The EU is banning 8K TV's!!! - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 12:59:56 pm
content: https://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/eu-efficiency-standards-would-ban-8k-4k-tvs/#:~:text=As%20of%20the%20time%20of%20this%20article%E2%80%99s%20publication%2C,TV%20that%20can%20be%20sold%20in%20the%20EU.And some people still wonder why the UK wanted out of the EU!!!

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 01:20:52 pm
content: great news,means us in the uk can start flogging "inefficient" tellys to the europeans at a nice little mark up

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 01:45:13 pm
content: If they banned 'inefficient' TVs here, I'd just have to keep my old 700W+ plasma TV for a while. That's OK, it keeps the living room warm in the winter.

author: Silicium81
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 01:56:37 pm
content: To qualify: The EU bans televisions that consume too much energy above a threshold that 8k still crosses...

author: JohanH
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 02:06:32 pm
content: Well, in UK you certainly need all comfort you can get, poor sods.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:14:45 pm
content: Oh no. Some power hungry TVs which are needlessly high resolution won't be for sale to the tiny slice of the market which spends excessive amounts of money on them. I will have a good cry over this.

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:19:58 pm
content: 8K? What for?Well, maybe it will end up making sense to watch nature documentaries on TV with binoculars!

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:28:44 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on November 02, 2022, 03:14:45 pmAnd when they come for you? When some moron limits your tea kettle to 500 watts?

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:30:48 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on November 02, 2022, 03:28:44 pmI think that unlikely.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:38:57 pm
content: Quote from: Silicium81 on November 02, 2022, 01:56:37 pmIt's a good idea, since the TVs do consume a lot of energy and the governments pay the energy bill.Oh wait.

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:42:11 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on November 02, 2022, 12:59:56 pmAs usual in this forum, the OP got carried away with the title. OP: The sky is falling! The sky is falling!Um nope, the EU isn't BANNING TVs, they're just trying to force them to become more energy efficient.I remember a time in the late 1970s in the US when all of the US auto makers told the USG that it was impossible to meet the USG's proposed auto emissions standards and that no one had the technology necessary to do so. The USG replied "Fine but when one of you does come up with the technology, the rest of you will be required to lease it from them and pay royalties." Within a few years ALL of the US auto makers had developed their own technology and were using it! None of them ever had to lease it from a different company.I think this will be the same situation. When the TV companiesacceptthat they are going to have to meet the TV power requirements, they WILL find a way to do so!Frankly, IMO, everyone would be better off if they couldn't buy TVs and spend countless hours watching the idioracy that passes for modern TV news and programming.Q: I wonder how much power this will save in Europe? Based on the amount of time that most people in my country spend in front of the TV and the number of homes in this country and the number of TVs in each one, my guess isA LOT!My personal pet peeve is all of the wall warts in a modern household and how much power each of them burns off, frequently even withnothingplugged into it!

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:42:25 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on November 02, 2022, 03:30:48 pmReally! Maybe not that specific thing, and it's a kettle by the way, not a tea kettle! Tea pot and kettle, two thingsThis is the problem with the EU, it's the nanny state gone mad! No, in the grand scheme a restriction on 8K TV's is not the end of the world, but gradually losing more and more freedom of choice is. As per the old phrase, it's the thin end of the wedge. And the excuse used is the climate change crisis, which is BS. The climate is in continual change, nothing humanity can do about it. CO2 is the gas of life, converted by greenery to oxygen! And remember this, every living, oxygen breathing life form exhales CO2, so what next, a breathing restriction?!

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:48:12 pm
content: The 'freedom of choice' (being told what to do by advertisements.) of the general public has consequences the general public are incapable of appreciating.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:57:31 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on November 02, 2022, 03:42:11 pmModern flat screen TV's don't use that much power though. My 42", 5 year old Samsung 4K uses 35 watts, MAX!! As I tinker with old CRT TV'sI have a good reference point, monochrome sets from the 50's through early 70's used as much as 200 watts, and colour upto 350 watts!!It used to be the case that the largest average power consuming domestic device was lighting, so say an average 3 bed UK house had 6 to 10 incandescent lamps burning for hours during darkness, could be anywhere from say 360 to 1000 watts, which is why the UK government adopted a policy of banning sales of incandescent light bulbs about 20 years ago and actually supplying free CFL's for a while, before the market went LED. This actually saved the construction of many extra power stations.Next is refrigerators, and where you Americans are the worst offenders! With your almost walk in, 2 door, ice on tap, 8 ft tall behemoths, consuming upto 500 watts, there is your elephant in the room! Even here in the poor impoverished UK though, it's still about 200 - 300 watts.Next is washing machines and dishwashers. So TV's are really quite low power users.Oh yeah, I very rarely watch broadcast TV, mainly youtube and some movies on Amazon Prime.

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 03:57:55 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on November 02, 2022, 03:48:12 pmQuoted for truth!The buying public MIGHT be willing to make better buying choices except that the manufacturers and resellers of most products frequently and deliberately hide the facts from them. In particular any specification that reflects poorly on that product.How many of you have NEVER bought some product only to find that no repair information was available, or that OEM parts were excessively expensive or that the quality was poor or the item wore out too quickly or that it didn't do the job that you expected it to; and then said to yourself "if I had known that I would have never bought this item" ?

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:00:16 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on November 02, 2022, 03:48:12 pmVery philosophical and not entirely true! Freedom of choice is the right to make personal choice, even if it is wrong. Abiding by common law excluded of course.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:03:01 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on November 02, 2022, 03:57:55 pmHence the old adage, buyer beware!! We have the Americans to blame for this, they invented sales and marketing and built in obsolescence

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:12:14 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on November 02, 2022, 04:00:16 pmSo basically you want to do things that are utterly stupid, may cause injuries to yourself and others without people keeping you from doing such stupid things? There is a difference between freedom of choice and freedom to harm yourself. But some people don't see that until it is too late.IMHO it is a good thing that governments enforce products to be safe and energy efficient. A product that is dangerous and / or inefficient causes more harm and monetary loss in the long run.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:16:38 pm
content: That's a clickbait, because if I got it wright the ban is on energy consumption level, not on TV resolution.Same as one can not have a Multiplex Cinema Theater at home, like the one at the nearby mall 3D cinema theater, because the 3D projector will surge more current than allocated to a household consumer.

author: voltsandjolts
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:35:44 pm
content: My eyes used to be 4K but now heading towards SVGA.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:36:17 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 02, 2022, 04:12:14 pmWell, there will always be very stupid people!! Like those that buy Apple products for exampleYou are manipulating my meaning, not a politician are you ?Nobody gets things right every time and all the time, so you live, you learn, you make choices, some good, some bad, and you live and learn, it's life's process. Eventually you learn most of the con tricks and the ways of the world and the bad choices and mistakes are fewer, for most.When governments, or worse, proxy governments like the EU, start to do your thinking for you, you never learn, you obey and lose the ability to learn and think for yourself, you become a consumer zomby, that is bad, very bad.Live you life, learn by your mistakes.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:39:18 pm
content: I don't "get" 8K, but it was my understanding the loophole that many TV manufacturers were using was to have the default profile be a bit crap and allow the user to increase the brightness in the custom profile.Or has that been banned now?

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:40:45 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on November 02, 2022, 04:16:38 pmBut effectively it kills the availability of 8K TV's, maybe until manufacturers can reduce power consumption, if possible. What is definite, if they do they will be even more expensive. An alternative might be to build into the software a warning that flashes up on the screen when the user has been watching for a preset number of hours, then they have a choice to turn off, or not.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:46:50 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 02, 2022, 04:39:18 pmDunno, but I can say that generally, TV's are set at max brightness out of the box, this is guaranteed to drastically reduce the life of the LED back light, which is why most sets just manage to survive the warranty period before the LED backlight strips fail and the user bins it for another because servicing it exceeds the value of the set. All intentional by the manufacturer of courseSo, first thing to do with a new set is go to settings and reduce the brightness.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:48:55 pm
content: Btw, voter sheeple should be punished to watch the propaganda machine (TV) on a 2x16 character display!

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:54:46 pm
content: Do not worry, propaganda will run at full brightness automatically

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 04:54:59 pm
content: This is actually related, albeit tangentially:In 2014, EU started limiting household vacuum cleaner power intake. In 2017, EU limited household vacuum cleaners to 900 watts or less. (The current requirements, PDF.)What I am interested in, is how that affected the effectiveness of the vacuum cleaners. According to some friends who have both "old" (>1500W) and "new" (<900W), there isn't really a noticeable difference in their pickup power. Others may disagree; but it is important to notice that anecdotal evidence of one pair of devices is not really reliable: variance across makes and models is too large.I personally also use my displays (and when I had one, my TV) at relatively low intensities. (For example, right now, my laptop display is at 15% brightness; in natural light, I may bump it up to 25% or so.) So, I am not sure how the energy limit will affect the largest TV's. If it causes the brightness/intensity to scale down, I'm all for it, because I just don't need the upper half of the brightness scale on my devices at all. Contrast and sharpness is different, though; I like those. Often, however, the darker shades are not visible at all until you push the brightness to uncomfortable levels. Perhaps this might change?(Yes, I'm being overly optimistic, I know. The real effect will likely be manufacturers doing tricks that lets them pass the limits, but keep doing whatever they've been doing before, because that's the path of least effort.)Any related observations?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:08:04 pm
content: I have a post-limited vacuum - 900W Miele Classic C2. No complaints at all about performance. I usually end up lowering the power when on anything other than hard floors as it tends to tug on carpets and rugs if I'm not careful.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:18:03 pm
content: Mine is a VAX cordless with a 20V Li Ion 72 W/hr battery, it's mainly ok but has a tendency to block easily, so the dust canister has to be emptied at every use to prevent that. I chose this because I HATE power cords on vacuum cleaners! I do still have my old 1200 watt Sebo though, just in case I get caught out by a flat battery on the Vax!

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:19:18 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on November 02, 2022, 04:54:46 pmNice one

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:20:16 pm
content: Meh.. Sensationalist title of article. The EU has motives to do this that are of interest to the general public. Television sets are used in many many households for many hours a day. Some people even leave them on the dumbest channels/programs during daytime to combat loneliness. Great for them. But if it draws 500W continuously because they bought a high-end TV "because I watch a lot of cable" (which may only offer you 720p or 1080p content), then that kind of stupidity cannot be argued with. People will do people things.What an EU can do, is force manufacturers to make more efficient sets. Virtually all tech manufacturers are publically traded companies, which focus on capitalism and being that 1pt ahead of competition in some arbitrary benchmark. 8K is better than 4K, even though you would need to set <1m from the set with 20/20 vision to see any difference. 100Hz is better than 60Hz, even though that 100Hz is only with image interpolation techniques and if you turn it off, the set can only do 50Hz (which is worse), etc. It's of best interest to the public to keep manufacturers honest. It's to the best interest of the public to keep our country wide energy bill low.There is no strict ban on the TV resolution or features. Only that the TV must offer some features at a decent performance/power e.g. efficiency ratio. We do this with cars, with houses, with whitegoods, so why not with electronics? Enforcement of regulations is to varying degrees - from a ban, to a tax increase, to an indication label that could suggest it costs a lot of money to run. That last indicator has been around for years, but if that's not enough, perhaps the other 2 measures are necessary.Likewise, if we were to rephrase this headline to CPUs and GPUs, would be as much beraged? I think that was the generally received sentiment of last gen CPU/GPU hardware so far, and of Intel's last few generations in the past as well. In my opinion it's also a tech market that's gone crazy. Sure fierce competition is good for pricing, but other "side effects" may suffer in the end. It's not an honest way of making progress.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:20:40 pm
content: Quote from: MT on November 02, 2022, 04:48:55 pm

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:20:51 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on November 02, 2022, 04:54:59 pmI don't notice any difference in performance. Only that the noise is slightly different (probably due to a more efficient turbine) and the inner design has changed so the bag doesn't obstruct the airflow so much. The latter makes the newer vacuum cleaner I bought work better compared to the 25 year old one (which I modified to also have the improved, unobstructed airflow; yes, same brands). So yes, I think the limit in energy consumption has triggered very positive changes in the design of vacuum cleaners.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:29:02 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 02, 2022, 04:39:18 pmNever seen one, so can't say about 8k. However, I remember similar remarks from 4k, but when I've tested a 32 inch 4k monitor at the office, and everybody was amazed by the clarity and the details never seen before on the other less resolution monitors. I guess it's similar for 8k monitors.Can't say about 8k TV, didn't watch TV since many decades ago. I've read TV brainwashes people and makes one dumb. Stay away from TV. Better live your own life instead of a fake TV life.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:44:36 pm
content: Quoteand suprise suprise you can stll get a vacuum over 900w thanks to little loopholes,like not calling it a domestic,just like you can buy 100w incandescent lamps,as long as there rough serviceQuoteThe eu did think about it,but got scared it would swing the brexit vote towards leave ,now we've buggered off they might start thinking about it again

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:48:12 pm
content: April fools was half year agoNo politicians will ever ban TV of any sort.What would they do without it?

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:50:38 pm
content: You just know that the people who come up with these ideas have a home theatre room in their 7 bedroom luxury home.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 05:56:25 pm
content: Quote from: themadhippy on November 02, 2022, 05:44:36 pmAnd, of course, the domestic low-power version will be in service an average of 10 minutes per week and the commercial one might be used for 2-3 hours a day.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 06:02:32 pm
content: Quote from: hans on November 02, 2022, 05:20:16 pmSo you surely did not read the article. None of current 8K TV will pass that standard and making them pass will make them too dim.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 06:37:25 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on November 02, 2022, 05:29:02 pmThere is quite a noticeable improvement on 4K material over full HD on my humble Samsung 42". Thats watching on broadcast TV not youtube, I can select 4K YT stuff but only in a few second clips as my BB connection speed won't fully support it, due to the pathetic UK BB infrastructure.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 06:41:18 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on November 02, 2022, 05:56:25 pmBut for every commercial one there will be 500 domestic ones.

author: KaneTW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 06:54:13 pm
content: I don't get why the EU needs to regulate this. It's infantilizing the customer.If you buy a TV with a high energy consumption (nowadays 'helpfully' labeled with a energy usage label but you could just look at the specs), you're accepting that it'll use more power.It's a general trend of the EU to presume that the general public knows nothing [and shouldn't know anything].

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 07:05:33 pm
content: Quote from: KaneTW on November 02, 2022, 06:54:13 pmWell, most customers are quite infantile when buying anything electronic. I see this more like an action directed at manufacturers, similar to what happened with vacuum cleaners. (Ash vacuums and wet-or-dry vacuums are exempt, even for household use; so perhaps the TV regulation needs to also consider use cases or surface area somehow?)Quote from: KaneTW on November 02, 2022, 06:54:13 pmThat I do agree with. I think it ispossiblethey can accidentally made an overall beneficial regulation, like seems to have occurred with vacuum cleaners (again, as far as I know it seems the power intake has gone down on domestic devices without any significant impact on efficacy, making it overall a good thing), and am just wondering if this could be a similar situation. I am not convinced either way, just pondering whether it could be the case here.Of course, I don't have even a 4K display, much less a 8K one, so I'm personally not affected.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 07:32:33 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on November 02, 2022, 07:05:33 pmIf you look at the past you'll see that government regulation (which ultimately is what we vote for!) has resulted in better products for the consumer. Companies have the moral compass of a 4 year old and only think short term to maximise shareholder profit. Just create a hype and have the stupid crowd buy their products. Without regulation, we end up with products that do us -consumers- no good at all. So all in all it is the other way around. We all vote for more regulation to make our lives better. There is nothing infantile about it; power to the people!

author: DC1MC
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 07:48:42 pm
content: Youare the carbon footprint that they want to reduce.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 07:56:43 pm
content: So, these assholes will ban 8k TVs, but not ban my pair of Pass Labs mono block amps:https://www.passlabs.com/products/xa200-8/#tech_specWith a total idle power draw of 1520 watts, if I had the money, I would ship a bunch of them for free to screw the difference of the number of 8K TV which would have been sold and in use.What are you supposed to do if you want an LED wall TV with a >2000 nits output to fight the daylight sun?

