Awful LED lights everywhere in USA...and upcoming incandescent ban!

DisplaysShouldNotBeTVs Yes Im friends with the university professor that knows him, i did told him that i was going to promote their monitor as it changed my life, because i know almost nobody knows about it, my professor friend told me about it, love their website also, i don't know what search engine you are using, in duckduckgo incandescent monitor is the first match that shows up, there are also videos of people making incandescent monitors, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHJx7D-ttdM i guess is something that just  recently was discovered.

jordan BTW, they just added a contact form to the bottom of their site!

I also finally found the Spectrumview patent:

https://ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/11415835

https://patents.google.com/patent/US11415835B2/en

Interesting that it's been in development all the way since 2019

Seems similar to Eazeye at the surface, but what really intrigues me is how Spectrumview is claiming to offer such wide gamut coverage and seemingly brighter results even with just sunlight, compared to the typical washed out look that other RLCDs have

jordan

the supply chain issue again… still it's refreshing to hear that they are willing to change the panel. Did they mention who makes their panels?

photon78s I have the 27" solar and a 24" incandescent bulb for night, at full incandescent bulb power touching the display feels warm, not too hot, at half power is just room temperature. The light box has three fans running at low speed, its very quiet but you can still hear a whisper, i think it has a pretty good ventilation

jordan Oof, yeah I would not consider buying until there is an option without FRC.

In monitors, FRC consistently gives me much worse symptoms than PWM.

My most reliable laptop actually has some mild PWM (which has a low enough flicker depth to not impact my productivity but occasionally I feel light eye pressure or very minor headaches from).

However, despite this PWM, the reason why I can consistently get so much done on that laptop is that I was pretty much entirely able to eliminate FRC and any image enhancement / post-processing.

Bad high-flicker-depth PWM can totally make a display unusable or very irritating to look at for me too, but FRC and other post-processing methods are always "the ones that really get to me" and cause longer term effects in addition to significantly interfering with reading and learning.

Incandescent colors have so much power to heal but if the display still has FRC that's something I almost always notice, it will prevent this display from living up to its brand and achieving "true expanded 2D peripheral vision field and completely still dreamlike quietness state as if frozen in time ꩜" effect.

DisplaysShouldNotBeTVs I contacted them about the frc color dithering and they said the same thing as Jordan and Photon78s said, its about a supply chain issue, seems non frc panels are really hard to get.

Before I was just like you guys, always searching for the next display or tweak to see if the eye strain disappeared, but now since i got these i don't need to search anything else, because i know i have the best displays available on earth. No joke, the experience changes entirely when you change the light, is much more immersive as well. LED light that fu...s you up, is no coincidence that the name of this forum is LEDstrain.

I guess there are two schools of thought then, one that thinks the strain arrises from software related and the other that the strain arises from the light itself. I have not had any strain whatsoever of any kind, but its just my experience. Besides that the monitors themselves are awesome, they are made of wood, so much nicer than plastic, you can actually feel the hand of the people that made them, these monitors should be three times the price, at least.

I think it would be useful if the company performed the kind of testing folks here are doing with high speed cameras, oscilloscope measurements of PWM, microscope videos of pixel inversion and FRC, color spectrum measurements and more and shared that with us.

LED strain is not only about the static spectrum of the light but also the dynamic fluctuations (flicker) and motion that humans are naturally and biologically wired to be sensitive to. I think natural light sources even if flickering (sun, reflective water, fire, etc.) do not have the same frequencies and rhythms of light intensity and color changes that these displays and other artificial sources produce.

DisplaysShouldNotBeTVs Ok I agree both software and light matter, but more light because light is the raw substance from which the software then gives form, like pottery in which the clay is the substance and then is shaped, but you cannot make fine Chinese ceramic for example with mud, the kind of primal substance defines the boundaries of what can be done with it. So i would first fix the light, and then its configuration and all the ways you can give form to it.

photon78s you are right on target, will pass the word, some more hard core data that can be measured by anyone.

photon78s I think natural light sources even if flickering (sun, reflective water, fire, etc.) do not have the same frequencies and rhythms of light intensity and color changes that these displays and other artificial sources produce.

agree, different types of light have different frequencies and rhythms of intensity and color, but here is where it gets interesting, what is artificial light, how do you define it, is artificial light electric? Then are thunderbolts artificial? My take is the same as the spectrumview site and other sources says, there are really just two types of light, incandescent and luminescent, nearly all electronic displays are luminescent, but there is natural luminescence like in fireflies.

beyondthelight

By artificial and in the context of this forum, I mean light from devices using led based backlight technology, oleds, etc.

This is a great site by a scientist who is also a participant on this forum ("jen" username on this forum):

https://www.flickersense.org/testing-leds-and-screens

Quoting that webpage:

Random flicker might be better than regularly pulsed flicker. Candlelight flickers slowly, but it doesn't harm me and even makes my brain feel a little better when I'm recovering from LED injury.

I view that many natural light sources do not have the same regularly pulsed flicker as our devices (artificial source). FRC (temporal dithering) and pixel inversion are very regular flicker patterns. Lots of measurements (including my own) on this forum confirm the regularly pulsed flicker aspect of current displays.

Also [emphasis mine]:

All of the LED lights that are OK for me have some special quality. Some are DC or have good AC/DC conversion and have low, non-periodic flicker. Some have low flicker that lacks color flicker and that has either a very random pattern or slight randomness to its pattern. This suggests that specific engineering for qualities not yet described by the IEEE report and not yet clearly defined may be required to create safe LEDs.

I wrote previously about what would be a more "ideal" display. I mentioned and included color spectrum as a criteria (WLED backlight spectrum peaks) so I am definitely interested in seeing improvements in the "quality" of the light itself, "the raw substance" as you termed.

https://ledstrain.org/d/2589-products-to-try-or-avoid-pwm-flicker-and-temporal-dithering-testing/158

More about FRC here: https://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?t=6799\

I wonder if these older LCDs due to their being not as accuracy as current displays are more comfortable.

Very old LCDs like an early portable TV or old 1994 Thinkpad, had a lot of pixel noise, the electronics weren't able to adjust pixels as accurately as they can today.

I wonder what folks here have to say about this statement from https://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?t=6799

Looks to me that FRC is not "below the noise floor" of people's vision despite claims to the contrary [emphasis mine]

Human vision already has natural noise (but most brain filters that). The same problem affects camera sensors.

The important job is to make sure FRC/temporal dithering is below the noise floor of human vision. Also at high resolution, FRC pixels are so fine that it's almost like invisible spatial dithering instead of temporal dithering. Also, FRC is dithering only between adjacent colors in the color gamut, not between widely-spaced colors (like some technologies such as DLP has to).

beyondthelight

Happy that the monitor works for you. At the moment I will wait for more reviews and testing data.

Anyone care to explain this statement:

In fact, many modern light sources, such as LED lights, use a combination of incandescence and luminescence to produce light. Incandescent materials can provide the initial heat to activate luminescent materials, resulting in a more energy-efficient and versatile light source.

Reference: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/incandescence-vs-luminescence.382420/