Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Sorry, but I've been in that industry (LCD and OLED) for over 10 years and this doesn't match with my understanding. QLED is basically an LCD technology with QuantumDot on top. It is just Samsung's marketing.

Most all mid tier LCD TVs currently use QD (whether in the backlight or the color filter layers). They don't use Blue QD (only longer lifetime Red/Green), but crystal InGaN in the Blue backlight. Other lower end LCDs use RG phosphor instead of QD to produce white, which also has long term burn-in issues, but as you mention they are not individual to pixels. Color shift of the (global backlight) screens over years can be compensated, but since environmental lighting has a bigger effect on perceived color, I'm not sure why you'd bother (mini-LED can be worse).

Even the very best currently shipping OLEDs (not yet phosphorescent Blue) have visible burn-in at ~2000hr even with image shifting de-contrast techniques. Early 2014 QD (Red/Green) have visible burn-in at ~7khr and modern ones about 20khr. They're about 10x better than OLEDs, but you could still see it several years in (rather than months in for OLED).

I've got no great love for QLED, but R/G QD just doesn't have the same level of burn-in problems that fluorescent Blue OLED does, and neither do Blue InGaN LEDs.

https://en.tab-tv.com/samsung-has-released-recommendations-f...

I'm including this link, because the SID.org papers are all paywalled.




Same here, working with and in that industry for ~17 years on technology strategy. I'm no evangelist either, neither for LCD nor OLED.

I frankly don't know how you technically define "visible burn-in" in context of QD (do you mean actual pure QD tech or Samsungs mixed use of the tech for QLED TVs?).

If we can agree, that: 1.) The jargon "burn-in" on OLED describes the luminance degradation of individual sub-pixels (i.e. a weaker red because the operation hours of a red sub-pixel were much higher than its neighbours).

2.) Samsung's "QLED" is a brand for a LCD panel with the backlight created using R/G QD and blue LED (instead of blue/yellow LED). The backlight on standard QLED is separated in ~700 zones of the display, so you have huge clusters of pixels using the same backlight zone.

Then: What is the equal meaning of "burn-in" then in the context of QLED? The luminance degradation of the whole zone?

Or is it the "legacy" meaning of burn-in on LCD: The occurence of weaker/dead pixels due to issues in the TFT layer (broken/weak transistors no longer properly rotating the crystals)?

Either way, I can't confirm and don't agree that OLED TVs will see a visible "burn-in" after ~2000hrs of normal use. First-gen models yes, but definitely not currently shipping models.


I suspect we agree more than disagree. I was on the Driver/TCON development side. I remember the QD guys demoing new OLED TVs at DisplayWeek '17 that showed visible degradation of extreme (B&W bars and Logos) visible at 64 sRGB (10min B/W 1min Grey) during the show after ~72-96hrs. At show setup it was invisible and by the end of the show it looked terrible. You could swap the cables between TVs for comparison.

Similar to standard definitions of Mura a method of defining visible burn-in, you'd have to define the burn image (16pix B&W block or CNN Logo?), the detection image (64 Grey?), viewing distance (30deg FoV?), and visible contrast (+/4 MND?). I guarantee you all the OEMs have a spec.

Here's a set of modern 20hr/day tests at 6 months (posted above) where OLED has visible degradation (mostly Sony/Viso but also Samsung and LG). The new ones are definitely better!

https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/longevity-burn-in-test-updat...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: