Blur Busters Forums

Jason38 wrote:Even regular LED lights I can't tolerate them. Maybe the special one you mentioned but there hasn't been one yet I can tolerate without orange glasses. It has to be flicker free.

You might be OK with the new CRI 97 LED lights using violet chips as long as they properly lower the violet peak lower than the full spectrum curve (see graphs above). The key is that the violet peak needs to be pushed low like in the graph above, unlike the very sharp blue peaks that current LEDs emit.

Many cheap LED bulbs don't have enough capacitor filtering to be fully PWM-free especially when dimmed. The majority of my LED bulbs are PWM free but I often paid extra to get CRI 90 which looks wonderful but won't be good enough for you -- it will take CRI 97 or thereabouts for your extreme situation.

Even filament LED bulbs use the crappy chips and look quite bad. But I pay close attention to LED technology developments -- as LED underpins almost every future display technology (even OLED screens)! LED-backlit LCD, OLED, MiroLED -- almost no display technology is untouched by LED!

Most people are perfectly fine with CRI 80 lightbulbs but for picky people they're bottom of barrel. I am a little pickier than average (not as picky as you) -- going towards CRI 90 bulbs. The cheapest CRI 90 bulbs I find today are the ones at IKEA, they make surprisingly good CRI 90 bulbs now that are really pleasing to my eyes, I can't tell the difference between IKEA LED and a standard incandescent. But they probably still have slightly too much bluepeak for you.

Fortunately, the CRI 97+ bulbs should finally be the trigger but those bulbs still cost about 50 dollars each. For your really extreme LED sensitivity I'd hold out for CRI 97 instead of CRI 95 but I think you will be pleasantly surprised with the better-manufactured CRI 97 / CRI 98 LED bulbs of the 2020s (that successfully shaves the shortwavelength peak to lower than the curve) -- you may even find you no longer need your incandescent insurance.

My experience with other people like you are they begin to get pleasantly surprised when they use the OLED-equivalent of LED light bulbs -- the ones that use violet chip and generate RGB completely by phosphor (unlike today's LED which use blue light, and only use phosphor for red/green). I have heared anecdotes that they were the first-ever LED lightbulbs that stopped their eyestrain for them. The problem is that even CRI 94, CRI 95, etc, still have a slight peakish peak in the low wavelengths, so you gotta push the limits, like CRI 97, etc, getting as close to CRI 100 as possible (identical to incandescent) -- bulbs that successfully neuter that pesky short wavelength peak are still relatively rare. Since you seem to be able to afford all the equipment you have -- you could even invest in a spectrophotometer and test the bulbs yourself too! Consider it your gieger counter for unacceptable LED bulbs. Properly manufactured violet chip LEDs (that are also PWM-free) produce amazingly OLED-quality feel in LED lightbulbs that allow you to put your incandescent light bulbs on eBay by the mid-to-end of 2020s. Thanks to CRI 97+ there's really truly no reason to keep those incandescents around, except as insurance. For CRI97+, try to get 5000K instead of 6500K, that will make sure that short wavelength peak is much

You don't get eyestrain with OLED screens, and those new CRI 97+ violet-chip lightbulbs (the PWM-free specimens; CRI unfortunately is not an indicator of PWM-freeness) are actually more comfortable than OLED screens if they're one of those that push the shortwavelength peak lower than the rest of the sunlight curve. OLED is LED too, and the new CRI 97 violet-chip lightbulbs generate light much more similarly to a Samsung mobile OLED screen (but fuller spectrum) in nearly 100% uniformly phosphor-generated light. The prices probably will fall quite a bit throughout the 2020s.

The main disadvantage of violet-chip LED lightbulbs is that they are slightly less efficient than blue-light-based LED lightbulbs. But that would not matter to you; still far more efficient than incandescent. Probably going to be a 10-year wait for dramatic price-drops on violet-chip-driven LED lighting.

Nontheless, this doesn't preclude the fact that the traditional LED blue-light peak has been a big problem for a small percentage of the human population.