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 07:58:23 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on November 02, 2022, 03:42:11 pmThey were garbage too. Have you looked at the horsepower ratings for cars before and after that requirement? There were cars with big honking V8 engines that only developed 120 HP. Until modern EFI came along they didn't have the tech to meet the requirements while selling cars that weren't crap.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 08:06:31 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on November 02, 2022, 05:56:25 pmThat's the first thought I had too. I don't really care if vacuums are limited in consumption, but I also don't care how much power they use. 95% of my vacuuming is done by the Roomba and I get out the upright for a proper deep cleaning maybe once a month for 10-15 minutes. It could consume 30kW and I would never even notice on my electric bill.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 08:10:47 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on November 02, 2022, 04:16:38 pmThat's how brexiteers operate.Here on the continent, we're watching in awe how 350 M£ are pouring into the NHS every week. Oh, wait...But seriously: an American or German or Japanese would see this as an incentive to develop new more efficient dsiplay technology. First on the market makes real money.Here: moan!

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 08:12:02 pm
content: What happens when you want to make a TV with built in true realtime AI up-scaling hardware using 4x Nividia 4090's which eats around 2kw just for the image processing?

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 08:24:26 pm
content: QuoteI am fairly sure Boris didn't promise to do that. What he said was that we would save £350m/wk (through not paying something) and wouldn't that be better spent on the NHS. Of course, it was carefully worded and led people to assume he was saying something else (that they would spend it on the NHS), but I never saw that expressly said.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 09:52:17 pm
content: So, let me get this right: (SLMGTR is my new acronym, lol);"Freedom of choice...is just a joke; YOU PEOPLE just responding to dumb commercials, telling you what to think/buy"...That's a purely cynical take on a world filled with good people, trying to parse out the situation. Seeming like we don't get freedom; it's too harmful to others (climate), and so...Cmnder 'Smith' will instruct you on proper personal spending and what's even available.Thinking: In EU, if vehicle is pulled over by police patrol, is that 75 inch TV, (illegal) going to be seized, as illegitimate goods ? Citation for driver (possession)?Some (bad) climate effects can happen, but the current crowd /(MOB ?) has it so twisted and weaponized...What's a person on the sidelines to do ?Try saying: " Climate change? I think that unlikely."(Sorry, I use sarcasm when needed).

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 10:08:28 pm
content: Quote from: BrianHG on November 02, 2022, 08:12:02 pmBuild it anyway? Sell some to the video-phile market as technology demonstrators. What you won't be able to do is sell it as a mass market product.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 10:25:29 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on November 02, 2022, 06:37:25 pm4K is *just about* at the threshold where a 50" or so screen will look better at typical viewing distance; very dependent on your eyesight (you'd need 20/20 vision after any correction to appreciate that.) I'd be surprised if you see anything from broadcast TV, unless you mean satellite, do Sky offer 4K yet? I haven't had it for like 10 years...I just don't see any point at all in 8K. You'd need a 100" screen to appreciate that, and even an American is going to think that's a bit ridiculous. Cinemas, sure? Maybe even a home cinema projector playing an 8K bluray. But we don't even have the transmission bandwidth on Freeview for anything more than 1080i60, and as you've pointed out, the average broadband connection is going to choke on 4K for some time (I'm feeling mighty fortunate with our 500Mbit/s BT FTTP, but I'm clearly the outlier!)

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 10:26:28 pm
content: I worked in video engineering and production for over thirty years… apart from the shift to digital,I suspect that most viewers couldn’t tell the difference from ‘good’ 625/50 and the new high-def formats with well lit content in a well prepared viewing environment.It’s all about the ‘racing stripes’ and ‘GT badge’ on the fuel filler cap.Large screens are great, but did you notice the quality of scriptwriting is inversely proportional to the screen size ?Don’t even mention HDR and compression artefacts !

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 10:30:26 pm
content: Quote from: SL4P on November 02, 2022, 10:26:28 pmFor about 10 years after the switch to HD I saw countless TVs connected via composite video, people had no idea that despite having a HD TV, the input they were using was only capable of SD, and not even very good SD at that. The only reason HD caught on in the first place is that it coincided with the development of reasonably priced large flat panel displays. Housewives everywhere rejoiced at the fact that they no longer needed an enormous heav box in their livingroom. Since the dawn of TV, the best selling sets by far have always been the cheapest junk on the shelves at Kmart and the like. Most people simply don't notice and or don't care about picture quality.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 10:38:44 pm
content: Quote from: RJHayward on November 02, 2022, 09:52:17 pmNot really. Think of it from this angle: When did you see the (average/expected/maximum) power use of a TV mentioned in an advertisement? Even in an online advert, which usually contain all kinds of tech specs? Hell, even standby power, which customers are definitely interested in and pretty knowable nowadays, are often omitted!Quote from: RJHayward on November 02, 2022, 09:52:17 pmNah, that didn't happen with vacuum cleaners either. Like I said, ash and wet-and-dry vacuums were explicitly set to be outside. Like then, the rules do not affect ownership –– you can still use a 1.5kW vacuum at home if you have one ––, only commercial sales to private customers.Me, I do not know if this is good or bad, and can't be arsed to delve into it to find out because I don't even have a 4K display yet; just reading what others think about it, in case I want to have an opinion on this someday.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 10:42:53 pm
content: Quote from: RJHayward on November 02, 2022, 09:52:17 pmTaking it to ridiculous extremes, what a shocker.This has nothing to do with personal choice, frankly. You want an 8K TV which uses 500W to do nothing all day? Go ahead and make one.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2022, 10:55:51 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 02, 2022, 10:25:29 pmI would have agreed with you until I actually saw it for myself, and my vision is far from 20/20. There are some dedicated 4K TV channels showing niche programs and the quality difference is obvious. Many YT creators are now recording in 4K, doesn't help me because as I said above, my connection won't support 4K, it won't even start playing it, 1440p is about it and even then it coughs and splutters! I'm fine with even 720p though, and 1080p plays fine, it's the program material that I'm most concerned with anyway.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 12:10:48 am
content: With all due respect, and sincere thanks for any criticism, I don't mind; but what, in the world, is extremism, when I see statements like:"Build it yourself, if you want it ". (power hungry video and theater systems).I could say, tongue-in-cheek,;"You want electric car ? Build it yourself..."I might prefer an approach that encourages moderating energy use, in a video or home theater.Plus, why not put energy ratings on package info, to encourage those who wish to shop that way.Additional, maybe you've noticed; Folks living under the brunt of FORCE usually only comply visibly, but may harbor grudges, against a beuracracy (especially when there is incompetence and hipocracy rampant.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 12:20:12 am
content: Quote from: RJHayward on November 03, 2022, 12:10:48 amIn the EU that is already the case for several decades.The same is happening for food as well so manufacturers can no longer hide unhealthy food.

author: eti
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 01:09:53 am
content: Please be mindful that there is a global shortage of exclamation marks. I have refrained from frivolous, unnecessary use here.

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 01:19:15 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 03, 2022, 12:20:12 amLike bananas of wrong curvature?

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 02:40:38 am
content: Quote from: vad on November 03, 2022, 01:19:15 amNo, more like not hiding sugars under the general carbohydrates term. (Sugars are carbohydrates, but their intake should be monitored separately from other carbohydrates. Refined sugar is basically poison. Hell, you can even use it as a disinfectant on open wounds!)

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 02:50:20 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on November 02, 2022, 10:42:53 pmSo you'd ban the finished product but support selling them as kits?

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 03:09:07 am
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on November 03, 2022, 02:50:20 amI won't get too much into this "debate" which is yet another great example of mommy EU banning stuff left and right for your own good.But just to reply to your remark: of course this is all about the numbers, so mass production is what is targeted. A negligible number of assembled kits wouldn't change a single thing. (Even this whole ban would not, but that's another question.) This does make some sense. "Kits" would be extremely expensive so they'll be extremely limited in number.Heck "kit" is a big word. All you need is a 8K monitor. The rest in a TV set is just garbage that you can replace with relatively inexpensive devices that'll do much better without any telemetry. But expect very high prices for a 8K monitor. Even just the 8K panels (if you think about kits) are going to be absolutely out of reach for people with a budget for a TV set. Again just a matter of market and numbers.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 03:36:42 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on November 03, 2022, 02:40:38 amHoney is antibacterial, it contains a lot of sugar, that doesn't make it poison though. Really "poison" is almost entirely about dose. Salt, water and even oxygen are toxic in large enough quantities, yet we can't survive without them. Sugar, even refined sugar is fuel, you just don't want too much of it. Historically it was rare enough in nature to not be an issue, now of course it is plentiful.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 03:59:43 am
content: Quote from: james_s on November 03, 2022, 03:36:42 amYes it's all about the dose. No, sugar is not "poison", but it can become so in large doses, and that's a definite issue with modern processed food. There's just too much of it. It is metabolized very fast and triggers high insulin peaks which will make you store all that as fat quickly (and, over time, gets you insulin-resistant which is even worse), unless you can burn it instantly. Which doesn't happen unless you consume it while doing sports.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 04:35:02 am
content: I think that by the time 8K becomes mainstream, the technology would have improved enough to meet the efficiency standards.Quote from: hans on November 02, 2022, 05:20:16 pmHasn't performance per watt improved with pretty much every generation, albeit by far less than it did in the past?Quote from: tom66 on November 02, 2022, 10:25:29 pmDownload it overnight to watch when you want, just like what was done in the good old days.Quote from: SL4P on November 02, 2022, 10:26:28 pmOn a 50" class screen, the difference between 1080p and 4K is very obvious, the difference between DVD quality and 1080p is even more obvious.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 06:09:43 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on November 03, 2022, 04:35:02 amWhatever it can or not, it's stupid to slap on them the same energy efficiency standard as on 4k. They will never be as efficient as 4k, not to say 1080p. Gaps between the pixels take much higher screen space percentage, so give or take they will be less efficient. Not to say they need more complicated and power consuming electronics too.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 06:58:53 am
content: Quote from: borjam on November 02, 2022, 03:19:58 pmYou say thatnowbut I said the same thing about 4K about 5-6 years ago. Now, I haven't looked back.Even old HD and even very old SD content looks amazing on modern LCDs with the secret sauce Sony, Samsung, LG etc... are putting into their post-processing. It really gives old content a new life.

author: eti
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 07:54:17 am
content: Quote from: SL4P on November 02, 2022, 10:26:28 pmDon't come here with your uncommon sense, rare rational thinking and wisdom. Be gone! 😁Absolutely spot on. The garbage coming into the TV is still the same.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 02:24:57 pm
content: Quote from: eti link=topic=350206.msg4499935#msg4499935 date=166746Absolutely spot on. The garbage coming into the TV is still the same.[/quote

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 02:50:38 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on November 02, 2022, 03:14:45 pmYes, it is pretty much like Audiophiles!Why produce resolution that the eye can't use?

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 03:28:51 pm
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on November 03, 2022, 02:50:38 pmBecause it's all about the emotion and psycho-acoustics, apparently

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 04:04:57 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on November 02, 2022, 03:57:31 pmAnd it's still too small. Today the best strategy is to buy and freeze all you can because the price will be higher next week. Freezers (only) went out of stock the second day of the pandemic and I don't think there is much inventory now, years later.Air conditioning is the largest load around here especially when it got to 115° F (46° C) a couple of months back. Pretty warm! Summer months are routinely 90°F+ (32°C+). You know it is hot when the AC is still running at 3 in the morning.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 04:10:43 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on November 02, 2022, 03:57:31 pmOn the subject of refrigeration, I was looking at chest freezers this week. These are far more efficient than vertical freezers. However with the current wacky efficiency ratings they all get an F rating for efficiency, while the vertical freezers do better.

author: Bicurico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 04:32:02 pm
content: I use 3 monitors on my PC. I have been wondering if I should swap them for a 48" 4K TV. This would give me the same size as 4x 24" FullHD monitors, but without the annoying frames.The cons are however that separate screens allow individual programs to run in full screen mode. Also, there is the issue of the refresh rate using 1x 4K on one HDMI. Not even sure if my graphics card wouls upport it (I am using a Geforce 660 and have a Geforce 860, too). The other reason is that my 3 monitors are arranged in an arc, to better match my field of view. Using one flat screen of similar size would result in considerable difference in distances to the eye (border vs center).Anyway, this is my ONLY application for 4K. Using regular household TV's up to 70" I seriously doubt that there is much difference between FullHD and 4K at recommended distance. Note that 4K for computer application is different, as one sits much closer to the screen.So why 8K? As far as I am aware, it was developed in Japan a few years ago and was intended to be te natural step: FullHD --> 4K --> 8K. But of course, they must have forgotten that FullHD is already more than enough for normal consumers! Not to mention the required bandwidth - not only in broadcast, but also in recording and post production.4K is still suffering with HEVC/.h256 which is complex and not many productions are available in 4K. I doubt this will change.Again, the only reason I am aware of to move to 8K is to make the whole filming and production digital at a resultion that can match or even exceed analog film.To render 8K, a really big screen is required and eventually the cinema of the future will use smaller rooms and instead of projecting the movie, it will be rendered on big 8K LCD screens.Coming on topic, the title is complete rubbish. The EU is not banning any TV. The keyword is energy eficiency and ALL devices not matching the designated efficiency rating will be banned.Why do 8K TV's exceed the rating? Because they are so big and have so many pixels/transistors. Either manufacturers can optimize this or you won't find consumer grade 8K TV's in the store. But, as already mentioned, you don't see many other types of devices in stores!Conclusion: much smoke for nothing.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 04:49:31 pm
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on November 03, 2022, 02:50:38 pmI've never seen an 8k TV but I'm skeptical of that comment. I've had people tell me that 4k is needlessly high resolution and yet I can clearly see the difference compared to 1080p. I've had so many people tell me that xx Hz is fast enough that the eye can't perceive flicker and yet I can see it clearly up to significantly higher frequencies.I generally find 1080p adequate, but 4k certainly looks sharper and smoother.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 06:24:49 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 03, 2022, 04:49:31 pmDon't bother replying to this kind of argument. It always the same, uninformed that we have addressed a few times but it still doesn't sink in.There was a recent thread about hearing as well in a simiilar vein.To begin with, any such statement should come with a definite and clear statement about "what the eye can use". Let's start the fun. It's much more complex than it appears. It would basically require books of thousands of pages and years of study. For the amount of stuff that is currently known. Which is not even the end of the story.Anyone non visually impaired has no trouble seeing the difference between FHD and 4K even on a relatively small screen. No doubt the difference between 4K and 8K on a larger screen will be very apparent.I am absolutely all, 100% for using proper science and debunking bullshit, but when poor science is used as a pretext to pass as smart when you know jack shit, well, nope.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 06:34:29 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 03, 2022, 06:24:49 pmI am sitting in front of a 4k screen showing small clear readable text. If I showed this same image at 2k resolution the text would be unreadable. For many images the extra resolution is pointless, but not for all.4k looks great up to about 55". Above that you start to see pixels if you are sitting anywhere near the screen. You don't need 8k source material for an 8k screen to have benefits for the viewer. A sweeping curve showing severe jaggies on a screen at its natural resolution can be smoothed a lot, without filtering that blurs it, by good quality upscaling of 2k or 4k material to 8k.

