I've never had a single spiral light bulb reach the "rated" lifespan.. even the name brand ones, lot of marketing BS,
I haven't tried LED yet.. but xperience thus far on new age lightbulbs.. no bueno..Show Image(http://a.deviantart.net/avatars/k/y/kyleoniplz.gif?1)
I've never had a single spiral light bulb reach the "rated" lifespan.. even the name brand ones, lot of marketing BS,
I haven't tried LED yet.. but xperience thus far on new age lightbulbs.. no bueno..Show Image(http://a.deviantart.net/avatars/k/y/kyleoniplz.gif?1)
CFLs have an ignition process. If you were to turn it on on day one and leave it one, it would very likely hit the quoted number. If you put it in a bathroom or closet, where it is running in short times and being turned on and off a lot, it's going to get a lot closer to 1000 hours (lifespan of incandescent) and than 8000 hours (typical CFL, the spiral kind)
(I'll stop now. Have done a lot of work with light bulbs in the past)
They're slated to phase out incandescents by 2017 I believe in Canada. Personally though I'm elated to know that we're being forced eventually into LED technology. I just hope that OLED lighting becomes a thing, since it can accurately reproduce natural light, iirc.All CFLs and LEDs have very spiky emission spectra, which are dramatically less pleasant (IMO) and distort color relationships (causing potential problems for anyone who cares about the way their photographs/paintings/clothes/... looks). They tend to also emit more light toward the blue end of the spectrum, again with a few spikes at particular wavelengths, which can make it harder to sleep.
Although, I worked for a retail store when the initial cuts were announced, and people came in purchasing incandescent bulbs by the cartful, I think the change over made a lot of people real angry.For good reason. It’s a really stupid set of laws bullied through legislatures. Incandescent light bulbs are amazingly cheap and robust technology and if it really matters there are several ways in which they could be made more efficient without swapping to a completely separate technology.
They're slated to phase out incandescents by 2017 I believe in Canada. Personally though I'm elated to know that we're being forced eventually into LED technology. I just hope that OLED lighting becomes a thing, since it can accurately reproduce natural light, iirc.All CFLs and LEDs have very spiky emission spectra, which are dramatically less pleasant (IMO) and distort color relationships (causing potential problems for anyone who cares about the way their photographs/paintings/clothes/... looks). They tend to also emit more light toward the blue end of the spectrum, again with a few spikes at particular wavelengths, which can make it harder to sleep.
OLEDs are better than most CFLs/LEDs in this respect (one flawed metric for this is the “color rendering index”), but not nearly as good as incandescent bulbs. They definitely don’t “accurately reproduce natural light”.QuoteAlthough, I worked for a retail store when the initial cuts were announced, and people came in purchasing incandescent bulbs by the cartful, I think the change over made a lot of people real angry.For good reason. It’s a really stupid set of laws bullied through legislatures. Incandescent light bulbs are amazingly cheap and robust technology and if it really matters there are several ways in which they could be made more efficient without swapping to a completely separate technology.
Residential lighting is not the main bottleneck in world energy use or the main cause of CO2 emission – it would have a much bigger impact to dramatically raise car fuel efficiency standards and get old inefficient cars off the road (or even just force SUVs to meet the standards for cars instead of trucks) or abolish coal power plants; those industries just have much more powerful lobbying efforts and people have now been brainwashed into thinking that incandescent light bulbs are bad.
It does make sense to try to be as efficient as possible for stuff like street lamps and lighting in warehouses though.
Other good changes would be to encourage people to live in smaller houses; adjust their thermostats less aggressively; buy smaller refrigerators and freezers; take jobs closer to home to cut their commutes and work from home more often; build denser neighborhoods to get people to spend more of their time biking, walking, and taking public transit instead of driving everywhere; travel longer distances by train instead of car or plane; eat less-processed food; cut down on the amount of packaging in everything they buy; &c. &c. Instead we get a crack down on light bulbs.
If we just taxed CO2 emissions at a level commensurate with their true costs to the planet, people might want to figure out how to be more energy efficient naturally, just to save money. There’d be no need for a separate light bulb policy at all.
The Metric System is a Propaganda Tool for Communists!The Metric system is fine-ish. The main problem with it is the base 10 number system which is straight-up stupid. We should have been using base 12 instead (the Babylonians had the right idea with a base 60 system).
... wait, which thread is this?
The Metric System is a Propaganda Tool for Communists!The Metric system is fine-ish. The main problem with it is the base 10 number system which is straight-up stupid. We should have been using base 12 instead (the Babylonians had the right idea with a base 60 system).
... wait, which thread is this?
The Metric System is a Propaganda Tool for Communists!The Metric system is fine-ish. The main problem with it is the base 10 number system which is straight-up stupid. We should have been using base 12 instead (the Babylonians had the right idea with a base 60 system).
... wait, which thread is this?
Nothing wrong with a base-10 system. It seems logical as most of us have 10 fingers to count with.
They're slated to phase out incandescents by 2017 I believe in Canada. Personally though I'm elated to know that we're being forced eventually into LED technology. I just hope that OLED lighting becomes a thing, since it can accurately reproduce natural light, iirc. Also it's like hella efficient.
Although, I worked for a retail store when the initial cuts were announced, and people came in purchasing incandescent bulbs by the cartful, I think the change over made a lot of people real angry.
The Metric System is a Propaganda Tool for Communists!The Metric system is fine-ish. The main problem with it is the base 10 number system which is straight-up stupid. We should have been using base 12 instead (the Babylonians had the right idea with a base 60 system).
... wait, which thread is this?
Nothing wrong with a base-10 system. It seems logical as most of us have 10 fingers to count with.
To be fair, the main thing base-10 has going for it is historical inertia. The finger thing is kind of irrelevant at this point.Nothing wrong with a base-10 system. It seems logical as most of us have 10 fingers to count with.That's literally the only thing base-10 has going for it. Except who even uses their fingers to count anyway?
Back to incandescent bulbs:
http://www.richsoil.com/CFL-fluorescent-light-bulbs.jsp
Edit: this one is great too:
I've always hated on CFLs, since I initially researched them, but this video makes me hate them even more. "But they're so majestic!" I know, so majestic. "But so fierce!" So fierce. Personally, I'm a huge fan of the potential of LED technology and OLED technology, But there is so much room to grow and improve in that field still. Incandescent has room for growth, but I do feel it has a lower ceiling of where they will stop being comparable.
I am still of the understanding that the research for broader spectrum of emissions from LED (OLED?) has been successful. Not commercially available = my point moot, though doesn't it.
Isn't it longevity that's a main hindrance? Or is that a thing of the past
It'll be interesting to see when those flexible LED's hit the market. I can imagine them being useful for smartphone displays, if only somebody came up with a viable flexible touch-screen!
I don't think I've heard of Lightboost before. What is it?
All CFLs and LEDs have very spiky emission spectra, which are dramatically less pleasant (IMO) and distort color relationships (causing potential problems for anyone who cares about the way their photographs/paintings/clothes/... looks).
It'll be interesting to see when those flexible LED's hit the market. I can imagine them being useful for smartphone displays, if only somebody came up with a viable flexible touch-screen!
The OLED is not nearly ready..
blue oled degredation is still significantly faster than greed/red.. so they're fine for smart phones because these things are "OFF" most of the time.
but even then, the panel noticeably get worse pretty quickly for heavy users..
Also, oled still has image persistence far greater than lightboosted backlit.. which makes them pointless for the new wave of clear motion displays..
Lightboost is the technology to lookout for in our most immediate future..
OLED still needs another 10 years..
It'll be interesting to see when those flexible LED's hit the market. I can imagine them being useful for smartphone displays, if only somebody came up with a viable flexible touch-screen!