The projector idea is kind of cool. I'm not that desperate at least not yet. Chief this information is unbelievable I'm pretty sure this is the most information I have ever heard on LEDs. All these LED groups just focus on the same thing all the time. It's actually super complicated and way above most people's heads. You really have me thinking about the brightness of the monitors versus the room. At my work I have to use computers. Way back in 2014 when flicker free monitors started coming out I asked my boss if he would replace three monitors in the shop with flicker free ones. He did it they are BENQ GW VA 2255. I wear orange glasses all day because the shop uses 6500 flicker free lights. This in turn makes the shop super bright meaning even if you had the monitors at max brightness they wouldn't be very bright. I have never had any issues with them except one time when the tech guy changed all the computers and used a DVI to VGA adapter. The screens started giving me crazy pain that I couldn't even be in the general area of them as I would get crazy eye pain. I had to ask my boss to take me off the computers completely. I figured it out in a couple of weeks and just got a straight DVI to DVI wire and got rid of the adapter everything was good again. Funny thing is I bought one for home a BENQ GW2255 problem was I got a defective unit. Then it was discontinued so I bought the GW2270 VA for home. I bought a 20 something monitors after this. I'm attacking my game room lighting again as I type this. I do have a decent in window in my game room I really need to pay attention to possible l pain at day Vs night. I figure I need to keep a super bright room like work. I have another question in regards to contrast. If you turn the contrast down really low does this cause more closed shutters on the monitor? Back in the days before flicker free you would turn brightness to max and turn contrast down. I find I'm always turning brightness and contrast down super low is it a bad idea to turn contrast down low? I always find LEDs super bright.

I wanted to share a couple of other tests I have done on myself over the years. I had bought a CRT monitor that I was able to set the refresh rate to 120hz. Again that was very close to passing my flicker threshold. I imagine my number to pass is just above there because I was almost normal. No blue light risk with the CRT. I have tried a lot of CCFL monitors. I don't need to wear the orange glasses with them but the Flicker always gets to me. I ordered a CCFL off eBay that was supposed to be flicker free but it actually had screen burn and seemed to have some other issues going on. Glad I didn't pay too much for it. It's too bad monitor manufacturers didn't tell you the quality of LEDs they put in these things. I guess that's my goal to use a monitor without the orange glasses.

Very interesting anecdotes!

Although we are Blur Busters and some of us consider that "that crazy site that's picky about display motion blur" and often "that site that instantly mic-drops the 30fps vs 60fps debate" ...we are more than that! The multiple Blur Busters websites (TestUFO, Forums, Media), combined, now receive a million visits per month, which is nothing to sneeze at anymore -- that veers into the entry part of advanced-mainstream now, no longer uber-niche. A few dozen websites and youtubers now use our tests and keep seeing the UFO one way or another (that's us!).

Recently, as Blur Busters transitions from a fun hobby to full time business, the mission statement is currently (as of May 2019) -- "To be the Perfect Motion Company for better motion quality on displays. To be innovators in eliminating unwanted display motion blur. To accelerate the refresh rate race to retina refresh rates."

Over the years, we attracted people who get eyestrain from motion blur. And PWM eyestrain. And it all branches out to people like you, who email me, post here, on social media, comments sections, and more. The fact that we now recognize "motion blur eyestrain" as a problem, means we recognize not all humans see identically -- the different degrees of color blindness, the different degrees of motion blindness ("Akinetopsia"), the different degrees of flicker sensitivity -- all spawning out to unusual conditions like yours.

Discussions about these afflictions are welcome here as they are imperfections on a "Perfect Motion Display" that makes displays different from reality. Spectrum (blue light)? Blur? Stroboscopics? Flicker? Vertigo? Etc. We often analyze why displays don't perfectly reproduce real life. Including the pesky invention of using static images to emulate moving images.

The humankind invention of a frame rate in the 19th century is a limitation -- real life is framerateless analog-motion. And good virtual reality good enough to trick a human (the "Matrix" test, the Star Trek "Morarity" test, or the "Holodeck Turing Test" as I like to call it) -- will likely require an ultrahigh refresh rate display. The closest we can get to analog real-life motion (no unwanted stroboscopics, no unwanted added source-based motion blur, no unwanted phantom array effect, no unwanted stroboscopic effect) is to use ultrahigh frame rates on an ultrahigh refresh rate display (Blur Busters Law: The Amazing Journey To Future 1000Hz Displays). It's surprising how the finite refresh rate is a bottleneck for five-sigma perfect match display-vs-reality; even artifacts still appear at quadruple-digit refresh rates!

As you know, we are the world's first mainstream website to test 480Hz.



Real photograph of TestUFO MouseArrow Test. Even on our 480Hz display, PWM-free, non-strobed, the refresh rate is not yet high enough to turn the mouse arrow to a continuous blur.

The flicker is far beyond fusion threshold (can't see flicker directly), but people still get eye pain -- that's because other artifacts (wagonwheel artifact, stroboscopic artifact, phantom array effect, etc) create an immediate discomfort. It's like how some people get motion sickness but others do not. Likewise, some people hate DLP rainbow artifacts but others do not.