author: Miyuki
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 07:07:36 pm
content: I was recently in one showroom walking by one of those microLED (not sure if it was just 4k or 8k)But it was like passing by the IR heating panelI was radiating blasting heat even at a distance

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 07:13:59 pm
content: My main attention, here, is on the 'control' issues, like:1.). You People don't know enough to make decision.2.). We make the ban, you WILL comply.(or else).3). You are just a stupid TV viewer, we know better.You saw some AD that brainwashed you, to thinkthat you want 8k.4). Now, let's talk about that Authoritarian personover there..., Yeah that's him.My point being; the energy use debate is so rife with hypocrisy and contradictions, that a person hesitates, to trust / believe. Watch the discussion around John Kerry and the private jet thing. John Kerry, attending climate change conference IN HIS PRIVATE JET!Oh yeah, and now there is a whole system just poised for that kind of 'statement'... A whole array of 'Fact Checking', to dismiss comments like the John Kerry thing. In this context, makes it hard to trust the demands to go authoritarian, on 8k, for example...And maybe bringing up John Kerry's PRIVATE JET is not fair, but I see hipocracy / arrogance, and I don't trust the whole climate warrior thing.Sad thing is, we DO need to respond, just maybe take the exploitation / power abuses as the issue gets hijacked, by various politically motivated camps.Sorry, got to go, I see a 'Fact Checker's in my rear view mirror...(lol)

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 07:32:51 pm
content: Quote from: RJHayward on November 03, 2022, 07:13:59 pmThe general public do not know enough to set product standards, indeed. Reality does exist.QuoteNothing is being banned. TVs are not being confiscated, nobody is going door to door to check you haven't got an inefficient device. Product standards are being set.QuoteYes. That genuinely is how most people approach buying products - advertisements and paid for articles manipulate them into buying what the manufacturer wants to sell them. The manufacturer puts on the market what they want to sell, not what people want to buy.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 07:42:29 pm
content: Quote from: KaneTW on November 02, 2022, 06:54:13 pmAs someone who spent almost all of his career as the interface between technical and non-technical folks, allow me to express something that many technical people do not realize, or simply refuse to accept:The overwhelming majority of the general public is non-technical, and cannot (and should not!) be expected to know anything technical. As technical people, it’s our responsibility to make technology accessible to everyone, and part of that is making certain decisions for people. The average citizen buys stuff based primarily on features and price, not on technical quality and efficiency, and so absent government regulation, most people will not spend extra for a product that will actually save them money in the long run and save the planet at the same time.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 08:04:51 pm
content: Do I hear Steve Jobs speaking from his grave ...

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 08:10:44 pm
content: I never liked Jobs while he was alive, but after he died I noticed a rapid drop in the quality and polish of Apple products. There is no way in hell he would have let iOS7 go out in the state it was, or the notches in the displays of iphones and now macbooks.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 08:17:42 pm
content: Oh the European parliament, a big bunch of hypocrites with their views on saving the world, while still every month move back and forth between Brussels and Strasbourg. The day that they stop doing that is the day that I will start to take them somewhat seriously.Especially with a commercial in mind the Dutch government used, or maybe still uses, to tell you that a better world starts with your self. They should act on that advice themselves, but what can I say, politicians just a big bunch of lying bastards.And sure the general public does not know about technology, but neither do the politicians and don't get me started on the consultants they hire.I saw some mention about sugar in this thread, and yes it is bad for you, but so is all the crap food that is cheap. But when some suggest that it might be a good idea to exempt vegetables from VAT, to stimulate the wider public to eat healthier, it all becomes very difficult and needs lots of meetings to discuss it and it will take at least a couple of years to change the rules.They have never heard of the rule to keep it simpleRant over

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 08:22:57 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 03, 2022, 08:10:44 pmWalter Isaacson, who wrote Steve Job's biography book, told about an episode at the hospital where Jobs was having his surgery, when Jobs did not like the oxygen mask he mentored the personnel how to improve the mask design.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 08:25:05 pm
content: Quote from: pcprogrammer on November 03, 2022, 08:17:42 pmI bet if you got invited to one of their big meetings, and spent all day. Carefully explaining about the KISS principal. You would have a significant impact, and they would nod their heads in agreement, clap and then arrange for it to be sorted out.They'd then spend 0.5 Billion Euros, on hiring consultants and others to sort it out. Eight years later, they'd come up with a 9,500 pages in total, set of 7 massive/big new rule books, on how to operate and use the KISS principal.Which kind of defeats the whole point of the KISS principal, in the first place.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KISS_principleInstead of coming up with a nice/catchy one liner, explaining the KISS principal, concisely and well.

author: KaneTW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 08:53:11 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on November 03, 2022, 07:42:29 pmI completely agree, but restrictions and regulations are not the solution except for life-threatening/etc situations.Simply put, if 10% of users want an inefficient high-resolution TV and 90% don't care, the 10% shouldn't have to suffer so the 90% enjoy a lower energy bill."Suffer" in this case meaning anywhere from "not being able to get a 8K TV at an attractive pricepoint" to "yet another regulation making it near-impossible to enter the consumer electronics market, and yet another reason to never sell to consumers, ever"

author: DavidAlfa
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 08:55:16 pm
content: Sorry butTerrible torture for humanity!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 09:16:42 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on November 03, 2022, 07:42:29 pmThe thing is. I think it would be a lot better, if they gently persuaded people, to 'do the right thing'. E.g. Change from buying filament, 100 watt bulbs, to getting (largely) equivalent, 10 watts (approx), LED equivalent light bulbs, instead.Using methods such as advertising, raising public awareness, of the benefits of using LED bulbs, over filament bulbs. The benefits, such as a significant electricity cost reduction, etc.Various initiatives, further moving people over the LED lighting, and perhaps other forms of low energy lighting.Instead of just (in my opinion, taking the lazy/easy option of just making filament bulbs illegal, through legislation).Then, people would be much freer, to do what they want in life, and there would still be a big move over to LED lighting. Just that filament bulbs would still be available, especially for the various reasons, why they can still be useful.Similarly, the overly-powerful law(s), seem to have outlawed 8K TVs, wouldn't have happened, if they had taken a more relaxed (much less legislative) way, compared to the current situation.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 09:30:49 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 03, 2022, 09:16:42 pmI can see both sides here. On one hand, I like having choice. On the other hand, I have met people that steadfastly refused to believe that LED/CFL bulbs save energy, despite the fact that it's easily demonstrated by directly measuring the power consumption. I've met other people that were by most measures intelligent, yet they simply could not make the connection between the efficiency rating of an AC or heat pump and their monthly bill.Personally I would prefer to tax inefficient stuff in order to encourage higher efficiency items to be purchased, but that way nothing is banned.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 10:05:13 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 03, 2022, 09:30:49 pmI know EXACTLY what you mean. It is a bit like, when you meet up with someone, and they take you to a shop, to buy three printer ink cartridges, for £19 each (price completely made up), almost £60. As they explain their printer needs them every couple of months, for the 100 pages they have printed.You explain that it is cheaper in the longer term, to buy a more expensive printer, but with considerably longer lasting, and cheaper (overall), supplies, such as toner.Yet, they say the printer only cost £29, so it MUST be the cheaper option, compared to the £200 printers, I'm suggesting, maybe they should have bought.I think part of the problem, is that people don't necessarily even see the mathematics, of £60 x 6 (if every 2 months) = £360 per year. Whereas a £200 Laser printer, or modern eco-tank printer, with the odd £10 .. £100+ toner/ink refill, every couple of years or so. Would be considerably cheaper in the longer term. Yet they keep on shelling out, £60 (or whatever the cost is), for three printer cartridges, until the next 100 pages are printed out, so around another couple of months.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 10:12:32 pm
content: Tooki, you almost got it right, (which is why I pushed the 'thanks' button). However, we are going to need a good sweep, of corruption. Always always always there's gonna be some dumb-ass messing with and twisting the agenda...because that's the way things have been unfolding.I observed the push, to get Americans out of their cars (Pres. Obama 2009-2016.). Meanwhile local BUS services cut like mad, 2013 Alameda-Contra Costa counties.I noticed our US Transportation Secretary projects a sense of incompetence, (and how he talks), incompetent in the very expertise needed to declare technical things for us to follow.Yeah, 'not banned', it's just that,...wait, ...'EU BANS 8k' that's the title of this thread. And I get to 'argue' that ? No thanks, I'm prioritizing my time, to some degree.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2022, 11:57:47 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 03, 2022, 09:30:49 pmCFL bulbs are the worst thing ever foisted on the public.They cost more to buy, produce adequate light initially, but their output falls off rapidly, radically reducing their useable lifetime.Contrast with conventional Fluorescent tubes, which still produce substantial levels of lighting, up until they start to flicker, then rapidly drop off, after a much longer lifetime than CFLs.The idea of somehow squishing a "fluoro" up to fit inside a "light bulb" was doomed from the start.The first LED bulbs were nice & efficient, but their light levels dropped off rapidly in service.More recently, this problem has been overcome, & the current generation deliver on the promises.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 12:07:35 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on November 03, 2022, 11:57:47 pmI was an early adopter of CFLs, I had switched over completely by 2001. They were not perfect by any means but for the most part I didn't have a lot of problems with them. The brightness does fall rapidly over the first 100 hours to around 90% of initial and then follows a much slower decline until they reach 70% at which point they are considered end of life. They worked particularly well for me in dusk to dawn lights outside where I regularly got over the rated lifespan of 6k-8k hours. LED is better, but CFL was hardly the worst thing, they worked well enough for me that I haven't used incandescent bulbs for general illumination in over 20 years.I have not seen the lumen decline of LED bulbs, even early ones. The Philips 8W LED in the porch light by my front door was installed in 2011 and runs dusk till dawn 7 days a week. It is indistinguishable from a NOS one I never ended up using.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 12:18:55 am
content: I have replaced most CFLs with LED a couple of years ago when LED had matured enough to be cost effective and work well. I had an early LED lamp but that was pretty crappy.My experience with CFL bulbs is that the more expensive, long life ones have a long lifespan but they tend to startup slow. The cheaper ones crap out quickly. I have replaced the CFL tube armatures I have with HF drivers. HF drivers make the tubes last almost forever. Though I have not found LED panels that have >90% CRI like the CFL tubes I have in my lab and workspace so I'll stick to CFL in there.All in all I must say that the modern LED lamps certainly are very good and offer a lot of lighting possibilities that are not possible with incandescent or CFL.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 12:42:28 am
content: LED is hands down superior to CFL, no argument there, but CFL was not THAT bad, the better ones worked pretty well. There definitely was a tradeoff between cost, starting speed and lifespan. People like instant on, but striking a fluorescent lamp without first preheating the cathodes is very hard on them so instant start lamps fail a lot faster, they're really only intended for applications where they are started once per day. Put one in a bathroom or something and they will fail quickly. Amalgam lamps are better able to tolerate high temperatures so most enclosed globe style, super compact and high output CFLs used that rather than elemental mercury, but amalgam types take a lot longer to reach full brightness.

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 01:35:56 am
content: Limiting a kettle to 500W would be pointless as it's not the power that matter but the energy. To boil a liter of water might require about 330KJ and it will make only a little difference if the kettle operated at 500W versus 2000W. Actually, the 2000W kettle might consume a bit less energy as there would be less time for the kettle to lose energy through radiation or convection.An 8K TV/monitor will tend to consume more power at a given size and brightness as it will have 4X as many transistors switching as a 4K TV/monitor does. But, an 8K TV of, say, 25 inches diagonal will not likely consume as much power as a 4K TV that's 55 inches when operating at the same brightness.Putting a limit on power consumption now when very few people have 8K will give the makers time to improve the technology. Given the energy issues the world is facing right now with the insane war Russia is waging in Ukraine it is not unreasonable to impose restrictions to limit the blackouts and brownouts that are almost certain to be with us this winter. During WWII rationing was a thing and although many hated it they sucked it up because they cared more about their neighbors than is common these days. We have evolved into a bunch of whining toddlers stomping are feet and pouting!Brian

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 01:47:35 am
content: Quote from: raptor1956 on November 04, 2022, 01:35:56 amIt was only an example to illustrate a point I think. Also since when has something being pointless stopped a politician from trying to legislate it?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 09:18:25 am
content: Quote from: james_s on November 04, 2022, 01:47:35 amPoliticians can promote anything they like, that's politics. But the EU is a technocratic organisation. Things are debated amongst industry professionals for years before even a draft piece of legislation would be written. No doubt the 500W kettle limit will never happen. If anything, the EU might mandate a 3kW kettle as standard, because it will likely be more efficient than a 2kW model.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 10:17:54 am
content: Quote from: Bud on November 03, 2022, 08:22:57 pmNice story, but the people using it are not the ones with the say in changing it.Besides, things that looked like improvements to him might compromise other parts of the design.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 10:44:13 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on November 03, 2022, 06:24:49 pmThanks for the sneer, but some of us were exposed, even if secondhand, to the conclusions of the original research current at the time we learnt about associated things.The decisions on TV standards by the relevant authorities were all informed by those studies, which gave us mortals some "rules of thumb" for what sort of resolution is adequate.Indeed, later research may well have proven those conclusions, & my comments, to be wrong, but isn't the onus on you to give some examples of how "much more complex" it is."Because you say so" just doesn't hack it!Jackshit my backside!

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 11:14:07 am
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 04, 2022, 09:18:25 amThere are other concerns than power rating & efficiency:-Using the standard 230v RMS EU voltage standard, for a 500w kettle ,I=2.17A (approx), a 2kW kettle, I= 8.7A(approx), whereas for a 3kW kettle, I=13A(approx)---spot on the UK 13A plug fuse rating!For the NA 120v voltage standard the figures are : 500w unit I=4.17A (approx), 2kW, I=16.7A (approx), & for 3kW, I=25A(exactly)!

author: JohanH
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 11:34:20 am
content: In many EU countries 10A fuse and wiring might be used (even though socket itself is rated 16A), so I guess larger than 2.3 kW isn't going to be standardized (if it were).

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 02:31:37 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 04, 2022, 12:18:55 amThe range of both CFL and LED performance is huge. However, I have still to see a LED bulb that can match a 1990s National/Panasonic CFL. Those things went on for years and years, with good efficiency, and pleasant illumination. Their only downside was their slow start, and the classic negative for any fluorescent lamp - don't use them in places where they have many short runs, like domestic bathrooms.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 03:08:20 pm
content: LED lighting is still far from perfect, even ideal. The main enemy of any LED lamp is heat. Enclose them and they die prematurely, sometimes very. Even semi enclosed is a problem, depending on the air flow, if airflow is restricted, like for example, an angle poise lamp, life is reduced. To achieve max life the lamp has to be in free air.Most are not compatible with outdoor use, with some products even stating that on the packaging, I have proved this to be true, they die quite quickly.Quality is variable and difficult to judge from appearance. If you buy Philips or a similar quality brand, then OK. Buying cheapies is a lottery.I've found Ikea, Aldi, Liddle etc, which are low price, to be surprisingly good. I've stripped a few failed ones down and these brands have good build quality. The unknown one hung low brands vary from cr4p to as good as Ikea, Aldi & Liddle but you cannot know until tried.And non, even Philips, get anywhere near the 10's of thousands of hours life claimed.However, compared to incandescent and CFL, it's LED every time.I visited a friend this summer, who I hadn't seen for many years. We were chatting in the evening and I'd noticed the multiple ceiling halogen down lighters in the kitchen and lounge, the conversation turned to energy costs and she was moaning about her bill. I asked her if the down lighters were still halogen, she replied she didn't know but they'd been in for over 20 years, so yes, they were. I did a quick calc on the probable consumption and it was around 1 to 1.3 KW with them all on!!! When I explained what that meant she said that they would be out the next week to be replaced with LED!!! She hadn't even changed the table lamps and other lamps to LED, she thought it wasn't worth it!

author: Stray Electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 03:16:08 pm
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on November 04, 2022, 11:14:07 amI don't know about the rest of the world but in the US normal AC outlets are usually rated for 15 amps however kitchen outlets are rated 20 amps (all at 120 VAC). Does anyone else in the EU, UK, etc do that?FWIW with regard to the power available: electric kettles aren't that common here either. We just use a plain kettle on the stove top.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 03:21:39 pm
content: everyone switch to CFLs. 5 years later : ban cfls, they contain mercury.try getting rid of them now. you can;t throw them in the trash , nor in the recycle bin. you have to give them with the dangerous goods.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 04:01:23 pm
content: Quote from: Stray Electron on November 04, 2022, 03:16:08 pmNo, there's basically no need, because we deliver practical amounts of power at 10A or so. Electric kettles are significantly more efficient than stoves.

author: unknownparticle
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 04:19:03 pm
content: The UK has a ring main system, with an MCB rated at 32 amps, but the individual socket outlets are rated at 13 amp with all the plugs 13 amp fused. On the average 3 bed house, which is much smaller than the average US property, there will be a ring main for each floor, as most houses are 2 story. Bare in mind though, our mains voltage is 240V so a 13 amp socket will support 3.1 KW. Our kettles are generally rated at between 2-3KW and you'll struggle to find a home or business without one!! Actually, it's a major problem for our power grid, because the nation tends to watch sh1t soap's like sheep, in their millions and when an ad break comes on, everyone puts the kettle on for a coffee or cup of tea, this results in a huge load spike for the grid, so they have to watch the TV schedules and plan accordingly!! That must now be less of a thing or becoming so though, as a result of catch up TV options.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 04:42:26 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 04, 2022, 02:31:37 pmReally? I have some nigh-on 7 year old Costco LED bulbs that were about £8 for 3 x 7W LED - warm white, instant start, and by my estimation about as bright as they left the factory. CRI is >80, which is better than most CFLs. They have probably done 15,000 hours already. CFLs can't beat modern LEDs.

author: AndyBeez
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 05:09:46 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on November 04, 2022, 03:21:39 pmSame here in sunny (?) England.A decade ago, our energy suppliers were giving these away for free to help save the planet from the evil that is,tungsten filaments. Even the European Union was in on the act, fronting these bulbs as eco-friendly. We all had them as they were not just energy saving, but planet saving too - and free.However, the free CFL bulbs were made in china shite that barely lasted twice as long as a filament bulb. Ever had any 'eco bulb' last the 100,000 hours claimed on the carton? Some, not even last 1,000 hours. My Philips bulbs faired better but, for the price of one, I could have bought a crate of tungsten bulbs. But being free, they were a throw away item!Then we (the people) discovered CFL bulbs were SO dangerous to the environment, our local town council provided special sealable bags to dispose of them in. Just one broken bulb was enough to close down our public library; theirhazmat bulbswere replaced with florescent strip lightsA traditional lightbulb contains mostly glass, tungsten, tin and a bit of leaded solder. A CFL contains almost as much e-waste as LED lightbulbs. And that's A LOT of good parts down in the dumpster.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 05:18:32 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on November 04, 2022, 03:21:39 pmIts the same pattern with many things. CO2 is bad? Let's go for diesel cars. Oh no, NO2 is bad, lets punish all those diesel car owners who bought to be environmentally friendly. Who gives a damn this week about CO2? That's so last week..... and next week. Its just not this week.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 05:22:23 pm
content: Diesel cars were always promoted as 'less bad', despite what VW wanted you to think. The government incentivised them with good tax rates because EVs weren't available at the time and now we've discovered that was probably a bad idea due to NOx, but it was the best of a set of not great options.Lightbulb emissions are almost entirely due to energy usage. An LED bulb repays its extra emissions within about 1,000 hours of operation. Sure some CFLs were shite but others last 10+ years, I've still got one in the loft which must be nearly 15 years old... I've been meaning to replace it but why bother when it still works?

author: AndyBeez
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 05:53:31 pm
content: The premise for banning tungsten and halogen bulbs is they use MORE energy and therefore produce MORE carbon dioxide. And as we all know, if there was LESS carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, our great leaders would have no reason to burn bullshit in a carbon neutral way at the COPConferencecash cow.To borrow a phrase from eco jedi Al Gore, the inconvenience truth about my carbon dioxide production is this: My lightbulbs produce zero carbon because, having nuclear, wind and solar generation in my region,there is no carbon produced. Other UK regions have abundant hydro-electric. Another truth, despite it's "dirty man of europe" reputation, the UK is spiralling towards a carbonnegativefuture.So a big yes to energy efficient lighting. Go physics, go EEs! But a big no to foundless reasoning from a political class whogreenwashtheir dirty hands with tax payers money. Every year.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 06:00:08 pm
content: Quote from: AndyBeez on November 04, 2022, 05:53:31 pmThe UK grid has a carbon intensity of about 200gCO2/kWh, no matter who you buy your electricity from. So a 100W tungsten bulb produces about 20g per hour of operation, but a 10W LED bulb is around 2g. A pretty good way to look at the emissions profile of a lightbulb is to consider the maximum amount of energy thatcouldhave been expended to make it. If it retails for £5, say, then it probably cost £2.50 to make. If natural gas is about £50 per MWh (Asian spot price), then it couldn't have used more than 50kWh to produce or around 12.5kg of CO2. So your payback period is (12500g / 18g = 694 hours) which is pretty damn short. And that's an upper estimate based on normal energy consumption, it doesn't consider e-waste but that's very hard to price in. If you buy a LED bulb that lasts 15k hours it has definitely a positive impact on your emissions.COP isn't a cash cow. Countries are desperate to get out of their commitments because going net zero will be almost impossible without massive economic costs, but no one seems brave enough to admit this yet. We're probably a bit fucked when it comes to climate change, and we need to be rapidly thinking about how to mitigate the worst outcomes rather than pretending 1.5C is achievable now.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 06:13:32 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 04, 2022, 05:22:23 pmIn engineering there are no solutions, despite what the marketing people say. There are only compromises. Too many people with power are utopian, and fail to understand that. So, we get an endless stream of destructive decisions. Electric cars are only "less bad", not perfect. On a really good day windmills and solar panels are "less bad" , and a very very long way from perfect.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 08:11:00 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 04, 2022, 09:18:25 amIs that how we ended up with those idiotic cookie notifications that pop up constantly all over the internet? I know it was well intended, but the way it panned out was a complete fail.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 08:14:10 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 04, 2022, 06:00:08 pmThat's something I've thought about for a while. Even the most optimistic moon shot climate action proposed predicts results that are still pretty dire as I recall. If we were going to prevent human caused climate change, the window of opportunity for that was decades if not a century ago. As of now we have already passed the point of no return so we may be better off finding ways to mitigate the effects rather than trying to prevent it.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 08:16:41 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 04, 2022, 09:18:25 amYou make that sound like a good thing. However little power it gives us, we can vote out a politician. The technocrats can only removed through serious violence.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 08:18:33 pm
content: Quote from: AndyBeez on November 04, 2022, 05:09:46 pmBurning coal to power an incandescent lamp releases more mercury into the environment than throwing away a CFL. Maybe it's different there but here they are easily disposed of, there are bins at most hardware stores, although most people just throw them in the trash. Closing the library and sending in a hazmat team is absurd overkill for the tiny amount of mercury that is present, in most bulbs it's not even liquid mercury, it's an amalgam similar to what used to be used in dental fillings.I never saw one that was claimed to last 100,000 hours. The best ones were typically rated for 8,000, cheaper ones 6,000. I had some early failures but I also had many that lasted longer than the rated life, largely that came down to how rarely they were started. Lights that came on once in the evening and shut off later lasted much longer than those that were switched off and on often.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 08:22:35 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 04, 2022, 05:18:32 pmIt's worse with refrigerants. Ammonia was toxic and smelly so they switched to R12. R12 was wrecking the ozone so they banned it and switched to R22 and R134. R22 has some ozone depletion potential (5% of $12) so they phased that out and switched to R410. R410 and R134 are greenhouse gasses so they're working on phasing those out. Each time of course requires new equipment and new tools to work with the stuff. IMHO we should have stuck with R22 and R134 and just focused on capturing and recycling it to avoid letting it out into the atmosphere.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 08:24:31 pm
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on November 04, 2022, 10:44:13 amHow about "because I can see the pixels with my own eyes"? Does that count? I tend to believe something when I can see it myself.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 08:25:50 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 04, 2022, 08:16:41 pmWell, we do not get to vote for the EU president or for the EU comission, actually.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 08:29:21 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 04, 2022, 08:18:33 pmI've seen National CFLs run for 10 years in stair wells, where they were never turned off. I think they were only rated for 8000 to 10000 hours, but could massively exceed that. Most of the complaints about the short life of CFLs are due to many warm up cycles (e.g. bathroom use) or use in an enclosed luminaire. Most CFLs are marked as unsuitable for use in enclosed fittings, but people ignore that. They blacken even faster when they can't dissipate their heat well, than when they are turned on and off a lot.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 08:33:43 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 04, 2022, 08:29:21 pmI think I once got around 12k hours out of one that was rated for 8,000, it was in a light on my desk at work that was left on all the time. It's not too hard to make one that will keep going longer than that, but the phosphor is going to get pretty tired at some point. L70 is considered EOL.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 09:46:35 pm
content: QuoteAre CFLs powered by some magic non-coal derived source, then? To put it another way, burning coal to power a CFL surely releases slightly less mercury from the power but an additional dump from the CFL at EOL (which, typically, would be sooner than the incandescent lamp).

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 09:52:33 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 04, 2022, 09:46:35 pmIt takes far less coal to power a CFL, so its still a lower polluter.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 10:03:25 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 04, 2022, 08:29:21 pmFunny enough, I used a few spare CFLs in my fridge. They only lasted 2 weeks each. Surely there is plenty of cold air in the fridge, so they did not die because of overheating. I still do not know why they died that fast.

author: Ranayna
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 10:17:51 pm
content: I would guess dampness or maybe cracking due to temperature difference?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 04, 2022, 10:29:30 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 04, 2022, 08:14:10 pmUnfortunately, a bit of both. We need to drastically cut CO2 emissions, but also work to mitigate the worst effects. That means building flood defences, security for energy grids against extreme temperatures (no Texas again, please), insulating existing homes, building *new* homes to be zero carbon, look at genome engineering or at least crop selection to be more rugged to extreme heat/longer droughts -- all of that stuff.There's no scenario in which we don't reduce emissions and only mitigate the badness and survive the long term in any reasonable manner. It'd be a bit like the lung cancer patient smoking 40-a-day after their tumour was excised.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 05, 2022, 07:27:57 am
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 04, 2022, 09:46:35 pmNo of course not, but they consume roughly 1/6 as much energy so you still come out ahead. As I've said earlier, I typically got much longer lifespan from my CFLs than from the incandescent lamps they replaced.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 05, 2022, 07:31:04 am
content: Quote from: Bud on November 04, 2022, 10:03:25 pmRapid cycling, and probably the low temperature too. Lower is not better, fluorescent lamps have a specific temperature range over which they are designed to operate which corresponds to the vapor pressure of the mercury inside them. Cold weather operation can be challenging, fluorescent tubes meant for cold weather ran at higher current and you could get special low temperature ballasts, mostly used in signs. Even then when it got *really* cold out, fluorescent signs would be very dim.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 05, 2022, 07:34:18 am
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 04, 2022, 10:29:30 pmUnfortunately I think that's totally impractical and wishful thinking. Even if you could build all new houses to be zero carbon and people could still afford them, there is still the inconvenient fact that a huge chunk of pollution comes from the third world and developing nations and they are many decades behind other regions. I was surprised to learn recently that as much kerosene is used for lighting still as is used in air transport. Kerosene lamps are still a daily use device in some parts of the world. There are vast areas that don't have electricity, let alone heat pumps.

author: timenutgoblin
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 10:37:44 am
content: The real reason these TVs use so much power:

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 11:50:14 am
content: Quote from: raptor1956 on November 04, 2022, 01:35:56 amDead wrong... The 4x transistor count to drive any LCD is the smallest amount of current used. Active matrix LCDs consume close to no current. LCD switching current is related to the total surface area of LCD fluid you are actively charging and discharging as the LCD fluid acts like a capacitor. So the screen resolution does not affect the current draw. Though, screen size and scan rate does.All you had to do was watch my linked video here and you were told exactly why the 8k TV need so much more electrical power, 3x more power hungry placing it way above the European limit.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/the-eu-is-banning-8k-tvs!!!/msg4499227/#msg4499227For those who don't believe me, seek to 4:10 in the attached video and the truth about the pixel aperture of the 4x higher density LDC which requires a back-light with 3x the brightness just to get a minimal acceptable brightness image completely blowing out the European power limit with no route to solving the problem with modern LCD technology.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 08:21:20 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 05, 2022, 07:34:18 amYes. If you compare China to the EU you'll see that China has tripled CO2 emissions between 1990 and 2020 while the EU has reduced the emissions by about 30% in the same period. The real challenge is going to make sure the upcoming countries are going to skip fossil fuels.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 08:23:56 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 06, 2022, 08:21:20 pmThose two things are not unconnected. A lot of the reduction in Europe is simply heavy industry moving to China. Same CO2 emission, different place.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 08:29:46 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 06, 2022, 08:23:56 pmYes, we've been shifting our pollution far away. Which makes it worse actually, since the way those countries produce energy is still a lot more polluting than the way we do. So for a given amount of required energy, by delocalizing production, we've been increasing worldwide pollution.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 08:39:08 pm
content: Quote from: BrianHG on November 06, 2022, 11:50:14 amThanks for starting the thread. It spurred me on, to read about these issues.What you just said (I ONLY quoted the bit I mean), is both completely 100% right, and NOT, at the same time. Let me explain.Thought experiment, to explain. As I understand it. If you have a 4k panel, and measure the overall power draw. Then, keeping the panel dimensions the same, magically change it to a (current technology) 8k TV panel. Although you are perfectly CORRECT, the panel/backlight will continue to use the SAME power.Unfortunately, you will notice (from my background reading), the display brightness, drastically (badly) drop in intensity.So, in order to force the overall picture brightness, back up to what it was, with the original 4k TV panel. It will be necessary to considerably increase the brightness of it. Which will usually result in a significant increase in power consumption.This is because the smaller pixels (8k rather than 4k ones, fitting in the same overall panel dimensions), will in effect, have much bigger borders (relatively speaking).I.e. Although they can make the pixels ever smaller, the borders, between the pixels, sadly, remain the same size (as I understand it). Probably due to technological limitations, at the moment.So, proportionally, that forces (scientifically or mathematically speaking), the space for the smaller pixel to shine through, disproportionately smaller.Or in other words. The display brightness, for a given amount of power on a 4k panel, will dramatically fall (be much less efficient), as so much light is lost/wasted, by the borders between the pixels, which HAVE NOT become smaller, because of current technology limitations.N.B. That was my understanding, by reading up on it.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 08:48:39 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 06, 2022, 08:23:56 pmI disagree. A) heavy industry moved to China / Asia during the 70's and 80's. B) If it is due to moving heavy industry, then China's CO2 emissions would have increased by only 30%. The latter isn't the case. What is the primary cause is the increased living standard in China.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 08:55:37 pm
content: Shouldn't the screen resolution affect current? If you have more pixels then even if they use zero power to be static, they use power to change. Four times more changes surely means four times more power necessary to change them.I realise that the power used to change a pixel is very different to the power needed to light those pixels up, but it's still more. Or do the pixels change for free?