The OLED is not nearly ready..
blue oled degredation is still significantly faster than greed/red.. so they're fine for smart phones because these things are "OFF" most of the time.
but even then, the panel noticeably get worse pretty quickly for heavy users..
Also, oled still has image persistence far greater than lightboosted backlit.. which makes them pointless for the new wave of clear motion displays..
Lightboost is the technology to lookout for in our most immediate future..
OLED still needs another 10 years..
PLEASE stop spreading disinformation. OLED has microsecond switching speeds (unlike the milliseconds switching of LCD), so you DO NOT GET blur or image persistence. OLED is a superior technology to backlit LCD in almost every aspect (efficiency, contrast, view angles, response time, etc..)
Blue OLEDs do degrade fast, unfortunately, and I suspect this is the main reson for not releasing desktop displays with OLED. Samsung have demonstrated large OLED panels (40" and above) with high resolution and good colour reproduction before. It could also be that the production cost of larger panels is prohibitive.
I believe it's the single component, so-called "white" LED's that have spiky emission spectra, since most of them are primarily based on blue LED chemistry with added impurities to get the other frequencies.
Other good changes would be to encourage people to live in smaller houses; adjust their thermostats less aggressively; buy smaller refrigerators and freezers; take jobs closer to home to cut their commutes and work from home more often; build denser neighborhoods to get people to spend more of their time biking, walking, and taking public transit instead of driving everywhere; travel longer distances by train instead of car or plane; eat less-processed food; cut down on the amount of packaging in everything they buy; &c. &c. Instead we get a crack down on light bulbs.
Other good changes would be to encourage people to live in smaller houses; adjust their thermostats less aggressively; buy smaller refrigerators and freezers; take jobs closer to home to cut their commutes and work from home more often; build denser neighborhoods to get people to spend more of their time biking, walking, and taking public transit instead of driving everywhere; travel longer distances by train instead of car or plane; eat less-processed food; cut down on the amount of packaging in everything they buy; &c. &c. Instead we get a crack down on light bulbs.
Holy ****, that **** ain't the 'merican way!
Other good changes would be to encourage people to live in smaller houses; adjust their thermostats less aggressively; buy smaller refrigerators and freezers; take jobs closer to home to cut their commutes and work from home more often; build denser neighborhoods to get people to spend more of their time biking, walking, and taking public transit instead of driving everywhere; travel longer distances by train instead of car or plane; eat less-processed food; cut down on the amount of packaging in everything they buy; &c. &c. Instead we get a crack down on light bulbs.
Holy ****, that **** ain't the 'merican way!
Murica People of all occupation must drive F350s to work... whether or not you've ever hauled anything in your life.. EVER..
I don't think I've heard of Lightboost before. What is it?
strobe the backlight so that you do not see the transitional states of the LCD matrix..
That is what motion blur is, when you see something move across the screen.. the backlight is constantly on, so while the matrix changes color and intensity, it creates a blur...
but.. if you flash the backlight to only illuminate a completed state...motion image will look completely smooth with NO trail..
this can only be done @ 100hz + because any less, you'd see flashing..
OLED can't be used in this way AT ALL.... because they themselves are light emitting..
Currently only possible on TN panels that do 144hz / 120hz refresh..
these are stills taken while a ufo alien moved quickly across the screen..
the difference between boosted and nonboostedShow Image(http://www.blurbusters.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/CROPPED_60Hz-1024x341.jpg)Show Image(http://www.blurbusters.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/CROPPED_LightBoost10-1024x232.jpg)
It'll be interesting to see when those flexible LED's hit the market. I can imagine them being useful for smartphone displays, if only somebody came up with a viable flexible touch-screen!
The OLED is not nearly ready..
blue oled degredation is still significantly faster than greed/red.. so they're fine for smart phones because these things are "OFF" most of the time.
but even then, the panel noticeably get worse pretty quickly for heavy users..
Also, oled still has image persistence far greater than lightboosted backlit.. which makes them pointless for the new wave of clear motion displays..
