Rank these types of monitors (and any others) for health/eye damage

[technoob95]

- LED/OLED/AMOLED/Super AMOLED
- LCD (e.g. TFT)
- Plasma
- DLP
- SED
- New CRT’s
- Any others

Assuming ambient light, settings, distance-to-size ratio e.t.c. are the same; rank the types of monitors generally for health and eyes (combined).

By ‘health’ I mean which is the least unhealthy for the brain and skin. E.g. In terms of the type of light). By ‘eyes’ I meant which is the least damaging to eyes.

An example of what I mean by unhealthy light is blue light. Studies have been done with blue light and monkeys (which obviously have over 90% the same DNA sequence and respond very similarly).

A question could be: Assuming all else is constant (and if different types of monitors generally emit different amounts of blue light); how much blue light do these types of monitors generally emit?

I am looking for the health and eye damage of types of monitors to buy one of them.

 

[Caring1]

If you are really concerned, don't sit in front of a monitor for too long, and get one with blue light reduction.
This sounds like you are doing a research project and asking us to do your homework for you.

 

[R0H1T]

Unless you can find scientific studies to get a definitive answer, at best you'd get anecdotal evidence here! And yeah we can't help with the homework.

 

[joemama]

I don't think you really have that many choices for monitors, like 99% of the monitors in the market are LCDs
If you really care about the blue light, many LCD monitors nowadays have low blue light mode or adjustable blue light

 

[Regeneration]

Only CRTs are considered unhealthy because of the flickering rate and some minor radiation.

1. Don't sit too close to the monitor.
2. Take a break every 15 minutes. Not moving the eyes for hours is unhealthy.
3. Don't sit in a complete dark room.

 

[Vayra86]

I am looking for the health and eye damage of types of monitors to buy one of them.

The absolute worst metric you can possibly use and I strongly recommend you focus on the actual product qualities.

Life is unhealthy, the key is moderation, something most people over here on this forum, me included, fail miserably at. There are no quantifiable, supported by consensus, damaging side effects of specific monitor types. Even low blue light... there is no evidence it truly helps your eyes, what it *might* do (again, no consensus, just anecdotal evidence) is allow your brain/biological clock to get used to day/night cycle better so you can sleep more easily. Its still BS though because the main differentiator is in fact WHAT you are doing on that screen. And the fact you're using a screen to begin with.

There are only results on general monitor use. A much more apparent side effect of screen use is near sightedness (many more children with glasses these days, eye problems develop earlier) and neck/back problems, the latter being a result of tablet and smartphone use.

Rather than looking at the monitor, look at your lifestyle, frequency and length of use, and listen to your body.

 

[Bill_Bright]

If you are really concerned, don't sit in front of a monitor for too long, and get one with blue light reduction.

I agree with this 100%.

But also, I recommend seeing an eye doctor and, if you don't have perfect vision, discuss getting prescription glasses for computer use. That's what I have and they really make a difference. No strain at all and I sit in front of my monitors 5 - 6 hours per day.

Mine are actually special bifocals. The main/top area has a focal length of ~24 inches - the average distance I sit away from my monitors. And the bottom part is for up close work.

Only CRTs are considered unhealthy because of the flickering rate and some minor radiation.

Only CRTs? Ummm, no. That is not true. As for flicker, CRT monitors typically have a refresh rate of 60Hz, but many support 75, 80 and some go as high as 100Hz. Most LCD monitors still have a native refresh rate of 60Hz.

Yes, radiation could be a problem, but you really have to sit very close for very long times. They main problem with CRT monitors is that they are analog, have huge footprints, and are heavy, power hungry heat generators. Plus the screens can be dust magnets.

In reality, because CRT monitors display curves as curves and not a series of jagged steps, CRT monitors can impose less stress and eyestrain than LCD displays! Extended up-close exposure to LCD monitors can result in significant eyestrain, head aches, sleep disorders and more.

 

[technoob95]

If you are really concerned, don't sit in front of a monitor for too long, and get one with blue light reduction.
This sounds like you are doing a research project and asking us to do your homework for you.

Unless you can find scientific studies to get a definitive answer, at best you'd get anecdotal evidence here! And yeah we can't help with the homework.

I do not mind anecdotal information and am asking to choose a type of monitor to buy.

 

[R-T-B]

Realistically, there are only two modern display techs that are produced, and they are pretty much identical from a health perspective:

TFT, and OLED. OLED costs more and is emissive rather than transmissive, but that should make zero health difference.

Everything else you listed is pretty much no longer manufactured or used (RIP Plasma).

 

[Athlonite]

Only CRTs are considered unhealthy because of the flickering rate and some minor radiation.

