Samsung researchers found a way for QLED technology to not use backlights

I didn't say it wasn't i said it's overblown. People are worrying about something that under normal circumstances won't happen to them for a long period of time. And i'm not even a normal circumstance, my TV is on way more often then most peoples especially with static imagery.

The video posted earlier even stated as much. The time required to have noticeable issues was very long on CONSTANT news or newslike banners and etc.

And the issue is, people bring this up as though it's some big deal when it's not, as though LCDs and technology in general don't have issues. In the same video for instance they had an LCD TV have way worse issues during the same timeframe. Not saying that's normal, but neither is the pixel degradation for normal users.

 

Sony's Crystal LED has been released at CES 2019. It's a modular video wall system for theaters and indoor signage.

Each display tile is a 15 7/8 x 17 7/8 inch, 320 x 360 pixels mLED panel with peak brigthness of 1000 nits and DCI-P3 color space coverage, which costs south of $10K.
So a 218 inch 4K display (12 x 6 panels) will set you back $720 000+.

https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/led-video-walls/zrd-2
https://www.engadget.com/2019/09/13/sony-crystal-cinema-16k-home-theater/
https://techswitchcf.com/2019/08/02...g-isnt-the-only-player-in-the-micro-led-game/

Can't see how it's 'overblown' when it's a real concern for a significant number of users. I have a 50-inch TV set that works like 8-10 hours a day, mostly with news programming and talk shows, and this usage pattern would completely rule out OLED for that specific room, because according to burn-in test resuls from Rtings.com I might get image degradation issues after only two years.

 

its already here



for rich folk.

 

That looks like 108 inch 1080p configuration with 6 x 3 ZRD-2 display modules ($180 000+).

 

Well, i meant for consumer, otherwise you would need to compare it to bvm based oled

 

Or what? You're going to wail at me with another meaningless wall of text. 95% of what you posted was noise. The other 5% was your minimal experience with an actual OLED. This is what you do, expound expansively out of inexperience.

 

Oh, that's simple - add you to my ignore list so I never have to read your inspid responses to my irrefutable logic ever again.

You'll like it inside of my ignore list, it's a big, empty echo-chamber where you get to yell incoherently for as long as you exist.

Farewell, and next time you reply to someone, do your bloody research - so they do not have to do it for you, and so you do not have to resort to an ad hominem attack that blows up in your face every time.

Even muppets have more class than you...and more control over their actions.

Oh, look at that, I did get the last word.

 

If my oled keep as good as it is for 2 years, watching it 4 hours a day maximum, i will happily replace it it after 3 years with something super cool will come up in 3 years. I'm really impressed by the bump up in quality compared to LCD.

 

Nonsense. Who told you four hours a day are needed to not kill an oled. I watch TV multiple times four since day one like others. Just never unplug it from the socket to let TV do things at standby and don't use visual profiles like dynamic, vivid and sports. That's all needed. Relax. It's more like four hours work two hours break time. Keep it simple.

In other words. At 24 hours a day, you can safely watch 4t*4h with 4t*2h breaks. 16 hours a day easily last 5+ years with a human alike 8 hours sleep. Enjoy your TV.

 

@Loobyluggs
the fact that you complain about input lag, which on tvs is coming from the processing done to improve the picture,
not so much from the panel tech used, tells me a lot.
anytime i do less processing (on the same identical hardware), i will have lower input lag, nothing to do with the screen type itself.

this is one of the reasons why most samsungs will have lower inout lag on their lower end stuff, cause they do less processing.

or how do you explain the drop from let's say 150ms down to ~30ms on the same tv, just by turning off anything that improves image quality (upscaling/motion etc)?

its like saying that the 500HP dump truck is crap because it cant go as fast as a 500 HP sports car,
while completely ignoring the fact that the truck can carry 5T...

 

Because a "significant number of users" think it's a bigger deal then it is. Not sure how that's too complicated for you to not understand. And they (You apparently) continue to proclaim it's a big deal when it's not, spreading the misinformation that much further.

It's a thing that can happen: Yes

Is it likely under normal circumstances: Not for a very long time, to the point you may be getting a new TV by the time it happens either way, or would have had other issues with a non-OLED tv during the same timeframe.

