HDR brightness to properly simulate a sun on screen

[Stahlmann]

Hey good people,

 

I've been thinking: How bright does a HDR display actually have to be to properly simulate a blinding sun on the screen?

 

I know there are screens like the Vizio P Series Quantum X with over 2000 Nits of peak brightness, but i've never actually seen such a bright panel in real-life, so i have no personal context on how bright this actually is to the human eyes.

The brightest displays i have ever seen personally are my LG 27GN950, which goes to about 750 Nits in HDR and my LG C9, which can reach about 850 Nits. And with both of these displays i have never had a moment in HDR content when i actually had the feeling of being blinded and the reflex to close my eyes.

 

I know some movies are mastered at up to 4000 Nits. How close is this to my question about the sun?

 

I'd like to hear your thoughts about this!

[ki8aras]

it really depends on your environment, a flash of 1000 nits in a pitch black room will blind you but in a normal environment with sunlight and stuff it won't 

[Stahlmann]

1 minute ago, ki8aras said:

it really depends on your environment, a flash of 1000 nits in a pitch black room will blind you but in a normal environment with sunlight and stuff it won't 

Normally i watch movies in a competely dark room. And because of the OLED screen that's pretty much the way to go. But the sun will even blind you when you're on the outside. And at least the screens with their peak brightness i have don't do that in the slightest when it's day outside.

[ki8aras]

1 minute ago, Stahlmann said:

Normally i watch movies in a competely dark room. And because of the OLED screen that's pretty much the way to go. But the sun will even blind you when you're on the outside. And at least the screens with their peak brightness i have don't do that in the slightest when it's day outside.

yeah but the sun is a hot ball of mass 150 million km from the earth beaming enough energy at us to support human life

 

while your display uses a couple hundred watts at most

[Stahlmann]

6 minutes ago, ki8aras said:

yeah but the sun is a hot ball of mass 150 million km from the earth beaming enough energy at us to support human life

 

while your display uses a couple hundred watts at most

I know but i'm just interested on the theoretical part of it, and how bright a screen would actually have to be. I know it's not a realistic expectation to have a screen that IS that bright.

[Kilrah]

You're talking of the actual sun disk?

Up to 1.6 billion apparently.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(luminance)

[Master Disaster]

58 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

I know but i'm just interested on the theoretical part of it, and how bright a screen would actually have to be. I know it's not a realistic expectation to have a screen that IS that bright.

I mean, you're talking relative to Earth which is something that can be calculated...

Quote

Earth receives around 133,200 lumens per square metre from the Sun, noting that this square metre has the Sun directly overhead. We can also divide this figure by the total power from the Sun, 133200/1366 = 97.5 lumens per watt. This is called luminous efficacy, the lighting efficiency of the Sun per watt of power

https://everythingwhat.com/how-many-lumens-is-the-sun-on-earth

 

Sure its bright but its nothing we cannot easily overcome with enough power.

[Doobeedoo]

Well, for example movies are mastered at 4000cd/m2 and some at 10000cd/m2 but obviously people don't have such displays. At least not yet.

We'll definitely need a new display tech like MicroLED to see even further visual and HDR advances.

[Stahlmann]

On 2/26/2021 at 4:45 PM, Doobeedoo said:

Well, for example movies are mastered at 4000cd/m2 and some at 10000cd/m2 but obviously people don't have such displays. At least not yet.

We'll definitely need a new display tech like MicroLED to see even further visual and HDR advances.

Yeah microLED will likely still be a few years off. And then it'll need a few more years to get cheap enough to get into the mainstream. I'd say not to expect any significant microLED TV in the consumer space for the next 8 years. Currently the battle is still going down between LED and OLED.

 

At least the new gen of OLEDs will get a lot brighter. One of the next Sony OLEDs will apparently get up to 1300cd/m2 peak brighness. And like i already said, the Vizio Quantum Series X already has over 2000cd/m2 peak brightness.

 

Man i'd really like to experience the Vizio just one time in a pitch black room to see what such HDR looks like.

[Doobeedoo]

3 hours ago, Stahlmann said:

Yeah microLED will likely still be a few years off. And then it'll need a few more years to get cheap enough to get into the mainstream. I'd say not to expect any significant microLED TV in the consumer space for the next 8 years. Currently the battle is still going down between LED and OLED.

 

At least the new gen of OLEDs will get a lot brighter. One of the next Sony OLEDs will apparently get up to 1300cd/m2 peak brighness. And like i already said, the Vizio Quantum Series X already has over 2000cd/m2 peak brightness.

 

Man i'd really like to experience the Vizio just one time in a pitch black room to see what such HDR looks like.

Yeah, it will take time... For monitors though, we'll be limited to LCD for a while. I even doubt we'll see more regular sized high refresh rate HDR OLED monitors. The OLED tech can see improvements, but still it has it's organic nature that definitely will pose issues with burn-in for sure.

[Stahlmann]

7 minutes ago, Doobeedoo said:

Yeah, it will take time... For monitors though, we'll be limited to LCD for a while. I even doubt we'll see more regular sized high refresh rate HDR OLED monitors. The OLED tech can see improvements, but still it has it's organic nature that definitely will pose issues with burn-in for sure.

LG has announced a 32" 4K OLED monitor for 2021. Sadly it's only 60Hz and only get's the HDR400 "True black" certification, so it doesn't really get that bright aswell. That's likely to prevent burn-in as it's severity is directly dependant on the OLED's brightness. Not to mention the outlandish price tag. (I'm getting a little off-topic here )

 

It'll be interesting how these brighter OLEDs are in terms of burn-in risk. At least my C9 OLED doesn't yet have any signs of burn-in after about 1 year of use. Including a lot of use as my PC monitor.