There are apparently many degrees of discomfort for artifacts.
- Not seeing the artifact (and completely unable to do so)
- Not seeing the artifact until trained to do so (e.g. like being trained to identify 3:2 pulldown)
- Simply merely seeing the artifact but having no reaction nor discomfort.
- Instantly sensitive & seeing the artifact and getting discomfort from it
- Instantly seeing the artifact and getting gradual sickness/nausea/headache/pain/siezure/etc
- Instantly seeing the artifact and getting instant sickness/nausea/headache/pain/siezure/etc

We've identified that many different artifacts that can cause above reactions in different humans (even if <1% of population)
- Direct effect from PWM dimming
- Artifacts from PWM dimming
- People who get discomfort from PWM dimming but not from high quality motion blur reduction strobing (huge clue: They're bothered by phantom array effect, not from the flicker)
- People who get discomfort from both PWM dimming *and* motion blur reduction strobing
- Temporal-color artifacts (DLP rainbow effect)
- Blur-reduction strobing (but it's more gentle than PWM-dimming)
- Motionblur (above-and-beyond human vision limitation)
- Color spectrum (e.g. very sharp blue light peak)
- Etc.

Statistics say approximately 12% of population is colorblind. For every very colorblind person, there are people who are just a few percent less sensitive to color that are never diagnosed as colorblind. Likewise, for every person like you who are super-sensitive to blue-light peak + flicker + etc, there are other people who have much less sensitivity.

Staring at certain kinds of displays can be worse than sitting on a roller coaster for some people. Even a single artifact, such as motion blur, can cause a motion sickness that didn't exist on a different display (e.g. CRT). Everybody reacts differently. It is literally only 10%-20% of the population, but that 10% has over 100+ different reactions.

As Blur Busters, we've found out pain from flicker is not simple: Sometimes it's a immediate nausea/dizziness/etc from the mouse arrow effect! So, stroboscopic effect (1000Hz+) is still a headache problem for a small percentage of humans because of these very artifacts. Not much research gets done, but the lighting industry did (that's why good fluorescent ballasts went to 20,000Hz to fix the phantom array effect):


(Page 6 of ASSIST paper)

Unfortunately the LED industry has not always taken note, I run into LED lightbulbs with a 120Hz PWM, especially in restaurants. They buy a 100 pack of bulbs for cheap for a few bucks off eBay or Amazon, and oftentimes they have no filter capacitor! So, everytime you dim these pesky LED bulbs, they emit a very squarewave 120Hz flicker that is particularly bothersome for probably as much as 10% of the population. Thankfully, the flicker doesn't bother me but I see it when I move my eyes around -- from point A to B of one eye movement, I instantly see the PWM of a 120Hz. Especially when dimmed. Even those filament bulbs. (Some will use a higher frequency PWM instead, such as those colored LED bulbs that have their own PWM-dimming electronics -- but the PWM is not always high enough -- if I intentionally roll my eyes fast, I can see PWM >1000-5000Hz if the OFF:ON duty cycle is mostly dark). This is really an annoying issue for people like you though where the flicker affects you far worse than it does for me.

PWM artifacts on displays manifests itself in other kinds of sharp motion (motion that has no source-based blurring). Some of us can see PWM artifacts (864Hz), others can see DLP rainbow artifacts (360Hz), yet others see artifacts that sears & hurts their eyes -- not because of the direct flicker but because of the artifact. (Certain artifacts can feel epileptic to some!) Many people aren't bothered by direct flicker but by the discomfort of the artifacts themselves.

It is possible that we'll start writing more articles about this topic matter in the coming decade because of how the venn diagram of motion blur reduction captures an interesting audience of blur-sensitive people who apparently consider Blur Busters as a sanctuary -- and how it branches out to other imperfections in the journey to the "Perfect Motion Display" of the future.

Perhaps there is room for future funding of little-done research in these topics. I'm recruiting researchers to coauthor me on topic matter such as these (email: [email protected]) seeing that few other places on the Internet attracts a slightly more concentrated-than-average audience of blur-sensitivity.

Just because the eyes of the panel manufacturer employees & monitor manufacturer employees are comfortable, doesn't mean it's already a five-sigma comfort display. Five sigma is where 0.00003% of humans can tell apart real world and a Perfect Motion Display. That's a virtually impossibly tall order. I'd even settle for three-sigma (99.87% of humans having no eye discomfort), but you might even be already the 0.1% -- so three-sigma comfort is possibly never going to be enough for people like you.

How do we five-sigma the display comfort? That's going to require a Perfect Motion Display, which does not exist. We (humankind) can work slowly towards it though. Motion blur is just but one component of a Perfect Motion Display -- motion blur is good when you want it, but bad when you don't want it, especially with a display with permanent motion blur. Formerly there wasn't choice (LCD had guaranteed motion blur, but that's no longer true).