 

related to burn-in in OLED, the tech might improve how to handle burn-in, but no matter what, its OLED limitation

oled lifetime in hours is rated for highest-brightness afaik cmiiw
but the blue is the faster degrading compared to other
for oled i think it depends on user usage

if u guys using at medium-low brightness settings (usually around 35% is enough for most people)
it will last long time, and burn in really minimized
so most people experiencing with their OLED display is "even" degrade, that barely show any sign...

but at med-high (70%+) ... any static image will burn-in quickly
OLED tech is same for TV and smartphone... smartphone got most report because it use more static image (such messenger apps bars)
i ever saw side-by-side comparisson, display-unit that been on (shop-hours, around~12hours/day) for couple months with max-brightness vs fresh new unit (same-model+size) ... that display-unit lost like ~30% of brightness compared to new one

as far for oled, its still the things keep reported till this year, like this article :
https://www.zdnet.com/article/fear-...e-axe-for-oled-tv-burn-in-and-market-squeeze/

 

Rtings.com burn-in tests on static content prove otherwise. Image quality degradation is apparent after 5000 hours of news and sport programming - for my usage pattern with extended hours of daily news coverage, that would be 2-3 years of operation.

What misinformation, exactly? If you cannot understand the simple math, it's your problem, not mine.

 

Did you even read the article you stated? lol

I can't imagine anyone actually reading that article and coming to the conclusion you have.

5000 hours is 203 days of constant on-time

The average use of a TV is around 4 hours a day

4 hours a day to 5000 hours is 1250 days

That'd be 3.5 years to reach those marks, mainly watching NEWS. People don't watch 4 hours of news each day.

"After more than 5000 hours, there has been no appreciable change to the brightness or color gamut of these TVs. Long periods of static content have resulted in some permanent burn-in (see the CNN TVs), however the other TVs with more varied content don't yet have noticeable uniformity issues on normal content. As a result, we don't expect most people who watch varied content without static areas to experience burn-in issues with an OLED TV. Those who display the same static content over long periods of time should consider the risk of burn-in though (such as those who watch lots of news, use the TV as a PC monitor, or play the same game with a bright static HUD). Those who are concerned about the risk of burn-in should go with an LCD TV for the peace of mind."

Basically, they stated everything i have been stating. You're blowing it out of proportion making it a bigger deal then it actually is. You're spreading misinformation because apparently you just want to do that.

And here's their 9000 hour update

" The TVs have now been running for over 9000 hours (around 5 years at 5 hours every day). Uniformity issues have developed on the TVs displaying Football and FIFA 18, and are starting to develop on the TV displaying Live NBC. Our stance remains the same, we don't expect most people who watch varied content without static areas to experience burn-in issues with an OLED TV."

Learn to read. Please.

And i never stated that it was a good idea for companies who display news all day or people who do watch news for 4+ hours of news a day (though i'd really question why you'd even be intrerested in a high end TV just for watching news and don't you have better things to do then watch news for 4 hours? There's not enough news each day to make that worth it but your call) I said people are blowing up the idea of burn-in on TVs for normal useage and it's not valid. 99% of consumers will not be affected by it and for people such as yourself to continue to post how bad burn-in on OLEDs are because it "can" happen is pure nonsense.

Or did you forget this post, from me?

 

Ps vita screen burn atrocious, plasma flash atrocious.

 

Should also point out that the rtings test is on a C7 -- the C8/C9 both have improved encapsulation which should result in less image retention - they also have a bunch of other mitigation technologies like automatically dimming static portions of the screen that I don't believe the C7 has.

 

honestly if LG or other oled-maker want to "get-over" with burn-in
they can simply just make the warranty longer specifically just for burn-in.... like maybe 5years+

 

@slyphnier
not sure which brand/model you saw, but on the sony A8/9 (F and G series) i have in the store,
i haven't seen any loss of brightness, after running for 11 month for 12h per day/7 days a week.
i usually setup the new one before taken previous/different model down,
and outside the peak brightness difference between models (A8G vs A9G)
nothing visible running same content.
nor any image retention, no matter if its the sony logo (after each video) or the 4K/UHD/HDR logo in the corner
displayed throughout the whole video.
this all using vivid profile with maxed out brightness/contrast.

and:
there are no Q/QD/QLED screens. they use regular LCD and a backlight,
no matter what they try to make ppl believe.
not even talking about the fact that if they really wanted to mimic an oled screen
on the light part, they wouldnt have just led-zones on their top unit,
but would cover the whole back of the screen with leds, like the Z9 series.

 

How much would a ten year guarantee cost for 'no burn-in or image retention' for an OLED television?

You can give me a percentage of RRP, or, straight cash - just imagine someone is in your store asking this question.

 

back then that it was lg b7p iirc.. to bad i didnt make record vid of it
sony also using LG oled panel right ?
so speaking of oled its kinda hit and miss like this :

Spoiler: red

https://www.reddit.com/r/hometheate...g_oled_has_burn_in_after_just_over_a_year_of/

so what to explain this ? is it caused by panel difference ? or firmware issue ?