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 09:22:26 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 06, 2022, 08:55:37 pmWhen the "more", including the power consumption of the processor needed to crunch all those numbers to convert a digital data stream into an image, is a few percent of the overall, and individual units' power consumption varies more than that because of environmental differences and possibly even differences in the main supply voltage, the "more" is just not significant enough to consider.In essence, we're talking about approximated, noisy numbers across individual units and use cases here, so a few watts here or there is within the noise, insignificant.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 09:28:11 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 06, 2022, 08:48:39 pmIndustry didn't start moving to China until the very end of the 1970s, and initially it most mostly light assembly work, especially toys and clothes. That began after Dung Xiao Ping took power in 1976. The really serious moves in heavy industry didn't build up until the 1990s. Europe still did most of its own heavy industrial work until then. I assume you very badly failed maths if you think a 30% reduction in Europe should in any way relate to the percentage increase in China. Not only was their starting point quite different and their population much higher, but they have also developed from a rather poor country, to one with a middle class bigger than the whole of Europe's population. Those people use a LOT more energy per capita than they did when poor.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 09:41:51 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 06, 2022, 09:28:11 pmThat is exactly my point!

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 09:45:52 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on November 06, 2022, 09:22:26 pmI am not concerned with whether it's significant or not, just whether it is. Whenargumentsdiscussions of this sort break out it's important to be correct. It is one thing to say "there's a bit more current due to blah but it's not significant" and quite another to say "there is no extra current used".

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 09:50:48 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 06, 2022, 09:41:51 pmI said "Those two things are not unconnected. A lot of the reduction in Europe is simply heavy industry moving to China. Same CO2 emission, different place.". That is Europe has done little to reduce its CO2 output. Its just happening as part of China's overall CO2 output these days. Apart from some changes to electricity production, which is only 20% to 25% of overall energy use, what has Europe done to truly reduce CO2 output? Its all smoke and mirrors. Obviously China, India and other developing places, have seen massive overall increases in CO2 production, as is their right.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 09:57:45 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 06, 2022, 08:39:08 pmYou got it right.The signal traces and the transistors for the rows and columns need to be masked black and since the feature size of these printed items on the LCD cannot get any smaller, the active open window pixel region has shrunk.If said traces weren't masked black, they would be in contact with the LCD fluid manipulating transparency all over the place plus the added capacitance on those traces would also cause the circuit to fail.The only solution would be if the LCD, both on top and bottom, had a separation layer as these traces and transistors without the black mask are transparent, but the active pixel regions would need to go down to a second layer where it is in contact with the LCD fluid, like a PCB with a via per pixel, where the vias still need to be transparent and LCD fluid proof. (Also, the materials which make the traces and transistors cannot alter the polarization of the light going through them...) This would magnify the price of the LCD by an insane amount, but, even the 4k panels would allow a tone more light through and such a designed 8k would probably become more efficient the today's 4k displays.I would not want to be the one to have to figure out a way to align such a hi-res active-matrix module to it's next layer in the middle, as I'm sure that just the current masks and color stencils must have been a hell to perfect the manufacturing process.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 10:05:33 pm
content: Quote from: BrianHG on November 06, 2022, 09:57:45 pmYou are assuming an LCD display. A lot of the high end 8k displays seem to be OLED, which doesn't have the same issues.For LCDs, the percentage of screen space taken by pixel to pixel borders has reduced a lot since the early panels. Does anyone have information about how that reduction has been progressing recently. and whether there are considerable reductions still in the pipeline?

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 10:15:27 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 06, 2022, 10:05:33 pmOled has a similar issue as you now need enough current to illuminate the pixel meaning some circuit size is still required. Also, smaller pixels are less efficient at generating light = more current = a tradeoff you need to make. Remember, large screen Oled is different from smart-phone AMOled displays. Efficiency and longevity would vastly improve if we can get a large screen AMOled.Same goes for QD-OLED, a QD-AMOled would be the gold standard as the entire screen process is just a single process blue pixel with QD phosphor paint for the green and red pixels which have no electrical circuit like the original Oled where you need 3/4 different types of organic dye which need to be energized to glow.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 10:37:58 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 06, 2022, 09:45:52 pmYou're absolutely right, and I fully agree. (I just read the question at face value, and didn't see the subtext.)

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 10:44:31 pm
content: In theory, it could be possible to have a monochrome LCD and a RGB backlight to get color with about 1/3 the power. Some LCDs of that sort have been built, but it's hard to get the LCD fast enough for that to work well.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 11:37:16 pm
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on November 06, 2022, 10:44:31 pmSomething I have not considered. There does exist a 14 ro 12 inch old studio Sony CRT (I think, it may have been Panasonic or Philips) which was a monochrome CRT with a large flat RGB cycling LCD shutter (one big fat pixel) in front to make a color display where the CRT ran at 3x refresh rate. It had something like 3-4x the display brightness and contrast of color CRTs with better convergence and true bleedless 4:4:4 color resolution used for on-site outdoor proofing in the film industry.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 11:45:13 pm
content: This seems to be a REALLY old version (CBS), of a Monochrome to Colour TV method. Possibly before colour TVs were significantly available.EDIT: Probably 1951, if the following link, is talking about the same system.https://eyesofageneration.com/the-story-behind-the-cbs-rcanbc-color-feud-these-screen-shots-are-from-a-co/

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2022, 11:56:40 pm
content: Quote from: BrianHG on November 06, 2022, 11:37:16 pmThe color versions of the Tektronix TDS500/600/700 series have exact that system. Unfortunately it doesn't work for me as the colors start to fade into eachother when I move my eye or head. Gives me a headache pretty quick.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 12:01:29 am
content: Doesn't one of the smart meter displays use mono LCD and RGB LEDs? Pretty sure Big Clive took one apart but I can't find it now.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 03:51:24 am
content: Quote from: BrianHG on November 06, 2022, 11:37:16 pmTechnology Connections did a video about that monitor. I think it was Panasonic. Same tech as the Tektronix Nucolor display, I have a scope with one and it looks fantastic. Full color display with no shadow mask so it's very sharp. It's too bad that technology didn't achieve more widespread use.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 04:31:43 am
content: Quote from: james_s on November 07, 2022, 03:51:24 amFound it, it was a JVC crt. Here it is, and yes it has digital electronics to accelerate the image.Anyways, with a 1 channel monochrome LCD and true RGB LEDs powered in sequence, it should work and allow for a far larger aperture for each pixel, even at 8k. This would save a lot on backlight power. However, backlights are usually white LED because they are cheaper than R,G,B variants.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 09:47:27 am
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 07, 2022, 12:01:29 amThere are many pseudo colour segmented LCD displays using a mix of LEDS and colour filters to do very specific things.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 09:59:55 am
content: Quote from: BrianHG on November 07, 2022, 04:31:43 amWhat you're describing is a "blue-phase-mode" LCD and they haven't been commercially used yet, but in theory they would work at higher resolutions. I think the issue is, to avoid the "rainbow" effect that DLPs use, you would need to get the panel switching at close to 500Hz-1kHz, which implies say sub 1ms transition times for pixels. Current LCD is around 10-20ms.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 01:55:02 pm
content: Quote from: BrianHG on November 06, 2022, 09:57:45 pmThanks for the great explanation.My understanding is that, ignoring arguments as to if 8k is better/useful, as regards human eyesight. The other big issue, is that most things have NOT been recorded in 8k, by and large.On the other hand, there is always improved (such as using more AI), image upscaling. To make the most of existing medias, resolution.Really, the issue (as regards this thread topic), is the EU creating laws, which potentially limit, progress in some areas.For example. I could invent an amazing new vacuum cleaner, which uses high pulsed, charged ions, and a huge vacuum, along with electrostatic .... (sorry, I can't tell you any more details, as you might try to copy my hypothetical, non-existent invention, lol)...and Magic Flux Capacitors. To clean better than existing Vacuum Cleaners, silently, automatically and fuss free.But it uses the full 3kW (or whatever the agreed maximum rating in your country is), in its first version.I would be unable to sell it (to everyone, not just some smaller subset of that area) in the EU (and probably the UK), unless I get the laws changed. Because of these pesky laws.Similarly, if a great new TV (panel) type was invented, but its first version, was rather power hungry. Such as 1kW or even more. Then it would NOT be legal to sell it, in a number of regions/countries/places.I don't think that (creating these over-encompassing, too restrictive laws), is necessarily a good thing.On the other hand, we currently only have the one planet Earth to live on, and it does seem to be suffering from climate change. So steps to help that situation, makes sense.I think on balance, they (e.g. EU/UK), should have come up with smarter laws. Which move people into buying more energy efficient/economic items, while at the same time allowing specialists/professionals/audiophools, to have their stuff and new innovations.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 02:20:40 pm
content: QuoteIncrease power prices. Oh, that would stiff the poor and the rich wouldn't notice. OK then...Ration power. Say, 10kWh/day.Oh, then there would have to be variations depending on size of property, and probably number of people. And it would still stiff the poor who can't afford to flood insulate their 1920s gaff (which they rent anyway).I don't think we can have laws smart enough to fix anything that isn't trivially black/white. Even killing someone has a number of mitigations and variable outcome. Some wishy-washy and arbitrary "that's approx too big" thing doesn't stand a chance.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 02:22:21 pm
content: If you liked the Technology Connections JVC YouTube Video, did you know he did another one (an extras), a part 2 if you like, on his other channel?

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 02:27:30 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 07, 2022, 02:20:40 pmThat is not really what I meant by smarter laws. What I meant was that the new law, is designed to encourage people to use lower energy consuming TVs. But still allows, other TVs, to continue to use, possibly more power, if necessary.E.g. (Taking Lamps as an example), strongly encouraging LED lamps, but still allowing other types of bulbs, to be bought and sold.Rather than outright banning things, because they are too lazy (or whatever the explanation is), to do it in a more robust way. Which doesn't infringe on peoples lives and their rights.I.e. If I want to go out and buy an 8k TV, in a years time, I should be able to. NOT banned by law from doing so, because it uses 20 watts (or whatever the amount is), more than what the EU/UK considered, sensible for a 4k TV.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 04:49:15 pm
content: How do you 'strongly encourage' without mandating? That kind of thing didn't work during the pandemic, and if people can't manage that when lives could depend on it what chance do you have when their entertainment is at stake?

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 05:16:26 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 07, 2022, 04:49:15 pmDesigning such laws, (Government/EU funded/created Adverts), and things. Would indeed (probably) need the efforts of a huge team(s), of people. With various skills/backgrounds and abilities. So I can't when making a 5 minute (wild estimate) forum post, really on my own, do the topic justice, and specify such new laws/policies/adverts etc.BUT, the current climate change situation, could be a very serious World/Earth-wide event, forcing extremely drastic actions. But such discussions, would be (in my opinion), completely off-topic from this thread.Also the EU need to be careful. Because if such laws are taken to extremes. Such as banning meat (because of its carbon footprint), hugely eliminating/restricting cars, again because of their carbon footprint.Somewhat banning flying, unless extremely important, and only for the very top people.Severely restricting electronic items, to reduce their carbon foot-prints.Final example, banning all central-heating and hot-water systems, to reduce the EU's carbon footprint.It could cause significant civil unrest.How far and what steps, the EU and the rest of the world, are prepared to take. To resolve the current climate situation, is not 100% clear or even 90% or 80%.So it could start with vacuum cleaners by law, having reduced maximum power capabilities, and current 8k TVs being outlawed. But later mean that even basics like some foods (dare I mention meat), being seriously curtailed.E.g. Rather big extra taxes, on sales of meats, air-flight tickets, car purchases, car fuels, and many other goods.So I'm sort of torn, between wanting the climate crisis to be resolved and not losing a lot of my or our, current freedoms.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 05:16:38 pm
content: Perhaps you could ban 8K on anything below say 70" screen size. That just doesn't work in the majority of living rooms, but those who are really keen to have a ridiculously large screen at ultra high resolution can still get one and pay the premium.Meanwhile anything 40" and below for 4K could be restricted unless it is classified as a monitor (there is already a definition for tax purposes - usually it is without anything but computer video inputs, no RC controller, no speakers, no smart functions etc...)I suspect the market will self regulate though. 8K will be far too expensive to make it into the consumer space for some time.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 05:23:40 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 07, 2022, 05:16:38 pmThe problem with that, is that early (affordable) 8k TVs, may only be viable, in sizes, well below 70" screen sizes.E.g. A while back, OLED's, were only available for purchase, at VERY small screen sizes. I can't remember exactly, but it was something like 12" (I think Techmoan's video channel, obtained one of the smallest/first ones, for filming), by Sony, if I remember correctly. Also, it was extremely expensive at the time.So if there had been a rule, that only 70" and bigger, OLED TVs are allowed. Then that would have seriously hindered OLED TVs, coming to the EU, for a long while, at least.EDIT: This seems to be the video I was referring to:

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 05:34:38 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 07, 2022, 05:16:26 pmYes, I am not asking you to make up some law on the spot. I am pointing out that laws mandate things. 'Strongly recommend' and similar are not laws. See, for instance, the Highway Code where there is 'should' for strong recommendations and 'must' for laws, and generally the 'should's are given lip service by many drivers, if they can even be arsed to manage that.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 06:06:11 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 07, 2022, 04:49:15 pmTax inefficient items, use some of the revenue to subsidize higher efficiency products.

author: MadScientist
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 06:08:10 pm
content: Quote from: unknownparticle on November 02, 2022, 03:42:25 pmThe uk is the ultimate nanny state , the EU has a long way to go.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 06:26:28 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 07, 2022, 05:34:38 pmWell, I'll give you an example. Let's say the car has just been invented in the UK/EU for the first time. But they are (rightly), worried about possible accident damage/injuries and worse.So, there are two solutions (A and B):A: A new law, mandating a man walks at up to 4 MPH, carrying a red flag. MUST walk in front of all moving vehicles, to warn other road users, of the upcoming dangers.I.e. The so called, 'Red Flag Acts'.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locomotive_ActsB: New laws, recommendations and so on. On vehicle safety. So that Zebra crossings, Traffic-lights, efficient car brakes on all wheels, Crumple zones in cars, seat belts, collapsible steering columns, etc. Driving tests, public information films, on how to drive safely and handle the roads safely as other users, etc.I'm essentially saying that the EU, goes for option A, the so called lazy option.Rather than spending the time and effort, sorting out option B. Which allows people to keep their civil liberties, and enjoy life to a nice extent.Whereas option A, means you might as well walk, journey time wise, approximately. Option A, could well jeopardize the development of the car markets.So in summary. You can have any 8k TV in the EU you like, so long as it has a 4k panel in it, or a man stands in front of it, carrying a big flag, that says 4k (MPH) on it.EDIT: Please take into account. I'm presenting an exaggerated, or extremely exaggerated view/concept, in an attempt to convey the possible issues, with the way the UK/EU, create these laws/regulations and recommendations, in the first place. But it is tricky or very tricky, to explain these concepts.So, please don't take this as a direct political viewpoint.E.g. There are many, many good things the UK/EU have done, laws/regulations wise. So it is all too easy to nitpick, because some people, don't like all of them (the laws), and can show counter-examples, where they go wrong.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 09:14:04 pm
content: Yes, you're presenting an extremely exaggerated viewpoint, to the point of it being wrong.The EU is definitely more (b) than (a), almost to a fault, because some of the regulations produced are so damn complicated that you need an entire team of lawyers with engineering degrees to understand whether the regulations apply to you.It's the UK that produces far too much broad, unthinking legislation. Take, for example the Psychoactive Substances Bill which intended to ban anything the government hadn't thought of banning yet that could make you high. Because that's apparently a great moral need. After its first reading in the House, it was pointed out to the government that it would ban tea and coffee as psychoactive substances. (Needless to say the position of banning the harmless-to-others self-use of drugs is a gross violation of one's personal rights, but that's a different discussion entirely.) Or, the "No Porn Law", err, sorry, the "Online Safety Bill", which would require ISPs to filter out content at the routing layer, because it might offend some religious parents should their little angels find themselves a little too curious.It's not to say the EU hasn't done (a) on occasion, the cookie law being a good example. But they're *definitely* much more technocratic.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2022, 09:56:31 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 07, 2022, 09:14:04 pmThanks for replying. Point by point, I agree with what you say.I am presenting an extremely exaggerated view point. But the main intention was to illustrate a point, rather than make what I say wrong.

