect for some people. Some will always be nauseated at any HFR but for some of us, the nausea disappears after a mid-HFR uncanny valley when all the motion blur disappears (CRT clarity blurless sample-and-hold that is mimicking analog framerateless motion). We weren't able to experimentally discover this until recently. Such research probably should become a University Thesis of the 2020s-2030s (students, feel free to reach out)

Being an ultra-Hz expert has often caused many people to contact me that the reduction of motion blur solved a headache problem for them. It's happening so often that I'm willing to participate, help, or fund research studies on little-researched blur busters topics such as motion blur nausea/sensitivities. One person cares less and go big whoop, yet the next person say it's best thing since sliced bread for them.

Also, being the world's first person to write a mainstream review of a true-480Hz display, I've been making some really interesting observations with video playback tests.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
lol you think windows task-bars and web browsers are full bright saturated colors? You must use some crazy themes on your desktop.

Anyone using a 55" OLED as a PC display isn't going to be blasting 300+ nits in their face for long periods of time on a huge screen. Well anyone with a brain that values their eyes. Desktop use is typically recommended around 120 nits or below. With that low of brightness and with pixel shift on, the propensity for desktop burn-in is virtually zero.

We now return to the regularly scheduled hyperbole programming.

The Rtings burn-in test had a TV playing CNN with pixel shift on at 200 nits, and it started showing burn-in pretty quickly. 120 nits would probably slow it down a bit, but not eliminate it. In many ways the task bar example is worse than CNN (if you don't have auto-hide turned on). It's up 100% of the time, and on Windows 10 the background is black, which is going to create even more differential in the aging than the random surrounding pixels you would get on CNN.

As for bright, saturated colors - yes, the task bar and web browser have them. Task bar icons and favicons are often intentionally designed to be eye-catching like that. If I look on my current screen for static bright red / orange / yellow elements which have historically been the most problem for OLED, I have:
- 6 favicons in pinned tabs (Youtube, Amazon, AVSforum, etc.)
- 2 browser extension buttons (LastPass, etc.)
- 7 favicons in a bookmarks toolbar (AccuWeather, etc)
- 3 taskbar quicklaunch shortcuts (Windows Explorer, Firefox, etc)

These are smaller elements than the CNN banner to be sure, so pixel shift will help, but it doesn't really eliminate burn-in, it just makes it softer.

Of course, most of these things can be worked around if you are willing to change. I could turn on auto-hide taskbar. I could disable favicons. I could turn off the bookmarks toolbar. I could run my browser in full-screen more often. I could disable dark mode themes on my PC so I would get more white backgrounds that would help age the surrounding pixels more. I could use a browser extension to block problematic images on my favorite websites. I could use a tool like OnTopReplica to crop out problematic parts of videos when watching streams from Youtube or Twitch (I already do this when I watch them on my TV). The great thing about the customization of PCs is that you can work around most of these issues, but for the way I use my PC it would be a lot more involved than just turning on pixel shift and forgetting it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,062 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
416 Posts
That is one expensive displayport they have on there.
Pretty standard for bearing the "Alienware" brand name. Always bring up the price a good 25-50%.

Been gaming on my OLED for 2 years and it shocks me that enthusiasts out there are still using "Gaming monitors". Sometimes I get the impression they wouldn't mind a black and white image as long as it upped the Hz...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Hahaha the LG 55" is going to be half that cost or less... yeah, I'll pass on this Alienware at $5k.
That is one expensive displayport they have on there.
Pretty standard for bearing the "Alienware" brand name. Always bring up the price a good 25-50%.

Been gaming on my OLED for 2 years and it shocks me that enthusiasts out there are still using "Gaming monitors". Sometimes I get the impression they wouldn't mind a black and white image as long as it upped the Hz...
To be clear, it's not official and only this article has reported this tidbit on pricing so far. I would expect it to be pricier than the LG OLED TVs but not by much, otherwise it won't make sense at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
801 Posts
In many ways the task bar example is worse than CNN..
As for bright, saturated colors - yes, the task bar and web browser have them. Task bar icons and favicons are often intentionally designed to be eye-catching like that. If I look on my current screen for static bright red / orange / yellow elements which have historically been the most problem for OLED, I have:
- 6 favicons in pinned tabs (Youtube, Amazon, AVSforum, etc.)
- 2 browser extension buttons (LastPass, etc.)
- 7 favicons in a bookmarks toolbar (AccuWeather, etc)
- 3 taskbar quicklaunch shortcuts (Windows Explorer, Firefox, etc)
If you have your browser open full-screen, for normal browsing, you are either using it at TV distances, or otherwise using it as a TV, not a monitor.
A full-screen browser is pretty much unusable on 40" and above unscaled 4K monitors. The pages look like a thin strip of text in the middle and you have to turn your head to reach side-aligned control elements on pages and in the browser.

