Another factor is that software-based "low blue light" doesn't fix the original LED backlight spectrum.
LCD blacks are not completely black, and blacks can leak through the original backlight spectrum which may trigger issues for many people. Software that lowers brightness below the native minimum brightness are also hugely imperfect in reducing effectiveness of operating-system-based low blue light filters, monitor firmwares, or utilities such as F.Lux.
This can also contaminate the validity of subpar low blue light research, as an additional erroneously-undisclosed error margin above-and-beyond ambient blue light peaks (e.g. cheap LED lightbulbs throughout a household).
If you measure the color temperature of LCD blacks, using a super-sensitive colorimeter or spectrophotometer, it's often a very high color temperature (very blue) even in the orangest-colored lowest blue light mode. Because the software fix to reduce blue light only works well on well-above-black.
And many people use Dark Mode at the same time -- which increases the color temperature a bit because of the bluer bias in the darker LCD shades. And in the dark, the irises open up and absorbs even more blue light from the dim greys/blacks. Thus enabling Dark Mode can contaminate a study that tests Low Blue Light, since there are counter-reacting factors when it comes to LCDs. Less amount of light (good), but bluer light (bad). Now, if they are OLEDs, bluish LCD blacks is not an issue, since many OLEDs can go completely black regardless of normal or low blue light mode.
I think there is legitimacy in saying OS/menu/software-based low-blue-light filters are sometimes ineffective on some screens with cheap backlights that create extremely bluish-grey LCD blacks. They turn very visible colors very orange but still keeping the blue tinted blacks & dark greys in LCD blacks since they do nothing to the color of LCD black.
Now that being said, there is an external fix-it-all for imperfect LCD blacks that may still be bluish: Orange tinted computer glasses, that act like sunglasses for computer displays. They universally filter all blue light from all colors emitted from a screen. (even so, it's not a perfect replacement for improved LED spectrum -- it's simply superior to the on-screen low blue light setting)
I believe I currently have enough reputation to call out in doubt the veracity of mainstream media claims based on outlier research papers that may be only surgically legitimate. One "avoiding blue light doesn't work" paper out of a storm of papers that do confirm a link. At best, the paper probably is a "enabling low blue light mode on a device is fairly ineffective" when considering the assault of blue light contamination from non-screen causes AND the partial ineffectiveness of software-based/OS-based low blue light filters. Mainstream media then spins it with bait titles.
My Blur Busters / TestUFO is already mentioned/credited/coauthor in
more than 20+ peer reviewed research papers.
There, however, are a HUGE number of issues with today's displays, not just blue light, which I will crosspost here:
Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑19 Oct 2021, 18:30
I understand that your eyes are very comfortable with Apple displays, but has more issues/migranes with other non-Apple displays. This is an interesting area that needs a bit of self-troubleshooting, but there are also additional ergonomic issues to also check too.
Ergonomic issues with vision can be hard to troubleshoot -- e.g. LED spectrum issues and panel issues (e.g. TN vs IPS, as well as standard LED backlight vs KSF/NanoIPS LED backlight). The best way to try to narrow this down is to analyze:
General pattern of changes to display industry over the last 10-25 years:
- CRT gave way to CCFL-backlit LCD, then gave way to LED-backlit LCD. (Different people react differently in migraines)
- Low blue light features have become available (but software/firmware does not fully solve CCFL vs LED differences)
- Desktop monitors are becoming bigger than they used to be (which can affect migraines due to bigger FOV)
- Higher Hz has now become available, even for IPS and VA (this can help some, people who get motionsick playing games)
- VRR technologies recently became available (can help motion sickness caused by stutter; people who get motionsick playing games)
There is no single cause of migraines. However, you can test categories of common causes of display ergonomic issues:
- Try enable/disable low blue light via menus/OS/app. This helps a lot, but sometimes is only partial as software doesn't fully fix the LED spectrum. LCD blacks are not completely black, and blacks can leak through the original backlight spectrum which may trigger issues for you.
- Try wear orange-tinted "computer glasses", they're like sunglasses but designed for computer use. Superior to software apps.
- Change refresh rate between 60Hz and 120Hz/144Hz and 240 Hz, in case your issue is motion blur related (some of us get nausea from motion blur and/or poorly tuned LCD pixel response).
- Verify the monitor dimming is PWM-free. Most displays made in the last 10 years are PWM-free, fortunately.
- Verify different LED backlight types. (regular vs KSF/NanoIPS vs Quantum Dot vs Apple Mac/iPad type backlight). Some people solve their problem by changing to a very different (sometimes more expensive) LED backlight type.
- Verify viewing distance (smaller display closer, bigger display further away). Some prefer to use a TV at the back of a 4-foot-deep desk, to help vision issues.
- Verify eye aging issues (people becoming 40+), if you're getting issues regardless of display in public, office, home, mobile, etc. See an optometrist for tests.
- Verify bias lights (e.g. nightnight behind the screen), to make sure your screen is no longer the dimmest/brightest object in your room.
- Try unexpected alternatives such as LG 42", 48" or 55" 4K 120Hz GSYNC OLED HDTV on the wall at back of a 4 foot deep desk (twice the viewing distance of normal 24" monitor). They are also FreeSync compatible.
Try to focus on categories during your process of elimination, but admittedly this can be very challenging if vision / motionsick / migraine issues only occur over time. There are many causes that sometimes are wild goose chases to red herrings -- many try to fix their headache by low blue light, find that doesn't work, and don't know the cause.