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 04:18:41 am
content: To summarize several threads. According EU bureaucrats, an ideal 8K TV would have a 4K panel, be powered via USB-C port, have a natural banana shape, not that rectangular nonsense, and display pop-up windows requiring viewers to click “Accept All Cookies” button every time new content is played.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 04:25:11 am
content: Quote from: vad on November 08, 2022, 04:18:41 am[mind blown]

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 04:54:39 am
content: According toFlatpanelsHD, the maximum power for the default picture mode for LCD, OLED, and microLED 4K and 8K TVs will be as follows from March 2023 onwards:Size Max. power for 4K/8K TVs default picture mode40" 48 W42" 53 W48" 66 W55" 84 W65" 112 W75" 141 W77" 148 W83" 164 W85" 169 W88" 178 WIt does not limit ownership, but does limit the sales. Also, the TV can still have higher-power modes, as long as selecting them informs the user about the increased power use.Hmm. I still don't have an opinion on this, because I do not intend to own a 8K TV (or display), and thus it does not impact me personally.

author: eti
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 05:22:24 am
content: Let’s ban the EUrobollocks from interfering in our UK lives. They’re a joke. The only brussels I want are the yummy green ones. 😋😋

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 11:47:42 am
content: QuoteI am broadly OK with this. First because power usage is an important issue (my current GPU, for instance, was chosen to be a bit old tech - despite being a game player - because it was much lower power than the latest ones, and similarly my monitor choice was partly based on power consumption), so that's encouragement to the manufacturers to try and keep it low. But, at the same time, if you don't care about that you can put them in non-EU mode and roast your eyeballs or peel paint off the rear wall.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 12:37:26 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on November 07, 2022, 09:14:04 pmI've had time to make a clearer explanation as to what my thinking was. It seems to boil down to my personal political opinions, thoughts and ideas. Which I'm not discussing here for at least three somewhat obvious reasons.I don't want to publicly discuss my political stuffPolitical discussions are largely banned (on this forum), and a bad idea as they can cause trouble, as wellI appreciate I'm just one single individual. Who is NOT speaking for others, and may be wrong on various things, just like other real life individualsBut on a more technical note, I can say some things. Which are more technical facts about this 8k TV thing, and other EU decisions. As they are scientific, rather than political.I sometimes lose the first few seconds of sound in various video sources. Because the EU mandated that speaker systems, have to forcibly automatically go into standby/sleep mode to save power. Which on a computer system, can be a real pain. Because that can also effect, the PCs, ability to send warning noises (in theory, somehow I don't seem to have that problem in practice at the moment, but use to, a long while ago), until the speakers eventually turn back on.Hence I sometimes have to wind Youtube videos back to the start, as a result.So (politically speaking, but leaving out my fuller political ideals), I'm convinced the quality of some items, big (e.g. cars or 8k TVs) and small (see speakers complaint above), is hurt, by some of these forced regulations.

author: jonpaul
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 01:58:12 pm
content: EU: Failing socialist command and control govTV: Threw mine out the window in 1972.Do the sem, save a lot of energy and your time!Energy sav: Ban politicians and lawyers, just hot airJ

author: Miyuki
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 02:41:31 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on November 08, 2022, 04:54:39 amDoes this mean that it is a hard limit per screen size and the only problem is that 8k cant fit in whereas FHD has no problem?Then it is all fine and manufacturers must try harderEven when those numbers seem low when I compare them to my screen what has stated Maximum: 120 W Typical: < 75 WAnd I use 3 of them

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 04:06:31 pm
content: QuoteI looked atthis, which I think is the appropriate regulation, and it seems to me that the speakers should provide a power management function and/or be exempt. Additionally, if it's waiting for sound data in order to 'start up' then it's not in stand-by so isn't required to (effectively) turn off.Are the speakers battery powered? Could be the manufacturer just wants to extend the battery life to make the adverts look better than the competition.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 04:33:22 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 08, 2022, 04:06:31 pmThanks for that link. No, they are mains powered.There are apparently lots of threads about it. The following link, is for rather similar/identical speakers, to the ones, I'm using in the short-term.https://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?297558-Any-ideas-how-to-prevent-my-speakers-from-entering-a-sleep-stateQuoteQuoteN.B. Other electronics item(s), have also been giving me similar problems. To the point that entire sets of things, are malfunctioning, because of these constant interrupts. I haven't fully got to the bottom of it, to 100% confirm that is the cause/issue, but I suspect it is.A good chance to throw in an example of so called 'Smart' rather than 'Lazy' laws.Afflicted devices, should also be allowed to have (permanent) defeat options. So that the mode can be disabled, to allow complicated setups to work reliably. SMART laws, would be designed to allow this.Non-smart/lazy laws, DON'T. Hence issues like speakers that switch off, and hinder computer audio/sound usages, other significant equipment, brought to its knees, because of this issue (different devices). 8k TVs that may become illegal to purchase in the EU. Etc.In fairness, reducing stand-by power consumption, as long as reliability, usage, features, long-term life expectancy etc, of the unit are NOT too adversely effected. Saving power is good. But when it makes all sorts of items, potentially illegal to buy (actually sell is the illegal bit), in the EU. It makes some people wonder, if the EU is doing the right thing, and coming up with sensible, WELL WRITTEN laws and regulations.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 04:54:15 pm
content: That workaround is something I thought of when I first read your post - great minds! But that's a product design failure, I think, and it shouldn't be required. I'd be inclined to return them as not suitable for the purpose (and, in fact, I returned a Samsung monitor for a similar issue).

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 05:04:43 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 08, 2022, 04:54:15 pmSome good points, thanks.It arguably is a design failure, just like you, and possibly the link I posted before says. For other reasons, and because at low sound levels (when you want piece and quiet etc), it can be very reluctant to even wake up at all.My feeling is it is perfectly reasonable for there to be TV buffs (people who are REALLY into their TVs, and want to get really good ones, even if it costs quite a lot of money). So, they should be free to go to and buy 8k TVs, if they want. I.e. NOT prevented from doing so, from possible new EU rules, which have not been written well enough, to cater for practicable 8k TVs power consumption.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 05:45:40 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 08, 2022, 12:37:26 pmBut that’s just a poor implementation in the audio system.Auto-off has been common in active studio monitors (the powered speakers in recording studios) for ages and ages, and works fine. I have some Jamo active speakers from the 90s which wake from standby within a fraction of a second.Part of it is how long the speakers decide to wait between applying power to the power amp and connecting it to the speakers via relays (or enabling the output on a class D amp chip).Another source of delays isn’t the speakers, but the sources. Especially with digital connections, where there are multiple data formats, and the decoder has to wait long enough to actually identify the format in use. (And some decoders, like my Denon home theater received, audibly pop when changing formats).HDCP (the encryption on HDMI) contributes to delays on HDMI. The handshaking adds some delay.So in reality, I doubt the EU rules have much to do with it. Many factors have been conspiring for years and years to slow down picture and audio connection setup, each alone adding a negligible amount, but in total an uncomfortable delay.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 06:06:09 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on November 08, 2022, 05:45:40 pmThat's a good point, as regards speaker systems. (I'm guessing, since I haven't opened up the speakers, or seen a schematic for them) I imagine, there are some hefty capacitors in the speakers/amplifiers, which were perhaps designed BEFORE the EU regulations existed or came to be valid.So, the possibly old design couldn't cope with switching on very quickly. But there are a number of other possible reasons for the delay, which as you said, can be largely designed out of equipment, usually.But in the future, they can sort problems like that out (I think the speakers in question, first came out around 2014), then everyone can be happy.Standby power consumption, is probably a good example, of where the normal consumer. Is probably completely clueless, as regards that concept, and may have little idea on what various items, standby power consumption might be.

author: KaneTW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 08, 2022, 11:36:43 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 08, 2022, 12:37:26 pmFor the speakers, just get pro speakers and a pro audio interface. I use Yamaha HS7s and an Audient id44 and it works reliably.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 12:00:10 am
content: Quote from: KaneTW on November 08, 2022, 11:36:43 pmThanks for the suggestion. It looks good.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 12:11:44 am
content: Looking at a typical 8k TV review/recommendation website, such as here:https://parker-marker.com/blogs/electronics/television-review/is-an-8k-tv-worth-it-heres-our-expert-answer/They seem to be around 65" to 85" (inches). At 85", there begins to be a significant argument, that the extra pixel density, is needed, to stop the screen appearing pixelated and/or worse due to lack of pixels. Depending on viewing distances and quality of TV picture, the buyers are looking for.So, on the one hand it makes me understand the need for 8k TVs, if people are going to buy TVs that size. But also makes me think the EU, maybe has a point with the legislation, because as TVs become so big, and less efficient (because of going to 8k). The electricity consumed, is going to be a lot more significant. I.e. considerably more power will be used, compared to a much more modestly sized TV, of around 4k.

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 04:27:28 am
content: If 8K TVs are banned in EU, is it still legal to buy four slim bezel 4K TVs and arrange them in 2x2 panel? Can a law abiding citizen own multiple TV sets in Europe?

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 07:35:55 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 08, 2022, 06:06:09 pmBut as I said, many old designscanturn on quickly.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 07:37:37 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 09, 2022, 12:11:44 amBut how many people are even going to want to have a TV that large? That's rare even here in the USA where everything is already generally bigger than in Europe. I can't help but think this legislation is pointless.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 07:40:21 am
content: Quote from: KaneTW on November 08, 2022, 11:36:43 pmBut that's ~~$1200 worth of gear, that's well beyond what most people are going to want to spend on that sort of thing, I'm pretty sure that's more than I've spent collectively on audio equipment throughout my entire life.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 03:32:57 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 09, 2022, 07:37:37 amI thought in the US, Home Cinema Rooms (Boys Sheds/theater rooms/home theaters), were a thing. Where they would have significantly big TVs in such rooms. But I'm NOT sure what the sizes of those TVs, would actually be.But me thinking that, is much more based on watching US based, Movies/YouTube-Videos and so on, rather than my real-life experiences. I.e. It wouldn't be the first time, I got things completely wrong about America. Because I tend to base such knowledge, too much on Movies or Videos I've seen, and perhaps jumped to, too many (possibly incorrect) conclusions.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 03:44:32 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 09, 2022, 07:37:37 amIn the UK the shops don't display a lot of 85" TVs, but 5 years ago they didn't display a huge number of 75" TVs, and now the shops are full of them. Screen sizes keep creeping up. There comes a limit at some point. We tried our 75" TV in the dining room, and it looked overbearing. In the lounge it doesn't look that big, and we would probably go for something bigger as its eventual replacement.

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 05:05:45 pm
content: Quotedon't seem that long ago that a 26" colour tv was the ultimate ,if it had teletext you were doing very well

author: Pinkus
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 05:16:34 pm
content: Now that TVs have gotten so big, I'm sure there will soon be cheaper Netflix or Amazon Prime access programs: Then you'll only have a 45" picture in the middle of your 90" screen and flashing ads all around ;-)It certainly won't be long now. Reminds me of the early days of the Internet.Unfortunately, the videoIdiocracy(from 2006), where this screenshot was made of, is becoming true more and more.

author: KaneTW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 06:09:04 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 09, 2022, 07:40:21 am~200 x2 for the speakers and ~200 for the audio interface (I typo'd, meant the id14 -- and there's other variants out there anyway) isn't that expensive. Not a low amount but you also get good quality.

author: Miyuki
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 06:28:34 pm
content: Quote from: themadhippy on November 09, 2022, 05:05:45 pmOh, that good old timesNo, I'm not that old. But my uncle used to have a similar living room.But it was so practical for us hoarders to have cabinets everywhere

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 06:30:33 pm
content: Quote from: Miyuki on November 09, 2022, 06:28:34 pmThe TV makers used to love setups like that. The TV's ventilation was so poor, and its power consumption so high, they could sell a regular stream of replacement sets.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 09:29:52 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 09, 2022, 03:32:57 pmActual home theaters are something the 1% have. I’m American and I’ve never even seen an actual home theater outside of the showroom of the home theater electronics dealer I bought my speakers from (back when Bowers and Wilkins was still a fairly small boutique brand, made in England, and thus not carried at mainstream stores).It’s not uncommon to have a “home theater”AV systemin your living room (i.e. some kind of surround sound system to go with your TV), but actual dedicated home theaters (in the sense of a dedicated room with projector and cinema seating) are quite rare, given that such a thing costs tens of thousands of dollars, not including real estate, and can easily go into the 6 digits. Most Americans simply can’t afford that.As for size, the largest TVs (75”+) are encroaching on the low end of the sizes where projectors have normally been used. But hardcore home theaters use expensive projectors ($20K-100K) onto the same perforated screens used in actual cinemas, which have the center speakersbehindthe screen rather than near it. The technology to use flat panel displays as center speakers is still in its infancy. (I know Sony did it with some OLED models, but I don’t think it’s been done with LCD, nor can I imagine how one would do it.)

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 09:41:43 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on November 09, 2022, 09:29:52 pmThanks!. I see.I suspect (currently) sales of 8k TVs themselves, are the top (something) percentage of the population (I'm not sure what percentage that would actually be though).Because even if someone, who is not in the top percent wanted one, they are probably still too expensive to get, for many people.They (8k TVs) seem to be priced (brand new), (only did a VERY quick check on prices), in the £1,800 to £4,400, according to googles, initial response page.Even so. Just because only the top 1% (or whatever the true figure is), want and/or can afford something. Shouldn't mean the EU brings in new laws, which hurt only some segments of the public.I suspect, I learnt about those home theaters, on YouTube. Which didn't put into perspective, how few people in America and probably most/all other countries, actually have them.

author: KaneTW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 10:33:49 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on November 09, 2022, 09:29:52 pmNo, it's just a question of priorities. A friend who is definitely not the 1% has a home theatre in his house. Anyone that's upper middle class can afford it, and from there it's a question of "do I want it?"

