Except for She Who Must Be Obeyed that would be the bedroom TV (lucky LG delayed the 42 inch OLED) but instead have a 48 inch. The main room would have an LG 83 OLED.

TardianExcept for She Who Must Be Obeyed that would be the bedroom TV (lucky LG delayed the 42 inch OLED) but instead have a 48 inch. The main room would have an LG 83 OLED.

I wish I majored in what you did, I'm poor lol

don't major in anything in the liberal arts everyone, big big mistake. lol

TomorrowRtings tested older generation OLED's with static content. This kind of testing takes a long time. Theirs took over 5 years of continiuous running and the results are from 2019 so already years out of date. Direct quote from their website:

So no. Rtings testing found the previous gen OLED's were already very persistant to burn-in unless subjected to unrealistic conditions like 5 years of continiuous running.

At the same time, TVs are different than monitors. TVs detect static content and offer the option to dim that, to prevent burn in. I would love to take OLED to my phot editing, but I shudder to think what dimming would do to a mostly static screen.

Atm I'm hesitant to call OLED a good or bad option for a monitor. I'd rather call it unproven. Yet.

lynx29I wish I majored in what you did, I'm poor lol

don't major in anything in the liberal arts everyone, big big mistake. lol

I majored in working hard and being poor so my children could live privileged lives. I gave up science and worked for ultra strategic government roles for little money and no thanks.

I retired five years ago on more money than I earned working only to get cancer and nearly die five times. My children are ungrateful and some are indolent.

I sold much of what I inherited for half of what it was worth. My family thinks I have lost it mentally. I waste too much time on the internet. I am working on not doing a thesis that would get a Ph.D.

I have few friends and now have to wait till 2022 for my dream car (Toyota GR 86 automatic) to be released. Who would envy me? Everyone, I lived a great life. Now for the next 40 years!

bugAt the same time, TVs are different than monitors. TVs detect static content and offer the option to dim that, to prevent burn in. I would love to take OLED to my phot editing, but I shudder to think what dimming would do to a mostly static screen.

Atm I'm hesitant to call OLED a good or bad option for a monitor. I'd rather call it unproven. Yet.

I have both and OLED is better for HDR material. OLEDs are too big to sit close to for editing.

bugAt the same time, TVs are different than monitors. TVs detect static content and offer the option to dim that, to prevent burn in. I would love to take OLED to my phot editing, but I shudder to think what dimming would do to a mostly static screen.

Atm I'm hesitant to call OLED a good or bad option for a monitor. I'd rather call it unproven. Yet.

Editing video on OLED - maybe. Editing photo - not so much.

For professional color grading video there are better options that are able to deliver peak brightness of 2000 nitts, like this bad boy:
or
Along with number of dimming zones and features optimized for it. Sure it costs sh!tload of money but it's not like some guy shooting a wedding is going to use this for editing his videos.

For photo editing I'd still prefer a true 10 or 12bit IPS panel with full coverage of sRGB. Maybe add high number of dimming zones to improve uniformity and you're set.

TardianI have both and OLED is better for HDR material. OLEDs are too big to sit close to for editing.

I know, I have an OLED TV. About 5% of the pictures I take in a holiday get the HDR treatment, I'd love to be able to use OLED for that. For non-HDR work, OLED's uniformity is unbelievable. I swear my brain was making up shades when initially looking at uniform, bright scenes on the OLED TV.

thesmokingmanLG Chem is nose diving... serves them right.

Except LG Display is not LG Chem.

Hi,
Yeah I was wondering about vlc's screen when it's done showing a movie showing black screen with their yellow cone in the middle
Seems pretty bright yellow if it would burn in eventually.

Have the 48c1 with a 3080Ti and its the greatest thing viewing content, just sometimes i think its too large playing games. I will pickup the 42 inch when it comes out and move the 48inch into the bedroom.

TomorrowWhat burn-in? It has not been a problem for a few generations now. Unless you leave it on for 24 hours displaying static content or something like that.

Why must the burn-in myth appear every time there is an article about OLED?
Then as a "PSA", let's kill this myth;
OLED has never had a burn-in problem.
OLED have a different problem with panel uniformity with a different cause that people confuse with burn-in, a problem caused by to uneven wear over time. This has nothing to do with pictures being static or not, but rather some areas of the screen being brighter over time. So leaving your OLED with a static screen over night is not going to hurt it, but viewing content that causes specific regions of the screen to have a significant higher brightness over time will lead to some altered color response. This issue may or may be a concern based on the user's usage pattern. But this is not burn-in, so people should stop it.

ChomiqEditing video on OLED - maybe. Editing photo - not so much.

For professional color grading video there are better options that are able to deliver peak brightness of 2000 nitts, like this bad boy:

or

Along with number of dimming zones and features optimized for it. Sure it costs sh!tload of money but it's not like some guy shooting a wedding is going to use this for editing his videos.

For photo editing I'd still prefer a true 10 or 12bit IPS panel with full coverage of sRGB. Maybe add high number of dimming zones to improve uniformity and you're set.

