Will HDR Kill Your OLED TV

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
53,518
This is a fairly technical read over at the aptly named TechHive, about HDR working your OLED TV to the point of early failure, or at least not being able to turn out the specifications that you think it should after HDR usage. This is probably no big deal to average TV viewers, but worth a read if you are display geek, which we know many of you are.


None of this information can be viewed as established fact. OLED simply hasn’t been around all that long, and HDR content has been available for an even shorter time. But here is some advice I can provide with complete confidence: Don’t use your OLED TV as a digital picture frame, a security camera monitor, or for displaying flight information at an airport.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,656
Not a clue since I do not own an OLED TV. :D (To expensive and my Sony Bravia 50 inch 1080p TV from 2013 is still going strong and looking good.)
 

Budwise

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 7, 2004
Messages
1,833
I'm sure my LG C7P will be fine. As he says in the final paragraph, just dont use an OLED for an Airport terminal or Mall directory etc. Watch varied content like a normal person and they'll last longer than the standards they're tied to.
 

zalazin

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 12, 2000
Messages
1,654
My ancient 43" Phillips is still going strong and I won't buy into all the hype. No way would I touch an Oled after reading this.....
 

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
I'm sure my LG C7P will be fine. As he says in the final paragraph, just dont use an OLED for an Airport terminal or Mall directory etc. Watch varied content like a normal person and they'll last longer than the standards they're tied to.

Actually I think the article leaves open a lot of questions. The author said minimalists who watch an occasional HDR movie shouldn;t worry, and he thinks average viewers (5 hours a day) probabaly shouldn't worry, but he admits none of this is definitive. We sinmply don't know what HDR will do to OLED, but I'll bet it won't be good.

Emissive QLED (rather than QLEDs being used as backlighting) might be better, but I have read that there may still be an issue with the blue element. But this is complex, given that the reason the individual QLEDs emit a certain color is because of size, rather than chemistry. I need to read more about this.

Probably the most stable are LEDs, and it was interesting to see Sony explore their Crystal TV tech, wherein LEDs actually form the pixels, rather than acting as back lights. I hope they develop that tech for the market. I believe another big player came out with scalable LED screens that could make up any size display.

I truly think HDR and OLED is not the best combo.
 
Last edited:

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
Until you have one in your living room and bask in the glory. :D

There are many short-lived phenomena that are beautiful. If you have the money, then you will have a great picture, no doubt. But if there is a better technology for this application, then I'm for it. the last thing I want to experience is my display dimming over time.
 

HeadRusch

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 8, 2007
Messages
1,587
Any self-illuminating display is going to suffer from issues like uneven-wear and the possibility of image retention/burn in, OLED is no different than Plasma in this regard. Making those tiny self-illuminating pixels go MAX POWAAAAH over and over is, yeah, gonig to probably kill it sooner than later.

If you owned a Plasma or CRT Rear or Front projector (where you could introduce uneven phosphor wear) you're well versed in these type of issues. There's no free lunch, people buy LCD's the same way they buy shitty 196kbit digital music copies......its 'good enough without most of the hassles' even if you lose some quality as a result.

I buy LCD's and (somewhat) shitty 196k music files for those exact reasons, too.
 
Last edited:

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
You're right about the displays you mention, but LEDs are the most robust technology we have...and do not suffer burn in.

Plasmas annd CRT have certain things in common.

Until (and if) emissive LED TVs become available, getting a good LCD for HDR is probably the best Price/Perfprmance/Stability solution for HDR.
 

Armenius

Extremely [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
33,183
You're right about the displays you mention, but LEDs are the most robust technology we have...and do not suffer burn in.

Plasmas annd CRT have certain things in common.

Until (and if) emissive LED TVs become available, getting a good LCD for HDR is probably the best Price/Perfprmance/Stability solution for HDR.
LEDs can suffer from burn-in issues, though. It's just uncommon. It's become more of an issue with cheaper panels these days, particularly those of the 4K variety.
 

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
LEDs can suffer from burn-in issues, though. It's just uncommon. It's become more of an issue with cheaper panels these days, particularly those of the 4K variety.

Theoretically true, but what is more common with LEDs is persistence rather than burn in. An LED has a "natural state", and will return to the state UNLESS there is NO periodic shifting at all. So if someone watches a TV station 24/7 with a non shifting logo, then after a consoderable period of time the LED might stay stuck.

Burn with other technologies can happen when you have repetitive stimulation over a period of time, even with occsional shifting.

LEDs are simply more robust, and can be driven harder without degrading.
 

motomonkey

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
1,490
My ancient 43" Phillips is still going strong and I won't buy into all the hype. No way would I touch an Oled after reading this.....