The risk of going cheap budget bottom-barrel uncertified "FreeSync" is you will make something else worse than your MBP display in order to gain FreeSync. Cheap gaming monitors also have a narrower brightness adjustment range than most Mac monitors, which is hugely unfortunate, if you're used to a Macbook backlight at 40% brightness setting (dimmer than the 1% brightness setting of some brands of gaming monitors that are still too bright).
However, my general rule of thumb for a FreeSync display to de-risk people whose eyes prefer the comfort of an Apple screen:
- Make sure it is both true AMD FreeSync *and* NVIDIA G-SYNC Compatible certified. A display simultaneously certified by both AMD and NVIDIA is more likely to be better.
- Choose an IPS panel, the same LCD technology that Apple uses. That's what all iMac/MacBook/iPad/iPhone LCDs are nowadays whenever they're not using OLED, so avoid the cheap TN monitors to get more of a 1:1 symmetric experience. IPS FreeSync is a bit more expensive than TN FreeSync.
- Adjust your environment. Don't use a bigger/smaller screen than other existing screens that fully comfort your eyes. Adjust brightness to match your other comfortable screens used from the exact same chair. Adjust DPI/zoom so you're not squinting at tiny text. Adjust viewing distance to be similar to your other favorite eye-comfortable displays.
- Supplement with filters, preferably external instead of apps. You may have to supplement with orange-tinted non-prescription "computer glasses" from Amazon, or neutral density filters or apps (F.Lux style) to increase adjustment range or overcome an intrisinic limitation of a specific backlight LED's spectrum of a cheap monitor not fully fixable by software utilities. And brightness range limitations that are narrower than the brightness adjustment range of a display made by Apple.
Now replying to other points:
Markachy wrote: ↑14 Oct 2021, 04:47
I had a look through the first 3 pages of results there, and there was nothing at all linking blue light (or screen use generally) to lens hardening - did I miss one in there? Can you link directly?
Think broader for the whole century's research. Not just screens.
In general, any short-wavelength light can accelerate the yellowing/hardening of the human eye lens, even if only a little bit. Maybe a year, or two, or ten. It's very diffuse. Essentially, any prolonged all-waking-hours exposure excess of short wavelength light is coming from, screen or other sources.
Like the yellowing/embrittlement of acrylic plastic put to strong exposure to shorter wavelength light, the human eye lens is subject to some roughly similar effects.
P.S. The blue peak can be sometimes be closer to violet/near-ultraviolet for some white LED technologies that could be used as backlights. Certain white LEDs use 415 or 430 nanometer blue, in the violet portion of spectrum rather than blue. They use phosphor to spread the blue peak to the longer blue wavelengths, but the peak is still sharp/intense at an even lower wavelength, which may possibly accelerate yellowing/hardening. More study is needed on this. Also if industry ever migrates to ultraviolet LEDs for screen backlight technologies, this could also be an issue if we don't correctly filter ultraviolet after phosphor conversion to blue.
Markachy wrote: ↑14 Oct 2021, 04:47
Indeed, I would love some more of your tips in this area in terms of house LEDs to get - are there specific brands of LED bulbs that you would recommend that have a wide spectrum of emittance
Slightly offtopic, but:
I generally try to use CRI ratings. I skip all LED bulbs without a labelled CRI rating, or whose CRI rating is below 90. I try to aim for 93 or 95.
For more incandescent-style comfort, look for LED bulbs with:
- Labelled "CRI" with "90" or higher; and
- Labelled with the eye-checkmark logo; and
- Advertised as true flicker free (properly capacitored); and
- Advertised as full spectrum while also simultaneously being warm color temperature; and
- If possible, also dimmable and/or dim-to-warm (new).
Generally, expect to spend ~$5 per bulb on average. Some go up from there, but those nice $50 bulbs are now only $5 to get "full spectrum warm white" vastly superior to anything non-incandescent ever invented. Woohoo!
I also finally found CRI 90+ LED bulbs with an RGB mode too. Sometimes one has to make compromises to save money -- e.g. Sylvania Smart+ WiFi Full Color Dimmable uses CRI 90 (bare minimum ergonomic white) but has RGB cheaper than a Philips Hue. But they're Tuya-based cloud controlled IoT junk, so hook them only to your guest WiFi network for security. And then deciding on other compromises if I want to have smart bulbs, including smartbulbs that can be asked to flash at a certain time of the day (alarm clock - I am deaf).
For other lighting, my kitchen under-cabinet lights are MARSWALL CRI 95 LED ribbon from Amazon (
this), installed myself, along with a good ultrahigh-frequency PWM (>10KHz) 12V dimmable power supply. They cost more than twice as much as the cheap LED ribbons, but the CRI 95 spectrum really looks nice. It might be exaggerated though (more CRI 92-93) but it definitely looks very incandescent looking for a LED ribbon. Now, obviously, it's a hell lot harder than installing commodity undercabinet lights, but emits a top-of-the-line halogen-looking spectrum at least during full brightness (doesn't have dim-to-warmer behavior).
Oh, and stick to the good brands of wall dimmers (e.g. even if it's just a Lutron LED-compatible dimmer on sale) if you want full-range LED dimming (rather than 20%-100% brightness junk that never dims fully and causes LED to flicker regularly or erratically).