Me, I caught the VA panel bug. I prefer the colours and tones. They don't tolerate slouching. I currently have a low-end graphics card and tolerate 8-bit outcomes.

I am about to move to 4K 4:2:2 video HDR and take my still photography to full professional quality (RAW 24mp). I am guessing I need an Eizo CG3146 4K PROMINENCE HDR Monitor. I am seeking cheaper suggestions?

I will be using DaVinci Resolve. Any suggestions on the minimum graphics card?

I didn't respond earlier because I need to sleep and my internet turns off at 12 at night. I have 'adult' children who inherited their Dad's OCD and need parental management. I have a wife and to quote Cat Stevens:

I'm looking for hard headed woman
One who'll take me for myself
And if I find my hard headed woman
I won't need nobody else, no no no

Dimming zones = blooming highlights. Even TCL make fully array mini led TVs:

www.tcl.com/au/en/products/c825/55C825.html

What you really want is dual layer LCD monitor:

www.newlighting.com/44517/new-tvlogic-31-4k-hdr-monitor-w-dual-layer-lcd

Yes, the above is eye-watering in cost. However, Hisense is making TVs using the same technology:

www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1620287722

The bleeding-edge technology displays have no bleeding edges in the image.

Do you post on DPReview? Message me if you do.

TomorrowRtings tested older generation OLED's with static content. This kind of testing takes a long time. Theirs took over 5 years of continiuous running and the results are from 2019 so already years out of date. Direct quote from their website:

So no. Rtings testing found the previous gen OLED's were already very persistant to burn-in unless subjected to unrealistic conditions like 5 years of continiuous running.

The only conclusion Rtings can reasonably draw there, is what they're saying:
we don't expect most people who watch varied content without static areas to experience burn-in issues with an OLED TV

Gaming contains a lot of static areas, UI elements, etc. The taskbar is always in the same place, as are icons on the desktop. And in gaming, imagine you play some MMO. Always the same UI elements there.

PC desktop usage is simply not comparable to TV - and let's take another example. One of the thousands of non-OLED TV's hanging out there in bars, restaurants and stuff displaying images that only change every so often - used as advertisement or info panels; AND all those normal TVs being used as displays to connect to in the office. They ALL display heavy uniformity and color problems. They're made to be TV's. Not monitors.

The conclusion really is, we just don't know yet, but its very plausible to cause problems still. Because even with the newer technologies to prevent it, you'll be losing brightness over time as well, which might mask it better, but still is a longevity issue.

efikkanWhy must the burn-in myth appear every time there is an article about OLED?
Then as a "PSA", let's kill this myth;
OLED has never had a burn-in problem.
OLED have a different problem with panel uniformity with a different cause that people confuse with burn-in, a problem caused by to uneven wear over time. This has nothing to do with pictures being static or not, but rather some areas of the screen being brighter over time. So leaving your OLED with a static screen over night is not going to hurt it, but viewing content that causes specific regions of the screen to have a significant higher brightness over time will lead to some altered color response. This issue may or may be a concern based on the user's usage pattern. But this is not burn-in, so people should stop it.

Well, if you want to be pedantic about it, blue OLEDs still burn out faster, so yeah, leaving the screen over night is going to hurt it in that regard.

Ok, it's not plasma burn-in, but if the visible effects are the same (more or less), do you really think we need a new name for it? ';)

bugWell, if you want to be pedantic about it, blue OLEDs still burn out faster, so yeah, leaving the screen over night is going to hurt it in that regard.

Ok, it's not plasma burn-in, but if the visible effects are the same (more or less), do you really think we need a new name for it? ';)

Well, if you want to be pedantic about it, blue OLEDs still burn out faster. So yeah, leaving the screen on overnight, is going to hurt it in that regard.

Now the above is pedantic.

Where are the big boys 75" or 85" inchers ?

Prima.VeraWhere are the big boys 75" or 85" inchers ?

Bedroom TVs? Proper TVs are 219 inchers. Get a bigger house if they don't fit. For wider than 16:9 there is always the JVC 8K projector and anamorphic lenses.

www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1610621412

The TV that can be seen from space* is almost big enough!
Source: Michael Mageros (expert)
* with the naked eye

Don't ask permission ask for forgiveness ... enjoy! :slap:

Thank you TPU, I really wanted FIVE stars. You have made this Polymath irritatingly happy (again)! W1zzard et al I promise to use my skills for the greater good of the TPU community.

This may on occasion involve telling the Emperor that they are wearing no clothes, and telling experts as to which way is up. I will however follow the TPU code.

Why buy a 42 inch tv while you can buy a 55 inch tv for far cheaper?

TardianWhy wait the 48 inch is excellent!

Agreed.

TardianI said exactly that to lynx29 in another thread. I sit about 90cm from my monitor. 32 inches is big enough, given I have 20:15 vision, and any bigger involves neck movements.
LG 32in UHD HDR10 FreeSync Monitor (32UK550-B) should meet your needs. They are $499 AUD.

Tardian

I'd say I'm 1.5m from my screen and my neck movements are negligible.