5 ms·
You're missing the point: > I don't care much about average panel degradation. > I do care about seeing ghost letters or shapes on top of the latest TV series
by dahfizz 3y ago
You're missing the point:
> I don't care much about average panel degradation.
> I do care about seeing ghost letters or shapes on top of the latest TV series I'm watching.
Nobody cares about "luminance degradation", they just dont want ghosting
- rickdeckard 3y agoNo I did not. Check the first sentence of my reply: "You'll be fine with any of the existing technologies of today." And "ghosting" are artifacts on fast movement due to a lag in panel refresh, it's something entirely different.
- 411111111111111 3y ago> You'll be fine with any of the existing technologies of today I think you're going too far with your statement. OLED/qd-oled and to a lesser degree WOLED all suffer from significant burn-in, which makes them pretty bad for desktop use. Previous LCD technologies will degrade over the years by losing luminance and color accuracy, but that's a pretty minor issue compared to OLED as far as I'm concerned.
- BearOso 3y agoFrom context, you know the post is talking about ghosting from image retention, not ghosting from motion blur. Please don't be pedantic. We're not all versed in the terminology.
- Sohcahtoa82 3y agoI'm pretty sure that on HN, being pedantic is basically required by law.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- BearOso 3y agoI think the point you're trying to make is you can calibrate away LCD backlight luminance degradation because it's uniform across the panel. And you don't notice because your eyes adapt to the whole screen. With OLED, not so much. OLED does have tech to compensate based on total pixel usage. You might see that if you tried to change a panel without the electronics. I'm not aware of how widespread it is, but I know iphones can do it.