Lightboost is the technology to lookout for in our most immediate future..
OLED still needs another 10 years..
PLEASE stop spreading disinformation. OLED has microsecond switching speeds (unlike the milliseconds switching of LCD), so you DO NOT GET blur or image persistence. OLED is a superior technology to backlit LCD in almost every aspect (efficiency, contrast, view angles, response time, etc..)
Blue OLEDs do degrade fast, unfortunately, and I suspect this is the main reson for not releasing desktop displays with OLED. Samsung have demonstrated large OLED panels (40" and above) with high resolution and good colour reproduction before. It could also be that the production cost of larger panels is prohibitive.
I believe it's the single component, so-called "white" LED's that have spiky emission spectra, since most of them are primarily based on blue LED chemistry with added impurities to get the other frequencies.
You are absolutely mistaken..
IMAGE-persistence, is the attribute we're talking about here.. NOT response time..
Flashing the backlight of a backlit LCD (TN), you can achieve 1ms of image persistence.. whereas OLED can not yet duplicate this..
Again... you are mistaken, this is NOT response time we're talking about
Response time has nothing to do with strobe backlighting which is crucial to making motion clear..
I have had several samsung oled, and currently the note 3.. Image persistence and blur is continually an issue on such devices..
All CFLs and LEDs have very spiky emission spectra, which are dramatically less pleasant (IMO) and distort color relationships (causing potential problems for anyone who cares about the way their photographs/paintings/clothes/... looks).
Tri colour LEDs have excellent emission spectra.
It'll be interesting to see when those flexible LED's hit the market. I can imagine them being useful for smartphone displays, if only somebody came up with a viable flexible touch-screen!
The OLED is not nearly ready..
blue oled degredation is still significantly faster than greed/red.. so they're fine for smart phones because these things are "OFF" most of the time.
but even then, the panel noticeably get worse pretty quickly for heavy users..
Also, oled still has image persistence far greater than lightboosted backlit.. which makes them pointless for the new wave of clear motion displays..
Lightboost is the technology to lookout for in our most immediate future..
OLED still needs another 10 years..
PLEASE stop spreading disinformation. OLED has microsecond switching speeds (unlike the milliseconds switching of LCD), so you DO NOT GET blur or image persistence. OLED is a superior technology to backlit LCD in almost every aspect (efficiency, contrast, view angles, response time, etc..)
Blue OLEDs do degrade fast, unfortunately, and I suspect this is the main reson for not releasing desktop displays with OLED. Samsung have demonstrated large OLED panels (40" and above) with high resolution and good colour reproduction before. It could also be that the production cost of larger panels is prohibitive.
I believe it's the single component, so-called "white" LED's that have spiky emission spectra, since most of them are primarily based on blue LED chemistry with added impurities to get the other frequencies.
You are absolutely mistaken..
IMAGE-persistence, is the attribute we're talking about here.. NOT response time..
Flashing the backlight of a backlit LCD (TN), you can achieve 1ms of image persistence.. whereas OLED can not yet duplicate this..
Again... you are mistaken, this is NOT response time we're talking about
Response time has nothing to do with strobe backlighting which is crucial to making motion clear..
I have had several samsung oled, and currently the note 3.. Image persistence and blur is continually an issue on such devices..
Firstly, Samsung's particular implementation of OLED in AMOLED panels is rather poor and the blur is due to the switching speed of the transistors used in the panel, NOT the OLED elements.
It is exactly "response time", since an OLED element is the light source, so the time it takes to change from one colour to another determines how long the old colour and therefore the old image persists. The OLED elements themselves can switch in microseconds, so if you use GOOD transistors you can beat LCD response time and therefore reduce image persistence by a factor of hundreds if not close a thousand.
Strobing the backlight reduces overall brightness (since the backlight is off during the pixel change) and it doesn't improve the ACTUAL persistence of the old image on the display, just the PERCEIVED persistence.All CFLs and LEDs have very spiky emission spectra, which are dramatically less pleasant (IMO) and distort color relationships (causing potential problems for anyone who cares about the way their photographs/paintings/clothes/... looks).