Guess it depends on what you want out of a home entertainment system.

Once you get used to watching movies at 4K with HDR on an OLED, it's hard to go back.

And in actually reading the article, unless you watch HDR content all of the time, the decrease in longevity is tolerable for the average user.
 

brentsg

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 8, 2003
Messages
1,746
Guess it depends on what you want out of a home entertainment system.

Once you get used to watching movies at 4K with HDR on an OLED, it's hard to go back.

And in actually reading the article, unless you watch HDR content all of the time, the decrease in longevity is tolerable for the average user.

Agreed, would rather use a faded OLED with some burn-in than any Phillips LCD I've ever seen.
 

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264

pcgeekesq

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 23, 2012
Messages
1,399
Until you have one in your living room and bask in the glory. :D
Abso-freakin-lutely. Had my bro-in-law and his family over, they watched Thor-Ragnarok in 4K HDR on my 65" LG OLED65C6P. They raved about it.

I don't watch crap, so it's hard to find even 2 hours a day of content worth watching. Accordingly, I have no fears of burn-in or any other wear issues on my OLED.

My only fear is that SpaceX will release a 4K HDR Blu-Ray of their Falcon Heavy flight -- the temptation to put it that nerd pron on loop and let it run forever would be pretty strong.
 
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
857
Not a clue since I do not own an OLED TV. :D (To expensive and my Sony Bravia 50 inch 1080p TV from 2013 is still going strong and looking good.)

Same. My 2013 Panasonic plasma TVs, 65 and 55in, still look great. I hope they last for a very long time as I have no interest in 4K at all and it sucks 1080p is becoming a rare resolution for TV and smartphone displays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DocNo
like this

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Staff member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
Actually I think the article leaves open a lot of questions. The author said minimalists who watch an occasional HDR movie shouldn;t worry, and he thinks average viewers (5 hours a day) probabaly shouldn't worry, but he admits none of this is definitive. We sinmply don't know what HDR will do to OLED, but I'll bet it won't be good.

Emissive QLED (rather than QLEDs being used as backlighting) might be better, but I have read that there may still be an issue with the blue element. But this is complex, given that the reason the individual QLEDs emit a certain color is because of size, rather than chemistry. I need to read more about this.

Probably the most stable are LEDs, and it was interesting to see Sony explore their Crystal TV tech, wherein LEDs actually form the pixels, rather than acting as back lights. I hope they develop that tech for the market. I believe another big player came out with scalable LED screens that could make up any size display.

I truly think HDR and OLED is not the best combo.

Apple is (alledgedly) working on MicroLED tech. Since it's probably for their iDevices, the pixel pitch will definitely be small enough for TVs and monitors (which was Crystal LED's and Plasma's problem, the subpixels were just too big for the future).

But yeah. While OLED is great in a dark room, the brightness levels you need for HDR1000 in a lit room are just too much for the tech. We need tougher pixels. QLED and MicroLED should theoretically have wider gamuts too.



EDIT: Oh, one thing to keep in mind when talking about durability. LG's OLED TVs are actually single-color OLEDs with filters. That gives them a little more durability than the RGB OLEDs you see in smartphones. But uneven subpixel wear is still an issue, and the filter cuts the brightness of the screen.
 
Last edited:

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
Apple is (alledgedly) working on MicroLED tech. Since it's probably for their iDevices, the pixel pitch will definitely be small enough for TVs and monitors (which was Crystal LED's and Plasma's problem, the subpixels were just too big for the future).

But yeah. While OLED is great in a dark room, the brightness levels you need for HDR1000 in a lit room are just too much for the tech. We need tougher pixels. QLED and MicroLED should theoretically have wider gamuts too.



EDIT: Oh, one thing to keep in mind when talking about durability. LG's OLED TVs are actually single-color OLEDs with filters. That gives them a little more durability than the RGB OLEDs you see in smartphones. But uneven subpixel wear is still an issue, and the filter cuts the brightness of the screen.

So you're saying Crystal LED was too bih for 4K and 8K?

Right about LG's OLED, which Kodak stupidly sold to LG. The problem is that even though the TV compemsates for the blue OLED degradation, white OLEDS will wear out driven at high HDR levels.

Kodak not only created this version of OLED tech, but also created digital cameras, but misplayed their hand.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
22,416
I have an LG C7 OLED (2017 model)...I'm not worried about lifespan...Dolby Vision is stunningly gorgeous and HDR in general is the biggest advancement in display technology since 1080p...I usually upgrade within 10 years so no biggie...plus by then even better sets will be available (8K?)
 