1. Don't sit too close to the monitor.
2. Take a break every 15 minutes. Not moving the eyes for hours is unhealthy.
3. Don't sit in a complete dark room.

only those crappy 60Hz CRT's flicker my old MAG did 1024x768 32bpp @ 100Hz or 1200x1024 @ 75Hz so no flicker it also had anti glare coatings and a flat square screen best damn CRT I ever used
the rest I'll agree with

as for which to buy I'd go with either high refresh TFT (including VA) or IPS with blue light reduction Oled are at the moment just to expensive unless you have a whole lot of cash burning a hole in ya pocket

 

[technoob95]

only those crappy 60Hz CRT's flicker my old MAG did 1024x768 32bpp @ 100Hz or 1200x1024 @ 75Hz so no flicker it also had anti glare coatings and a flat square screen best damn CRT I ever used
the rest I'll agree with

as for which to buy I'd go with either high refresh TFT (including VA) or IPS with blue light reduction Oled are at the moment just to expensive unless you have a whole lot of cash burning a hole in ya pocket

Which out of TFT and IPS would you recommend?

 

[Athlonite]

Which out of TFT and IPS would you recommend?

All depends on how much money you are wanting to spend! don't have a lot then go TN got plenty then go for an IPS

 

[sam_86314]

Only CRTs are considered unhealthy because of the flickering rate and some minor radiation.

1. Don't sit too close to the monitor.
2. Take a break every 15 minutes. Not moving the eyes for hours is unhealthy.
3. Don't sit in a complete dark room.

I'd think DLP would probably have the same problem because of the spinning color wheel.

 

[R-T-B]

TFT got plenty then go for an IPS

Technically IPS is a type if TFT.

 

[Bill_Bright]

I'd think DLP would probably have the same problem because of the spinning color wheel.

I had a 46" DLP TV. Gorgeous image. No eyestrain at all. But after 4 years, the motor for the spinning wheel started to whine. Not good. I don't think I have ever seen a DLP computer monitor - except projection types.

 

[Athlonite]

Technically IPS is a type if TFT.

you are correct I should have used the term TN rather than TFT

 

[R-T-B]

To further add to the discussion, I am a fan of Plasma panels. So much so I keep a stock of vintage ones and have learned to refurbish them and keep them alive. They aren't nearly as susceptible to burn in as most believe.

Their biggest drawback is they really are 1080p only. I've lately ceased to care about this and my 42" plasma is again my main. But I have no idea about eyestrain. I imagine it'd be similar to CRTs, given they use similar phosphors and a lot of energy. But seriously, just sit back a bit and enjoy the view. Be aware though, they will act as a space heater, and the good ones for computer monitors (the ones that support Chroma 444) are energy pigs from the early days (Pannasonic ceased supporting 444 chroma about 2010 lineup for cost reasons). They can and will draw up to 500W on a white background, which is insane (like me so it's a good fit).

 

[Athlonite]

I do have to agree with you there RTB a good Plasma just looks really nice even at only 1080p

 

[Decryptor009]

I have no issues viewing my CRT television for older gaming on console.
I have issues with LCD screens though and sometimes i just cannot put my finger on why, like i have 3 monitors, my eyes react differently to each screen even of the same panel type. IPS causes more eye strain for me than TN.

 

[R-T-B]

I do have to agree with you there RTB a good Plasma just looks really nice even at only 1080p

Yeah, the colors are what sell me and they still boast unbeatable (outside of OLED) contrast ratios.

That said, they do have some oddities from the analog era. Image "noise" at times can be noticed, and sometimes part of the picture can affect other parts of the screen. Like a bright blue/red/green button can create a slightly brighter/darker "bar" across the screen on a badly calibrated panel. Finicky things that need a lot of tuning. Probably why I like them.

 

[bug]

Which out of TFT and IPS would you recommend?

Here, read a bit a decide for yourself: https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/panel_technologies.htm

 

[R-T-B]

Here, read a bit a decide for yourself: https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/panel_technologies.htm

Why didn't I think to link this? Excellent article!

 

[technoob95]

All depends on how much money you are wanting to spend! don't have a lot then go TN got plenty then go for an IPS

Here, read a bit a decide for yourself: https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/panel_technologies.htm

TN's have higher refresh rates so they would be better?

 

[sam_86314]

TN's have higher refresh rates so they would be better?

TN panels tend to have better pixel response times, but worse colors and viewing angles.

TN, IPS, and VA can all have high refresh rates. IPS tends to have better color reproduction and worse pixel response times. VA is right in the middle.

Both of my monitors are TN, and I have no issues with their color reproduction, but I don't do professional color work.

 

[Jetster]

TN panels have no better response time then and a quality IPS. They are just cheaper. You can get a 240 Hz IPS and it will feel better to the eyes

I don't think it makes any difference in the screen type and your health. But to much close activity with children can cause nearsightedness and fatigue