Tri colour LEDs have excellent emission spectra.
+1 to this. It would be nice if more lightbulb manufacturers started using triple elements. Preferably in conjunction with a power smoothing circuit to reduce flicker. That'd solve the emission issues and the flicker. It'd make them a lot more expensive, though, since you can actually wire LED's directly to mains current, christmas lights style and that's exactly what the cheaper LED bulbs do and you'd have to balance the supply to the different colour LED's since they have different forward voltage drop, current handling and brightness.
....
"Just the perceived- Persistence"... Yes because NOTHING ELSE MATTERS ... Get with the program already..
The display is made so I can perceive the image upon it... Jebus...
OLED is poor, and needs another 10 years.. firstly THey produce VERY little light compared to a backlit solution..
So the REASON samsung and ALLLLL oled utilize LONG image persistence is due to this low brightness limitation.
If they blinked it off too quickly, or strobed it, it'd be too dim..
Transition between ON and OFF is irrelevant, if within that frame, they can't produce enough light..
With backlit , just use a more powerful light, DONE... OLED... you need a hell of alot more research and dev to get anywhere close to the output of backlit solutions..
WHICH is why OLED as a viable MOTION-display solution is WAY WAY WAY out.. 10 years minimum..
Lightboost is the ONLY game in town..Show Image(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/hehe-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862507)
Other good changes would be to encourage people to live in smaller houses; adjust their thermostats less aggressively; buy smaller refrigerators and freezers; take jobs closer to home to cut their commutes and work from home more often; build denser neighborhoods to get people to spend more of their time biking, walking, and taking public transit instead of driving everywhere; travel longer distances by train instead of car or plane; eat less-processed food; cut down on the amount of packaging in everything they buy; &c. &c. Instead we get a crack down on light bulbs.
Holy ****, that **** ain't the 'merican way!
Murica People of all occupation must drive F350s to work... whether or not you've ever hauled anything in your life.. EVER..
Damn straight!
But in consideration of the above mentioned shizz…I've downsized from an F350 crew cab long bed diesel 4X4, to an F250 crew cab standard bed 2WD and now all the way down to a tiny girls truck….my current F150 crew cab short bed 2WD (but I kept the towing package).
I'm an environmentalist from the word go.
Replace your ****ing light bulbs with the new stuff and stop complaining *****es!
You can take my light bulbs but I'll die on my feet rather than live on my knees.
Other good changes would be to encourage people to live in smaller houses; adjust their thermostats less aggressively; buy smaller refrigerators and freezers; take jobs closer to home to cut their commutes and work from home more often; build denser neighborhoods to get people to spend more of their time biking, walking, and taking public transit instead of driving everywhere; travel longer distances by train instead of car or plane; eat less-processed food; cut down on the amount of packaging in everything they buy; &c. &c. Instead we get a crack down on light bulbs.
Holy ****, that **** ain't the 'merican way!
Murica People of all occupation must drive F350s to work... whether or not you've ever hauled anything in your life.. EVER..
Damn straight!
But in consideration of the above mentioned shizz…I've downsized from an F350 crew cab long bed diesel 4X4, to an F250 crew cab standard bed 2WD and now all the way down to a tiny girls truck….my current F150 crew cab short bed 2WD (but I kept the towing package).
I'm an environmentalist from the word go.
Replace your ****ing light bulbs with the new stuff and stop complaining *****es!
You can take my job just don't take my land :(
How many geekwhacks does it take to change a lightbulb?
How many geekwhacks does it take to change a lightbulb?Everyone in this thread since we cant agree on which lightbulb we are going to replace it with. :p
....
"Just the perceived- Persistence"... Yes because NOTHING ELSE MATTERS ... Get with the program already..
The display is made so I can perceive the image upon it... Jebus...