Last edited:

cjcox

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
2,315
WAAHH! WAAHH!!! OLED is great, but I'd rather save a few hundred bucks on an eye blinding Samsung, because Samsung is just uber cool. Dang it! OLED is still better. I know, I'll write yet another article about how absolutely awful and evil OLEDs are and of course LG, I mean, hey, Samsung is just sooo much cooler.

(idiots)

Loving my 3 year old LG OLED... the majority of you other guys will replace your Samsungs long before I replace my LG. Just saying. I've never met a Samsung user that was using their TV on the surface of Sun (so they could show off its brightness).
 

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
WAAHH! WAAHH!!! OLED is great, but I'd rather save a few hundred bucks on an eye blinding Samsung, because Samsung is just uber cool. Dang it! OLED is still better. I know, I'll write yet another article about how absolutely awful and evil OLEDs are and of course LG, I mean, hey, Samsung is just sooo much cooler.

(idiots)

Loving my 3 year old LG OLED... the majority of you other guys will replace your Samsungs long before I replace my LG. Just saying. I've never met a Samsung user that was using their TV on the surface of Sun (so they could show off its brightness).

Your set is pre HDR? OLEDs are great, but I believe HDR will age them more quickly.
 

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
Amerius:

I'm not finding a lot about Dell burn in.

If the appearance of burn in exists, it may be a defect in underlying circuitry rather than the LEDs themselves. There's not a lot of evidence for burn in, except for the rare conditions I described.

But I have an open mind.
 

vegeta535

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
9,180
WAAHH! WAAHH!!! OLED is great, but I'd rather save a few hundred bucks on an eye blinding Samsung, because Samsung is just uber cool. Dang it! OLED is still better. I know, I'll write yet another article about how absolutely awful and evil OLEDs are and of course LG, I mean, hey, Samsung is just sooo much cooler.

(idiots)

Loving my 3 year old LG OLED... the majority of you other guys will replace your Samsungs long before I replace my LG. Just saying. I've never met a Samsung user that was using their TV on the surface of Sun (so they could show off its brightness).
IDK seems like TCL is the hot stuff right now. Like I said in other thread price and size is the most important thing to the common man. Panel type/quality and features don't mean much to them.
 

AlphaAtlas

[H]ard|Gawd
Staff member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
1,713
IDK seems like TCL is the hot stuff right now. Like I said in other thread price and size is the most important thing to the common man. Panel type/quality and features don't mean much to them.

What's wrong with TCL's panels? They're all VA IIRC, which gives them better blacks and less bloom at a given price point than most IPS competitors. I Iike that they bake Roku into the TVs too, instead of pushing a crumby MeeToo OS.

So you're saying Crystal LED was too bih for 4K and 8K?

Right about LG's OLED, which Kodak stupidly sold to LG. The problem is that even though the TV compemsates for the blue OLED degradation, white OLEDS will wear out driven at high HDR levels.

Kodak not only created this version of OLED tech, but also created digital cameras, but misplayed their hand.
We don't know for sure, but the 2012 Crystal LED prototype was a big 55" 1080p TV, and I seem to remember them mentioning pixel pitch. Also, they only use the tech in giant video walls now.

That being said, Apple seems intent on proving them wrong, as microLED is allegedly being developed for the Apple Watch. Which is a crazy tiny pixel pitch.

And yeah. Even individual LG/Kodak subpixels can wear out unevenly if you, for example, have a bright blue wallpaper or loop Blue Planet to stress one color more. It just means they don't have to worry about those different RGB OLED wear curves in perfect conditions.
 
Last edited:

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
IDK seems like TCL is the hot stuff right now. Like I said in other thread price and size is the most important thing to the common man. Panel type/quality and features don't mean much to them.

Agree about size. Give me a good 80 inch and larger, and I'm happy. I'd rather have a very good 90 inch set than a a great 65 inch. More compelling.
 

pcgeekesq

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 23, 2012
Messages
1,399
The discussion is about llongevity.
https://www.rtings.com/tv/learn/real-life-oled-burn-in-test
OLED burn in is real

From the cited article: "Week 18: (05/31/2018): Uniformity photos have been updated. The maximum brightness CNN TV is showing some darker areas of burn-in on the 'Breaking News' banner."

What kind of idiot buys an OLED TV to watch CNN 20 hours a day, and turns it up to max brightness?
Seriously, you deserve to have your panel turn to crap if you do that. It's hardly a typical use case.
 

pcgeekesq

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 23, 2012
Messages
1,399
Agree about size. Give me a good 80 inch and larger, and I'm happy. I'd rather have a very good 90 inch set than a a great 65 inch. More compelling.
It's just a question of where you sit. There's no perceptual different between a 4K 65" set at 6.5' and a 4K 90" set at 9', unless your eyes are so bad you can't focus at 6.5'.
But hey, if you feel the need for the bigger screen, as compensation for whatever, go ahead.
 