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 11:14:36 pm
content: Quote from: KaneTW on November 09, 2022, 10:33:49 pmLikewise I knew a middle class guy that had a Ferrari, I'd guess that home theaters are about as common as those, and the demographic breakdown between them is probably similar.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 11:22:21 pm
content: Quote from: KaneTW on November 09, 2022, 10:33:49 pmCome on, duuuuude… I am talking about whether such things* arecommonplace(they’re not), not whether cases of non-rich people with some sort of home theaterexist.And to reiterate: by “actual home theater” I mean a high-end, dedicated room with cinema-like construction, seating, etc. and equipment that significantly reproduces a cinema experience. Not just a regular room with a big screen and some speakers, in front of a sofa.And of course, it’s not “just” a matter of priorities: most Americans simply don’t earn anywhere close to enough money to afford such a luxury. The median household income in USA is about $71K. In many parts of the country, you’d pay 10% of that just on the annual rent for the space to house the home theater!Then remember that half of households make less than that — in many, many cases significantly less — which certainty doesn’t leave any way to spend tens of thousands on a home theater.*with the photo as a reference, which I’d guess at being a ~$20-40K home theater, including construction costs to raise the floor, install the built-in cabinetry, etc, plus seating, sound panels, and the AV gear.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2022, 11:47:38 pm
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 09, 2022, 09:41:43 pmFrankly, I don’t see the point in 8K. At a comfortable viewing distance (i.e. one where the screen comfortably fits within, but nearly fills, your field of view), your eyes plain and simply cannot resolve a single 4K pixel, never mind at 8K. We don’t have enough angular resolution to do so.This pageexplains the problem nicely. To tell apart two pixels on an 82” 8K display, you’d have to be sitting just 28” from the screen, just a bit more than arm’s length! I can’t even sit that close to my 42” TV for very long. 8K really only makes sense when you want to come close and inspect some part of the screen. Perfect human vision simply doesn’t have enough resolution to make use of it from afar. When you consider that a typical TV is somewhere on the order of 10 feet (120 inches) from the viewer, it becomes clear that 8k is laughably unnecessary even on an 85” TV or 120” projection screen.Heck, even digital cinemas, actual movie theaters people pay money to go see movies at, are mostly just 2K! (Few cinemas are jumping at the chance to replace a $60,000 projector they bought just a few years ago, so we are likely stuck with lots of 2K cinemas for a while.) If 4K isn’t even essential for a literal cinema with a 65footscreen, then 8K certainly isn’t even distantly needed for a 65 inch TV!!

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 12:13:16 am
content: Quote from: tooki on November 09, 2022, 11:47:38 pmThat is a good question, and to do it justice, I'd hope that reliable/honest people (scientists perhaps), can perform experiments, theoretical analysis, and then answer such questions for us. Ideally taking into account Psychological effects, such as Placebo ones.I.e. (Psychological/Placebo), a Million dollar Ultra-Delux-Platinum-King-View TV, with a billion superBright-Mega-pixels, would be perceived by some/many, as having a better quality image, than a $199, 1080P, Foreign Unknown branded, Cheapo-matic TV. Even if the actual real life picture quality, was identical between them (i.e. a Placebo or psychological like effect).I don't think I've yet to see an 8k TV in real life, that I've noticed (but could have walked passed one in a shop, without realizing it).Actually, it's usually OLED TVs, which seem (for me, at least) to have amazing picture quality, and nice and bright, too. From what I've seen. It is just I'm too worried about picture burn in issues. Which were very likely to have been 4k TVs.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 12:27:15 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 10, 2022, 12:13:16 amI'm not too worried about burn in, I think OLED is similar to CRT based rear projection in that matter and I used one of those for years without getting burn. That said, I don't watch TV in a traditional sense, I'm 100% streaming. Commercial TV all has those stupid logos that sit in the corner all the time and those can burn in.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 12:30:33 am
content: QuoteI sit 2" more than arm's length from a 43" 4K screen. I can just about make out the pixels. My partner sits a bit closer (arm's length) to a 32" 4K screen without issue, but for me to use that I have to have Windows in 115% mode. So that's a long way of saying she could see the pixels on my screen. And having used it for some time I could go with a bigger screen with more resolution, sitting the same distance away.Could my eyes see the individual pixels off to the side of such a screen? Of course not! But that's why my head and eyes can swivel (often independently). If I lookedatthat part of the screen then there would be no issue and all pixels could be noticed.The only thing (apart from cost, availability and the ability to drive it) that would prevent me getting such a huge screen would be the flatness of it. It would need to be a curved one, I think. Gosh, it was only yesterday (really) that I was thinking how I could fit two 43" 4K screens in front of me without there being a double-bezel in the middle. An 80" 8K screen would do that nicely.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 01:08:14 am
content: Quote from: eti on November 08, 2022, 05:22:24 amI thought you had already done that.-----How did it turn out?

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 01:08:35 am
content: Quote from: james_s on November 10, 2022, 12:27:15 amI guess different people, react to the possibility of OLED burn in, in different ways. There are many different usage scenarios, for TVs as well. E.g. Some people game on them (bigger risk of burn in), while others only watch movies on them.Peoples stories (on the internet), seem to vary a lot. There seem to be some, who get plagued by huge problems, with OLED screen burn. While there are many others, who love their OLED TVs, and don't understand why so many others, seem to have had so much trouble, with their OLED TVs.The situation, is almost like a big conspiracy theory story. OLED screen burn vs OLEDs never screen burn, sections of society.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 01:53:43 am
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 10, 2022, 12:30:33 amYou’re talking about computer displays. Everyone else is talking about TVs. Same technology, different purpose and constraints, because with computer displays, we can sit close and look at an area of interest; with TVs, we need the entire screen to be in our field of vision the whole time.At work, I have two 27” 4K displays, run with Windows at 150%. All but one program works perfectly with that scaling (and the singular exception works around 95% correctly, just with a few — luckily not particularly important — parts a bit small). I certainly can’t make out a single pixel on those at arm’s length. On a 43” I’m sure I could.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 02:38:23 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 10, 2022, 01:08:35 amPart of it might be the same as was true with CRT projection and plasma, out of the box the brightness and contrast is usually cranked way up. If you dial it in to something sensible it will greatly increase the life of the display.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 02:40:02 am
content: Quote from: MK14 on November 10, 2022, 01:08:35 amI think competitive gamers consider OLED/QLED screens a consumable item. If it burns in, they use it as an excuse to upgrade to a newer one.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 02:46:42 am
content: Quote from: james_s on November 10, 2022, 02:38:23 amThat's a good point. When watching expert opinion, as to how to use/treat an OLED TV. They do talk about that. It goes something on the lines of that it is the sheer excessive temperature of the OLEDs, on parts of the picture which have a combination, of excessive brightness (hence temperature rises up), and a picture which keeps them continuous on for long enough (something like 5 seconds or so).Then the (relatively) excessive temperature, 'burns' the OLEDs, at that position.So, by merely turning the brightness down to more sensible/relaxed levels. The excessive temperatures, don't occur, and hence neither does the OLED screen burns.I can't remember the recommended percentage. But the advice, seems to boil down to keep the brightness level, no more than 45% (N.B. I DON'T KNOW what the percentage should be. If you need to know, then feel free to find out, from a proper source) of full-brightness (or some magic level), to minimize the risk of screen burns.But, also might need a number of other rules, to keep the screen safe/safer from getting screen burns.

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 02:53:00 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on November 10, 2022, 02:40:02 amThanks. That makes sense.The potentially extremely rapid response times of OLED TVs (no slowdown effect, like with LCDs, which tend to introduce delays). Would be very attractive to gamers, if they play competative multi-player games. As the response times (at least in their opinions, but probably in real-life as well), can be extremely critical, to doing well at it.Opinions vary though, as to how importortant refresh-rates/response-times, really are.Linus Tech Tips, have done quite a good video, illustrating, why faster monitors, are useful in competative gaming.They have done at least two videos on it. I'm not sure if the following one, is the best one, of theirs. Also, there may be other videos on this subject area, which could be better.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 11:54:33 am
content: QuoteYes, and considering the similar effect to being in a cinema. TVs currently don't take up all your vision whereas a decent cinema experience can very nearly do so. A huge screen reasonably close, as opposed to an humungous one a bit further away.QuoteHow is that much different? Instead of ramping up to 150% you could've just got a lower resolutions screen at the same size.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 12:04:02 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 10, 2022, 11:54:33 amNo, because setting to 150% doesn't scale everything up, making it more pixelated. It simply draws everything bigger. Vector based UI elements such as text and buttons still have more pixels on high resolution screen, compared to a low resolution screen, when drawn to the same size.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 12:19:30 pm
content: So if there was 8K input it would look better than upscaled input despite you not being able to see the individual pixels?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 02:39:24 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on November 09, 2022, 11:47:38 pmA debate along these lines was had with people arguing that 5K+ monitors make sense. I said it is only the case if on a current monitor this checkerboard pattern:https://www.shadertoy.com/view/WdXyz4is visible as a discrete array of pixels, rather than a solid grey colour.For me, 1080p was clearly discernable, but at 2' viewing distance it's a solid colour on my 4K monitor. So the real world upper limit is probably somewhere around 3K for my setup. I don't have an unusual setup and I have normal vision (20/20) without correction.I still stand by this, though others seem convinced that additional pixels beyond the eye's effective resolution carry a benefit.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 05:26:46 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 10, 2022, 12:19:30 pmSetting the scaling on software simply draws the interface larger, to compensate for the higher resolution. Suppose the dimensions of a character such as the letter o is 10 pixels by 10 at 100%. If the scaling is set to 150%, then it will draw the letter o at 15 by 15 pixels.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 05:27:39 pm
content: QuoteI see an array of discreet pixels on my 4K. Viewing distance is 32".

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 05:30:55 pm
content: Quote from: Zero999 on November 10, 2022, 05:26:46 pmIsn't that what stuff like Cleartype is all about? They draw at the 15x15 virtual scale and map that to the 10x10 actual pixels.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 05:34:18 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 10, 2022, 05:30:55 pmMy recollection was that Cleartype used subpixels, I never cared enough to look into the details though.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 05:39:26 pm
content: Quote from: james_s on November 10, 2022, 05:34:18 pmMy main experience of it is to turn it off, but I think - simplistically - it works out where a line should go and then, if it's between pixels, it 'adjusts' them so the line kind of seems to go where it should.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 05:46:12 pm
content: ClearType's intelligence is treating the subpixels of a pixel as usable for improving font clarity. This is because the human eye has poor chrominance resolution compared to its luminance resolution, so the colour variation at the edges of the character will generally not be distinguishable - of course, this depends on the display resolution, your eyesight and how far away you are from the monitor. It also only works on monitors with regular grids of subpixels, like LCDs, and those with square pixels. For CRTs with dot arrays, it doesn't work, and for some newer OLED displays as featured on some laptops now, it definitely doesn't work, because there's often not a 1:1 relation between the subpixels and the pixels any more (quite often 1 green pixel per 1 real pixel but alternating red and blue shared with adjacent pixels.)I quite like it on 1080p monitors and below. For a 4K monitor the resolution is already high enough that it has no particular benefit, but it also doesn't really harm anything, so I've never bothered to turn it off.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subpixel_rendering

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 06:22:42 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 10, 2022, 05:30:55 pmIt's got nothing to do with Cleartype. If you've got two screens, one with a higher resolution than another and draw the graphics on the higher resolution screen with proportionally more pixels larger, they will both be the same size, but the higher resolution monitor will look shaper.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 06:30:26 pm
content: QuoteEven though you can't distinguish between pixels?

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 06:53:32 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 10, 2022, 11:54:33 amIt’s the same “real estate” as a 2560x1440 display, but everything is rendered with 2.25x as many pixels. It’s a dramatic improvement in sharpness of both text and graphics. Altium looksgloriousin 4K.It feels like going from a dot matrix printer to a laser printer.Bear in mind that it doesn’t cost any extra to go 4K: these displays were bought just for me and I got to choose, and there was basically no difference in cost.As zero999 said, Windows display scaling (on apps that support this, which is nearly all) is done on the vector graphics (or with higher-resolution bitmaps). It’s not done by interpolating the 100% bitmap. (That is what windows does for old apps that don’t support scaling.)

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 06:55:10 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 10, 2022, 06:30:26 pmTo a point. At about 18” — the closest we ever look at our screens (like on phones), we can resolve about 300 pixels per inch. Beyond that, it doesn’t really make any difference.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2022, 07:46:59 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 10, 2022, 05:30:55 pmNope. You’re thinking of (one approach to) grayscale anti-aliasing. It’s actually usually done by other, more computationally efficient methods.Cleartype is Microsoft’s name for subpixel rendering, which allows the text renderer to be aware of the RGB subpixels in an LCD, so that it can produce more accurate letter shapes.Quote from: tom66 on November 10, 2022, 05:46:12 pmThat is NOT why subpixel rendering works!The principle isn’t that our eyes have lower chrominance resolution: the principle is that to draw a full-color pixel somewhere on a screen, you need all three subpixels — but they can beanythree adjacent subpixels, giving you triple the horizontal placement resolution, withzeroloss of chrominance resolution on all pixels except the first and last one of a line.Where it gets trickier is attempting to use subpixel rendering not just to get tripleplacementresolution, but to draw lines whosethicknessis not an integer multiple of a whole pixel. As soon as you use fractional pixel widths, you risk color shifts. So in practice, some algorithms “shade” grayscale-antialiased text with the colors to avoid extreme color shifts. Others render in full “color” and then desaturate it.As it is, subpixel rendering is on its way out: nobody ever made a subpixel rendering implementation that supports arbitrary display rotation. Microsoft’s supports BGR subpixel order in addition to RGB, but nobody ever made a rendered that works with a display rotated 90 degrees. So between modern gadgets that support dynamically switching between landscape and portrait modes, high-resolution displays that simply have tons of resolution — and many of which use non-uniform subpixel arrangements (especially OLED, some of which is RGBW, some with different size subpixels for RGB*) — plus modern graphics pipelines that support the little animations and transforms in modern user interfaces, many modern OSes are deprecating subpixel rendering. iOS has never supported it, macOS has disabled it by default ever since the Retina (200% scaling) Macs came out, etc. The newer, iOS-derived graphics engine in macOS doesn’t even support subpixel rendering at all.Windows has two completely different text rendering engines, the old GDI one and the later WPF one. The GDI ClearType is truly just subpixel-tweaked grayscale antialiasing, as it does not allow characters to be positioned in increments smaller than a whole pixel. WPF ClearType is extremely similar to the Mac subpixel renderer, which allows sub-pixel positioning (i.e. you can position a character anywhere, e.g. at 48.2216px), allowing more accurate overall text rendering. Both WPF and Core Graphics/Core Animation (the modern graphics APIs on iOS and macOS) fully support grayscale anti-aliasing with sub-pixel positioning, since it works well on any type of display, regardless of subpixel arrangement.Unfortunately Windows can’t switch rendering modes on the fly, so on windows devices that can rotate the screen (like my convertible laptop), as soon as you rotate the screen away from whatever orientation ClearType is set to, ClearType text looksawful. Apple avoided this problem by simply never using subpixel rendering on iOS (and until now, not shipping any “convertible” Macs).*despite the wiki article on subpixel rendering having an obscenely oversized section on the PenTile series of non-uniform subpixel arrangements, claiming some were designed for subpixel rendering, I am not aware of any implementations of such renderers being in actual use in the wild.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2022, 01:10:00 pm
content: QuoteThat's theory, and no doubt best case. What does practice say? I've seen people with their phone stuck up their left nostril and others holding them at arm's length. Theory is great, but it doesn't tell you how it actually is.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2022, 01:12:28 pm
content: QuoteYes, probably! The point I was trying to make is that the edges are blurred to make you think they're less jagged. The actual name or technique isn't really important.Edit: although that point seems to have lost its relevance in the diversion, so I have no idea where this is going now.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2022, 07:49:16 pm
content: Obviously above a certain pixel density, antialiasing may not be necessary anymore. Maybe 8K is that threshold at arm-length for moderate-sized displays. Haven't seen any 8K display yet. But 4K isn't quite there except for very small displays.This is all a matter of aliasing. Antialiasing is filtering, and the higher the "oversampling" ratio, the simplest your filter can become. To the point of not requiring any.As I already said, "resolving a pixel" doesn't mean squat, especially below a certain pixel size. This isn't how eyesight works. We are not resolving individual pixels when we look at a bitmapped display (unless obviously there are only a few single pixels distributed over the display, in which case, good luck to even see them on a small FHD display at arm length. Just like we are not resolving individual frames when we look at a video. This misconception keeps on going.