OLED is poor, and needs another 10 years.. firstly THey produce VERY little light compared to a backlit solution..
So the REASON samsung and ALLLLL oled utilize LONG image persistence is due to this low brightness limitation.
If they blinked it off too quickly, or strobed it, it'd be too dim..
Transition between ON and OFF is irrelevant, if within that frame, they can't produce enough light..
With backlit , just use a more powerful light, DONE... OLED... you need a hell of alot more research and dev to get anywhere close to the output of backlit solutions..
WHICH is why OLED as a viable MOTION-display solution is WAY WAY WAY out.. 10 years minimum..
Lightboost is the ONLY game in town..Show Image(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/hehe-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862507)
STAAAHP, PLEASE JUST STAAAAHHHP!
Brightness is just fine on OLED, certainly good enough for desktop displays or TV's and contrast is unbeatable (not to mention view angles, light bleed, etc). And you have it the wrong way round, if your switching time is fast you don't need to resort to a hack like "Lightboost" and you can keep the display on all the time without introducing a strobed / flickering display. Which do you think is better for your eyes?
Samsung's image persistence has absolutely NOTHING to do with brightness levels. They used slow transistors... that's all.
All OLED needs is good transistors used in the matrix. And it won't need 10 years, it's here now (although a bit expensive still):
http://www.amazon.com/LG-Electronics-55EA9800-Cinema-Curved/dp/B00E5U3YEK
And here's an interesting article:
http://www.displaymate.com/LG_OLED_TV_ShootOut_1.htm
See the section on response time and motion blur.
Now can you please stop spreading disinformation....
....
"Just the perceived- Persistence"... Yes because NOTHING ELSE MATTERS ... Get with the program already..
The display is made so I can perceive the image upon it... Jebus...
OLED is poor, and needs another 10 years.. firstly THey produce VERY little light compared to a backlit solution..
So the REASON samsung and ALLLLL oled utilize LONG image persistence is due to this low brightness limitation.
If they blinked it off too quickly, or strobed it, it'd be too dim..
Transition between ON and OFF is irrelevant, if within that frame, they can't produce enough light..
With backlit , just use a more powerful light, DONE... OLED... you need a hell of alot more research and dev to get anywhere close to the output of backlit solutions..
WHICH is why OLED as a viable MOTION-display solution is WAY WAY WAY out.. 10 years minimum..
Lightboost is the ONLY game in town..Show Image(http://emoticoner.com/files/emoticons/onion-head/hehe-onion-head-emoticon.gif?1292862507)
STAAAHP, PLEASE JUST STAAAAHHHP!
Brightness is just fine on OLED, certainly good enough for desktop displays or TV's and contrast is unbeatable (not to mention view angles, light bleed, etc). And you have it the wrong way round, if your switching time is fast you don't need to resort to a hack like "Lightboost" and you can keep the display on all the time without introducing a strobed / flickering display. Which do you think is better for your eyes?
Samsung's image persistence has absolutely NOTHING to do with brightness levels. They used slow transistors... that's all.
All OLED needs is good transistors used in the matrix. And it won't need 10 years, it's here now (although a bit expensive still):
http://www.amazon.com/LG-Electronics-55EA9800-Cinema-Curved/dp/B00E5U3YEK
And here's an interesting article:
http://www.displaymate.com/LG_OLED_TV_ShootOut_1.htm
See the section on response time and motion blur.
Now can you please stop spreading disinformation....
You ignorant F00L
read this..
http://hardforum.com/archive/index.php/t-1780462.html
OLED is at least 10 years away.. at this point, it's bluring aspect is no better than plasma.. which is extremely blurry compared to Lightb00st
Again, you're stuck in an error of terminology..
Motion blur,,,,, can result from many different things.... because OLED can't be easily strobed AND produce enough brightness at the same time... it MUST use the sample-hold method to display your images..
So even if you have 0.1ms transition time you need around 16ms of persistence to adequately produce very bright images...