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
What's wrong with TCL's panels? They're all VA IIRC, which gives them better blacks and less bloom at a given price point than most IPS competitors. I Iike that they bake Roku into the TVs too, instead of pushing a crumby MeeToo OS.


We don't know for sure, but the 2012 Crystal LED prototype was a big 55" 1080p TV, and I seem to remember them mentioning pixel pitch. Also, they only use the tech in giant video walls now.

That being said, Apple seems intent on proving them wrong, as microLED is allegedly being developed for the Apple Watch. Which is a crazy tiny pixel pitch.

And yeah. Even individual LG/Kodak subpixels can wear out unevenly if you, for example, have a bright blue wallpaper or loop Blue Planet to stress one color more. It just means they don't have to worry about those different RGB OLED wear curves in perfect conditions.

The Kodak/LG compenstion ensures color balance and protection against differential aging, but stressed OLEDs will dim more quickly. So you can eventually have sets that are balanced color-wise, but uniformly lose brightness when driven too hard.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 133315

Guest
My 4k samsung Tv is starting to flake on me and its only been 2 years since I bought it.

Backlight looks like its fuked my 55inch panel as I see this, | | | | | on my tv, more noticeable in light backgrounds, sea or sky and the second left one and second right one are more prominent than the others.

| = back light vertical strip.

Tried turning shit down but I think 2 of the lights are either brighter leds or closer to the back of the panel than the others ?

It’s a good excuse to buy a new oled tv.
 

dreamwriter

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 22, 2018
Messages
264
It's just a question of where you sit. There's no perceptual different between a 4K 65" set at 6.5' and a 4K 90" set at 9', unless your eyes are so bad you can't focus at 6.5'.
But hey, if you feel the need for the bigger screen, as compensation for whatever, go ahead.

You can sit really close to your laptop, and get the effect of a large screen, but I prefer not to.

Your eyes will certainly focus differently between a 65" and a 90" at the distances you mentioned, and there is a difference in how one feels sitting 6.5 feet from an electronic device, compared to a bigger screen farther away. I don't'like sitting close to a TV, There is a difference bewteen a home theater feeling and TV. There are a lot of people who like big screens, and projection.

And in response to your gracious permission for me to use a bigger screen, I cheerfully give you permission to sit 6.5 feet from your TV, as compensation for "whatever" as you say,
 

Pieter3dnow

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
6,784
Not a clue since I do not own an OLED TV. :D (To expensive and my Sony Bravia 50 inch 1080p TV from 2013 is still going strong and looking good.)
Recently replaced my 2012 Samsung . The TV wars are kinda odd now between Samsung and LG (which is the only Oled TV producing company). There is hardly any reason (content providers still hardly use 4K/HDR) to swap but from experience I can say is that some of the new content is amazing on a new TV and that is on both Oled and Qled (full array local dimming).
Some of the technology will mature and some of it will be replaced it hasn't been any other way the last decades..
Maybe in the next few years it will drop enough in price to get within the mainstream audience.
 

Tak Ne

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
1,233
All aboard the FAD Train. Time to sell those 3D TVs, 4k TVs & curved screena and buy a TV that can do HDR. They guarantee at least 20 bits of media to exploit this great new feature before the TV manufacturers realise that 95% of people don't care and content creators accept that the same content released previously but with HDR didn't somehow make it good.
 

cjcox

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
2,315
IDK seems like TCL is the hot stuff right now. Like I said in other thread price and size is the most important thing to the common man. Panel type/quality and features don't mean much to them.

That's true. Arguably sound is more important and I'm just using the built-ins on my LG :LOL: So maybe I'm the one that truly "doesn't get it"... you know?
 

tunatime

Well...OK
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
5,196
I love my 2016 and 2017 oled tvs. The 16 i ues as my pc and the 17 mostly pulls tv/moives and light gaming. I haven't checked with slides in a while but i have yet to notice any thing any both still look amazing. If you can afford to spend 2k+ on a tv you probably don't care if it lasts 5 years as by then it would be outdated and in a spare bedroom anyway.
 

motomonkey

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
1,490
All aboard the FAD Train. Time to sell those 3D TVs, 4k TVs & curved screena and buy a TV that can do HDR. They guarantee at least 20 bits of media to exploit this great new feature before the TV manufacturers realise that 95% of people don't care and content creators accept that the same content released previously but with HDR didn't somehow make it good.


You are seriously calling HDR and 4K a fad? wow.

enjoy your Betamax.
 
Top