[Doobeedoo]

13 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

LG has announced a 32" 4K OLED monitor for 2021. Sadly it's only 60Hz and only get's the HDR400 "True black" certification, so it doesn't really get that bright aswell. That's likely to prevent burn-in as it's severity is directly dependant on the OLED's brightness. Not to mention the outlandish price tag. (I'm getting a little off-topic here )

 

It'll be interesting how these brighter OLEDs are in terms of burn-in risk. At least my C9 OLED doesn't yet have any signs of burn-in after about 1 year of use. Including a lot of use as my PC monitor.

Yeah I know, there are some OLED monitors, but no 1000+ nits or 240Hz ones for example like we've seen from LCD monitors. Can only imagine burn-in on OLED with such brightness with all day static UIs on it, oof. On the other hand I'm surprised we haven't seen literally any very high refresh rate model though, OLED being faster than LCD.

 

Man I'd be scared using those 4K 120Hz monitors/TVs as monitor all day with static desktop/game elements. But yeah good to see hear no issues so far.

[Stahlmann]

Just now, Doobeedoo said:

Yeah I know, there are some OLED monitors, but no 1000+ nits or 240Hz ones for example like we've seen from LCD monitors. Can only imagine burn-in on OLED with such brightness with all day static UIs on it, oof. On the other hand I'm surprised we haven't seen literally any very high refresh rate model though, OLED being faster than LCD.

 

Man I'd be scared using those 4K 120Hz monitors/TVs as monitor all day with static desktop/game elements. But yeah good to see hear no issues so far.

Burn-In is basically not a big problem if you have mixed content. I don't use my TV exclusively as a PC-monitor. Sometimes i watch movies, sometimes i watch games. For most PC games i use my other 4K 144Hz monitor. The OLED is mostly being used for singleplayer games like AC: Odyssey. And in these games you can also often disable static UI elements you don't want/need. Burn-in is very low-risk with modern OLEDs and it makes me sad it's enough of a reason for many people to steer away from OLED. The picture is just next-level compared to LED/LCD.

[Doobeedoo]

12 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

Burn-In is basically not a big problem if you have mixed content. I don't use my TV exclusively as a PC-monitor. Sometimes i watch movies, sometimes i watch games. For most PC games i use my other 4K 144Hz monitor. The OLED is mostly being used for singleplayer games like AC: Odyssey. And in these games you can also often disable static UI elements you don't want/need. Burn-in is very low-risk with modern OLEDs and it makes me sad it's enough of a reason for many people to steer away from OLED. The picture is just next-level compared to LED/LCD.

That may be true, mixed content, also having multiple displays like so. Though if you'd only have a single display, that display would be used more and in my case I'd be worried long-term since I have my PC on for very long daily and be it on desktop work or entertainment, a lot of static UI. Same for many games I'd play for long, a lot of static UI. So for such high end display investment I'd expect to have up to a decade for example, yeah I don't want burn-in UIs

But no doubt image quality is next-level over any LCD.

[jones177]

1 hour ago, Stahlmann said:

Burn-In is basically not a big problem if you have mixed content. I don't use my TV exclusively as a PC-monitor. Sometimes i watch movies, sometimes i watch games. For most PC games i use my other 4K 144Hz monitor. The OLED is mostly being used for singleplayer games like AC: Odyssey. And in these games you can also often disable static UI elements you don't want/need. Burn-in is very low-risk with modern OLEDs and it makes me sad it's enough of a reason for many people to steer away from OLED. The picture is just next-level compared to LED/LCD.

Chrome burnt in on mine so being on forums and YouTube did it. Now it is games and TV content only for my OLEDs. 

 

Here is what it looked like a 4900 hours.

[Stahlmann]

1 hour ago, jones177 said:

Chrome burnt in on mine so being on forums and YouTube did it. Now it is games and TV content only for my OLEDs. 

 

Here is what it looked like a 4900 hours.

Yeah but that's not really noticeable in real content is it? You can barely see it even when especially watching out for it.

 

(Tbh i don't even see it in your picture...)

[jones177]

1 hour ago, Stahlmann said:

Yeah but that's not really noticeable in real content is it? You can barely see it even when especially watching out for it.

 

(Tbh i don't even see it in your picture...)

It barely shows up viewed on a monitor or on the NanoCell TV I am using now but it is easy to spot viewed on an OLED.

It is only noticeable in games that have lots of blue sky like Horizon Zero Dawn.  In movies it usually blends in with the sky.

 

Using the OLED as a normal monitor was a test that failed. It has not put me off using them for gaming.  

[e22big]

On 2/26/2021 at 5:43 PM, Stahlmann said:

I know but i'm just interested on the theoretical part of it, and how bright a screen would actually have to be. I know it's not a realistic expectation to have a screen that IS that bright.

Well, the perception of solar brightness depends as much on raw luminance glow of the monitor as well as the distance you sit from them. One of a more scientific way to consider this is to look at the specialised medical lamp for people with SAD condition (Seasonal Affective Disorder) which stimulate the effect of natural sun light for people who don't have easy access for it. SAD lamp is often measure in lux which in turn measure in lumen (how further can the said light travel from the said source) per squre metre, by some lux 10 nit is measured at roughly 30 lux - in order for SAD lamp to be effective, you are looking for something around 10,000 lux which probably, you can workout the rest of the math

 

https://sciencing.com/convert-footcandles-lumens-5946754.html

Alternatively, if you want to experience for yourself the effect of a 1000 nit brightness and more, the easy source for that is basically your phone. Phone like Samsung S21 can do up to 1500 nit, you can go to their store and try crank up their brightness to the max.