author: KaneTW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2022, 11:27:09 pm
content: There's a few considerations that go into effective human eye resolution. The spot size of the lens (around 10 um), the various cone densities (http://www.cvrl.org/database/text/intros/introdens.htm), the brain combining L/R images for additional fidelity, etc etc.60 PPD in the foveal region and much less in the periphery is what I operate with. That being said, a VR set with 35 PPD is very close to being perfectly lifelike (apart from reduced peripheral vision).

author: vad
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2022, 05:00:52 am
content: Let’s do some elementary math here.Statement #1. Angular resolution of human eye is about 0.017°, according to Wikipedia. Angular resolution is defined as angular distance between two points that an instrument, human eye in this case, can distinguish.Statement #2. For a digital image to resolve two points separated by 0.017° angle, angular distance between its two adjacent pixels should be at least half angular distance between the points, according to Nyquist sampling theorem. In other words angular distance between two adjacent display pixels should be <= 0.0085°, before a person with 20/20 vision could start noticing sampling artifacts.Statement #3. For the best cinema theatrical experience, horizontal viewing angle should be around 45-50 degrees, according to SMPTE and THX recommendations. Let’s choose 47.5° as recommended sweet spot, and then compute the smallest horizontal pixel resolution requirement as 47.5° / 0.0085 °/pixel = 5,588 pixels. 4K image with 3,840 horizontal pixels does not meet this requirement, and 8K image does.For 85” TV a person has to sit 7 feet (2.1 meters) from the TV for 47.5 degree horizontal viewing angle. If you, like me, sit much further from TV, you should not see any difference between 4K and 8K. In cinema, however, 8K projectors can potentially bring some improvement. AFAIK, most digital cinema projectors are either 2K or 4K today.

author: eti
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2022, 08:21:20 am
content: Doesn’t matter how many “K” you have, it’s still the same inane, woke agenda drivel coming through.

author: Ice-Tea
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2022, 08:37:47 am
content: Quote from: eti on November 12, 2022, 08:21:20 amYou should get a TV with a remote, mate!

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2022, 12:57:05 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 11, 2022, 01:10:00 pmSorry, I should have been clearer, in that I meant that 18” is the normal closest distance for typical use, but yes, closer isn’t too uncommon. Even so, I think my memory was slightly off, see below.The question of resolution, however, is much clearer, because it’s a function of angular resolution, as I explained in an earlier reply, which has a link to a page about why more resolution doesn’t make sense, and that page has a link to an online resolution calculator.Consider that for years, 300dpi laser printers were the norm, and considered razor sharp. Higher resolution helped a little bit on text, but its real value was in producing much smoother halftones. Displays don’t need extra resolution to do halftoning, since their pixels can directly take intermediate values.I just checked this calculator:https://stari.co/tv-monitor-viewing-distance-calculatorI entered numbers to approximate a sheet of paper at 300dpi: 14” diagonal, 2400x3300 pixels. It says the minimum distance (to not be able to see individual pixels) is 26cm, just under 11 inches. So I think my memory about display resolution was 300dpi at 12”, not 18”, and that I was conflating that with the 18-24” that we commonly sit from a computer display, not a phone display.That same calculator includes some criteria for field of view, calculating a minimum viewing distance that provides for a 70 degree field of view, e.g. 3.1-8.4 feet (0.95-2.55m) for a 60”. (That 70° is actually on the high side, though: the THX standards say 40 degrees maximum, and recommend 6.0-9.0 feet for 60”.)But even with that calculator, which suggests shorter minimum distances than others, an 85” 8K TV has what they call a visual acuity distance (at any distance greater than this, the angular resolution of the eye cannot discern a single pixel) of 2.9 feet (0.87m), while even their minimum distance for 70° is 4.4 feet. So even a very generously short minimum distance is substantially longer than the distance at which a pixel cannot be discerned. Since this ratio is independent of screen size (being a function of angular resolution and angular field of view), it follows that 8K does not and cannot ever make sense for watching video.Computer displays are a different matter, since we don’t need to keep the whole screen in our field of view: we can have a large display up close and then focus on a specific area of it by moving your head closer to the area of interest.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2022, 01:01:12 pm
content: Quote from: eti on November 12, 2022, 08:21:20 amYou really need to leave your politics at the door. Your post explaining your situation bought you some leeway, but it’s not carte blanche to invoke politics, religion, etc. over and over again.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2022, 01:29:54 pm
content: Quote from: Ice-Tea on November 12, 2022, 08:37:47 amThe best way to avoid all that bollocks is to keep the TV switched off.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2022, 06:56:03 pm
content: Disclaimer, haven't seen the banning proposal entirely. But it looks like it wouldn't be only TV sets that would be affected by the ban, but any 8K display.

author: eti
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 01:53:15 am
content: Quote from: tooki on November 12, 2022, 01:01:12 pmNot liking "woke" shite is pretty universal. Nice attempt to hide behind "No politics or religion" - "woke" is universally dismissed and mocked, it's SO dumb, it's laughed at hard by any sane person. I am not talking politics - "woke" is a joke.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 06:38:45 am
content: Quote from: eti on November 13, 2022, 01:53:15 amNo, you are definitely "talking politics".Many people think the term "woke" is stupid, but support various good ideas which are mislabelled as "woke" by those who oppose them.It seems that "woke" has become one of the all-purpose swearwords which are used by a certain demographic to smear anything they don't agree with.

author: eti
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 07:52:43 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on November 13, 2022, 06:38:45 amOkay. I’ll leave it then. Deflecting and misdirection aside, a certain person KNOWS they are deliberately provocative and that it’s targeted; that’s been done a few times and in a serial manner, not just an unintentional one off. I can be pretty grumpy, but I do hope I’m not so immature and dumb to DIRECTLY, clumsily fire ad-hom attacks to complete strangers. I do rant a bit and ain’t proud of that at all, but direct targeted personal snippiness and clumsy “insults” were hopefully left behind at childhood. I can’t speak for others.I don’t expect to be defended when I am grumpy, unfair or unnecessarily cynical, and personal character attacks (no matter how silly) should ALL be handled with equal justice and fairness. If EQUAL and consistent rules aren’t seen to be uniformly adhered to, we see a rather lopsided, inconsistent “community”.Were this real life, I can’t help but imagine there’d be a fair percentage of sudden, MIRACULOUS silence from those “keyboard warriors” who so confidently (insecurely) dish out cocky insults online. I think there’d be a great deal of improvement to society if the face to face nature was somehow able to be brought back more; the potential for a real world smack in the face tends to somewhat tone down the bravado 😂😂🤦‍♂️

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 08:16:19 am
content: Quote from: eti on November 13, 2022, 07:52:43 amWhat does any of that have to do with the issue that YOU keep bringing up religion and politics over and over, in obvious and deliberate violation of the rules?

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 08:19:51 am
content: Quote from: vk6zgo on November 13, 2022, 06:38:45 amPrecisely this.

author: mfro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 12:53:30 pm
content: Back on topic: I don't get why an engineering-centric audience of basically technophile, smart people I'd expect here bite on such headline.The EU doesn't ban 8K TVs. The EU just bans energy hungry TVs. And that's IMHO just a consequent thing to do. All EU countries (essentially more or less all - reasonable - states on earth) have signed the Paris Climate Agreement. Thus, they basically have agreed to reduce CO₂ emissions.Consequently, if this agreement is supposed to be more than just an empty promise, states have to work on CO₂ reduction. At least as long as most of electrical energy on earth is generated from fossil fuels, it's just consequent to work on reducing (or - at least - avoidance of increase) electrical energy consumption. If you don't agree with that, you should probably rather argue with your government (that's the guys you were voting for) about taking part in the agreement instead of complaining about their attempts trying to comply with it.From a pure engineering standpoint, IMHO the 8K energy issue should rather been seen as an engineering challenge than a consumer confinement?The entertainment electronics industry needs to go through basically the same transformation than the automotive industry. Some may fail, some may try to cheat and get caught, others might just succeed (to my understanding, at least Samsung already indicated that it might be entirely possible to meet the EU regulations).

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 01:07:30 pm
content: QuoteI think the argument is that it might be an effective ban on hi-res screens. Kind of like not actually banning motorcars but if you make the fuel unavailable it's an effective ban. Wouldn't be the first time something has been shafted indirectly like that when the political fallout of hitting it directly would be too much to bear. (But please note I am not saying this is like that, just elaborating a viewpoint.)

author: MK14
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 04:24:46 pm
content: I managed to see my first (as far as I know/remember) 8k TV today, at a shop. It was around 65", and a very high price, possibly £3,500 or some other high price.The picture did look good (I'd prefer to change the screen to show various real life signal sources, rather than their 'special' video clip, which could be 'tuned', to make the TV look good, and not show up its defects).As mentioned before in this thread, the rather large size 65" (they had 75" on show, I think, and 85" were mentioned, as existing, within the shop label(s), possibly for ordering direct to your home).But, up close (near, nose touching screen, close), I could apparently see the individual pixels, quite easily, But far back, it did look good.But the massive OLED TVs (probably 4k), had an as good, or better display. At least on the very limited indeed, video, they kept on playing back, at that shop.In truth (not that I'm lying here), even the £499 bread and butter, LCD/LED, 55" TVs, seemed to have very good, nice/big pictures.If I was buying a TV currently (I'm NOT), I suspect I'd look more closely at the QLED ones, as although they don't have as good a picture quality as the OLEDs, it is still pretty good. But with much less chance of screen burn/retention issues/worries.Although I agree we need to reduce our (worldwide) power consumption and hence CO2 footprint. I DON'T like the idea of a big organization (e.g. the EU), choosing a lowish upper limit, on my behalf. Forcing potentially nicer/better TV options, to be unavailable.They sort of can't now, since UK/Brexit, but in practice, often can. Either because the UK follows suit, with similar laws and regulations and/or the higher power things, sales/market drops too much (as they can't be sold in the EU), so companies, don't bother making special versions, just for the (relatively much smaller), UK.In other words. I'd prefer the powers to be, to ask us (users), NICELY (through advertising, public information campaigns, slight extra taxes/VAT on power hungry inefficient items and/or tax rate reduction on more power efficient items, and many other initiatives), if we can reduce our power consumption, have more solar power, increase electric vehicle and/or public transport use, etc.Rather than making (in my opinion), pesky new laws.Otherwise things could start getting silly. E.g. (hypothetical, completely made up, new rules) Powerful gaming graphics cards could be outlawed, because the EU suddenly says all new PCs, must use less than 50 watts, at max power use.Similarly, many core CPUs, for home use, could effectively be outlawed, if such regulations were put in.So I hope this EU laws situation is NOT the start of a thin-wedge.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 04:32:45 pm
content: Quote from: mfro on November 13, 2022, 12:53:30 pmThe EU's energy ratings are a mess. They are supposed to keep only the most inefficient products out of the market. They are supposed to give the consumer a good guide to which of the available products are the most efficient. However, the ratings are all over the place. For example, they rate the efficiency of chest and vertical freezers differently. Currently pretty much all chest freezers have an F rating, so those ratings are pretty much useless for selecting a product. Vertical freezers are far less efficient than even the worst chest freezer, but their different rating scale makes them look much better.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 05:06:24 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on November 02, 2022, 04:54:59 pmVacuum cleaners have alwayssuckedequally: air flow and vacuum ratings are designed based on what people need, and these needs have not changed.Vacuum cleaners were artificially inefficient, basically designed to be hybrid vacuum cleaners + electric heaters when marketing figured out Watts sell. This was somewhere in early 1990's. Power ratings quickly grew into 2000W range. All attempts to force suck-ratings, Air-watts or whatever failed - finally a complete ban to this crap was required.Funny thing is, efficient vacuum cleaners have been available all the time, namely industrial or workshop vacuum cleaners. Their users have two specific needs:1) better vacuuming than household vacuum cleaners,2) ability to connect power tools into the slave socket (so that the vacuum cleaner detects current being drawn, and starts the vacuum automagically)Because power tools regularly need up to 10A, and Schuko plugs are limited to 16A, this leaves mere 6A for the vacuum cleaner itself. So they only have 1200W, and they need to suck better than those 2000W home cleaners. Motor efficiency needs to be doubled.... which is utterly trivial, because human kind can easily design 95% efficient electric motors. If the point of comparison is a 30% efficient broken-by-design piece of shit designed by marketing and not engineering department, it is trivial to make it say 60% efficient again by letting engineers back in, and it's still cheap-as-fuck to manufacture. Probably even cheaper than the inefficient version thanks to easier thermals!So for crappy vacuum cleaners, good riddance. I don't say this too often, at least not unironically, but thanks EU for this.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 05:37:47 pm
content: QuoteA thought just struck: it may be an 8K TV but that doesn't necessarily mean it is 8K resolution. If you were to use a 4K TV as a monitor it wouldn't appear as good as an actual 4K monitor because of the way the pixels do RGB, or, rather, don't do it:Quote from:https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/picture-quality/pixels

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 05:48:06 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on November 13, 2022, 05:37:47 pmThose RGBW panels are not common. Most TVs have panels that work as well as a monitor as any custom monitor, as long as you configure them correctly. Unfortunately, a LOT of TVs are poorly documented, and it can take a while to configure them so they accept 4:4:4 video, and get the full resolution of the panel. You might just need to select a "PC" or "game" mode for the HDMI port you are using, but you may also need to have the extract correct text in the input label field for that port. Its easy to see, on coloured text, when you've got it right.

author: mfro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 06:52:56 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on November 13, 2022, 04:32:45 pmNot true. A quick Google shows plenty of devices available with C or better rating.Also, there is no difference in any EU efficiency criteria between chest and vertical.There is a difference between free standing and built-in devices (with the latter receiving a bonus because of less space available for insulation).

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 07:07:40 pm
content: Quote from: mfro on November 13, 2022, 06:52:56 pmInteresting. I went through the web sites of some of the UKs big electrical retailers recently, looking at freezers. Most were likehttps://ao.com/l/chest_freezers/1/32-33/A long like of F rated products, although page 2 of that list does ave two E rated models I missed before. Other retailers, likehttps://markselectrical.co.uk/chest-freezers.html, are similar.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2022, 09:28:02 pm
content: Quote from: mfro on November 13, 2022, 06:52:56 pmIndeed. The EU just changed energy ratings recently, not sure how long ago. We bought a new fridge which is 'D' rated, about 240kWh/year. Our old one is A+ rated at 255kWh per year, about 5 years old (incidentally - never buy Hisense refigeration). Once all fridges are at 'A+' it doesn't give much room for comparison. Compressing ratings back to 'D' and so on gives more room for comparison.Also, in the UK, they are post-Brexit harmonised ratings, so blame the UK gov't for synchronising it with the EU, not the EU for coming up with it ... hang on, wasn't that supposed to be one of those Brexit bonuses?