If you're a power user, the icons on your taskbar are not permanent static elements. They open up and expand, move around as you add/remove them. Even one change every few month will rearrange things enough to remove taskbar BI as a concern.

If you're not a power user, you have no need for a 55" HDR OLED monitor.

There are non-power uses for large screens, but they're almost all better served by monitor walls made out of tiled 24" monitors, or at most SDR 40" 4K monitors.

Really, if most of your time is spent looking at your desktop or sitting in the web browser, you don't need an OLED for that. LCD provide exactly the same web browsing and office productivity experience for much less. This monitor is being sold specifically for demanding 3D gaming, not stock market charts.

Also, I don't have the experience of using an OLED laptop, but out of two well-used ones (since they're stopped making them) I've looked at, neither had any burn-in. That's with RGB panels used in laptops that are a lot more BI-prone than LG WOLED ones . In my 2 years of using an OLED TV as a monitor, I got no BI visible on test colors, and that included a lot of hours in a MMORPG with bright ability icons, and most of these hours were at Light 100.

The icons used in browsers, on desktops, or in computer games (sic - not console games) are, without scaling, too small to overcome the BI compensation system with pixel shift and logo dimming within any reasonable lifetime for them. This is far cry from the massive field of red on CNN that the TV can't do anything about.

So, in conclusion, no - the taskbar is not worse than CNN.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
If you have your browser open full-screen, for normal browsing, you are either using it at TV distances, or otherwise using it as a TV, not a monitor.
A full-screen browser is pretty much unusable on 40" and above unscaled 4K monitors. The pages look like a thin strip of text in the middle and you have to turn your head to reach side-aligned control elements on pages and in the browser.

It's not an issue of running in full screen, it's an issue of having the browser window in the same position. Modern operating systems will do that by default. Windows 10 has a snap feature. Linux and OSX will restore windows to the same position on reopen, etc.

Of course you can manually twiddle the positions of your windows to avoid this. But it is another manual step you must take.

If you're a power user, the icons on your taskbar are not permanent static elements. They open up and expand, move around as you add/remove them. Even one change every few month will rearrange things enough to remove taskbar BI as a concern.

If you're not a power user, you have no need for a 55" HDR OLED monitor.
Not really interested in playing "no true Scotsman" about who is and isn't a power user. Personally I don't change the icons in my quick launch bar very frequently and I tend to have the same set of applications open most of the time, so the icons are usually in the same place.

There are non-power uses for large screens, but they're almost all better served by monitor walls made out of tiled 24" monitors, or at most SDR 40" 4K monitors.

Really, if most of your time is spent looking at your desktop or sitting in the web browser, you don't need an OLED for that. LCD provide exactly the same web browsing and office productivity experience for much less. This monitor is being sold specifically for demanding 3D gaming, not stock market charts.
Dare I say, "power users" use their PCs for a lot of different things. Gaming, watching movies, web browsing, work, etc. You don't have to pick just one.

A setup with multiple tiled high refresh-rate gaming monitors is what I'm using now. OLED is an attractive alternative because the gaming monitors have poor contrast and suffer from IPS glow. Those issue apply when doing anything with the monitor, not just gaming. I actually also have my desktop hooked up to a TV via HDMI as an extra monitor for when I want to play games with better picture quality and am willing to give up VRR and 120 Hz+. I will probably replace that TV with a 2019 LG OLED later this year so I can get VRR and 120 Hz with OLED picture quality once HDMI 2.1 graphics cards become available. If I could get rid of the whole complicated setup and just use a single OLED, I would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
801 Posts
Of course you can manually twiddle the positions of your windows to avoid this. But it is another manual step you must take.
It's not a step for me. I will have my browserS at different window size and position depending on what I'm doing with them. Right now it occupies about 20% of my display, on the lower right, because I'm just answering a post while watching the latest Grand Tour. In hindsight, the latter is pretty great, so I probably should have maximized it instead.


Dare I say, "power users" use their PCs for a lot of different things. Gaming, watching movies, web browsing, work, etc. You don't have to pick just one.
I fully agree.

And that's why they're not going to get burn-in on their OLED monitors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Well, the monitor is getting released, except...It's not really that palatable. No HDMI 2.1, no proper HDR, 4K grand price tag...

I'm not sure this will sell decently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
801 Posts
But who could possibly resist the allure of selling a $1,000 LG 55B8 with a $3,999 markup, at the cost of bolting on a $10 Displayport connection?

Perhaps only someone already selling a $500 LCD TV with Displayport bolted on as a $5k "Big format gaming monitor"...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
Its a step in the right direction at least. There is a decent sized untapped market for big gaming displays. But IMO neither this nor the Nvidias go big enough.


Maybe this will spur the TV makers to add DP. They throw us a bone with gaming features but they always end up lacking in some way.
 
41 - 60 of 61 Posts
Top