So we are a goldmine of "Perfect Motion Display" research -- pretty much anything that deviates away from a display's ability to match real life.

Jason38 wrote:I'm attacking my game room lighting again as I type this. I do have a decent in window in my game room I really need to pay attention to possible l pain at day Vs night. I figure I need to keep a super bright room like work.

That's important; re-equalizing day versus night is important for a person like you.
Focus on your eye comfort difference day vs night, and compensate.

Jason38 wrote: I have another question in regards to contrast. If you turn the contrast down really low does this cause more closed shutters on the monitor?

There's no relation. Contrast/Brightness is a complex thing, and different displays have different techniques of achieving that, which may or may not include PWM (or not), either at a fullscreen level, or at a per-pixel level. For LCD, it is usually brightness that affects PWM and contrast that affects the lookup table curve (brightening blacks digitally and dimming grays digitally). Keeping in mind that LCD blacks are not perfectly black, and can still leak blue light through (depending on the brightness level) -- there's a blue peak in the LCD blacks.

Jason38 wrote:Back in the days before flicker free you would turn brightness to max and turn contrast down. I find I'm always turning brightness and contrast down super low is it a bad idea to turn contrast down low? I always find LEDs super bright.

It's hard to diagnose. Sometimes it's been a situations of wildgoose chase and redherrings that are best solved via a neutral-density gray filter.

The common situation is a person of brightness sensitivity, finds a monitor does not have enough brightness range to darken far enough, and then that person has to use (or abuse) the Contrast to try to get the screen dimmer. Unfortunately it's intentionally handicapping you, intentionally shrinking the size of your gas tank, intentionally letting the air out of your bicycle tires, you're making the product worse. Because now with a small contrast range your monitor is almost literally turning a TN 6-bit panel into a 4-bit or 5-bit color, because you're digitally remapping the 0-255 color range to a darker-contrast 64-192 color range of your shrunken contrast. Or such. So back up, rewind, fix things by purchasing a neutral density films of varying degrees (50% ND, 75% ND, 90% ND) -- examples such as these sheets -- just make sure you get a sheet big enough to cover your monitor screen. This allows you to keep your full 8-bit color range or 10-bit color range, instead of using digital Contrast to butcher your color depth to "Rob Peter To Pay Paul" (fixing a different eyestrain problem) trading one pro for one con.

Also, since your room is very bright, it is common that you want to raise the brightness of blacks, to compensate. So recalibrating with slightly brighter blacks and a narrower contrast range, can be quite helpful to many. Conversely, many esports players need to see with higher gamma to see enemies in dark scenes better. So, there are also, indeed, legitimate reasons to reduce contrast to intentionally brighten the dark colors (to see dim scenery). Many gaming monitors include those gamma-boost features. Eyestrain from extreme shadowed images seem to exist so that may be a good use case to keep doing what you're doing.

Other than that, I cannot definitively tell you what your attempts to adjust Contrast is doing to your eyes, but I wanted to warn you with the above caveat. Situations like this is extremely common; trying to trade one display artifact for another lesser-poison display artifact. Especially when those people don't know that you can keep the cake and eat it too (occasionally) with solutions like that. But there oftentimes ends up good reasons why you're doing what you're doing. You just need to become familiar with why you're doing what you're doing -- that's the challenging part: "Why does the display look easier on my eyes when I adjust Contrast that way..." -- that can sometimes be hard to answer straightforwardly.

Jason38 wrote:I wanted to share a couple of other tests I have done on myself over the years. I had bought a CRT monitor that I was able to set the refresh rate to 120hz. Again that was very close to passing my flicker threshold. I imagine my number to pass is just above there because I was almost normal.

Unfortunately, thresholds are NOT simple.
- There's direct flicker sensitivity (e.g. flicker fusion threshold, often ~75Hz)
- There's indirect sensitivity (e.g. discomfort from stroboscopics, PWM dimming, etc -- 360Hz, 432Hz or 864Hz)
- We have people who have no pain from blur reduction (120Hz flicker on 120fps material) but lots of discomfort from PWM dimming (432Hz+ PWM dimming)
- CRT gentle strobing versus LCD harsh squarewave strobing (meaning CRT 85Hz is easier than LCD 120Hz)

CRT used a phosphor that faded, while LCD strobing is a binary ON-OFF-ON-OFF-ON-OFF. The speed of the turning-on and turning-off.

Look, even Incandescent bulbs have a very very soft PWM (it's a faint sinewave like flicker between 100% brightness and 95% brightness or so -- 100%-brightness-95%-brightness-100%-brightness-95%-brightness) because of the AC power curve, and how when the voltage of the AC sine wave goes through the 0 volt, to the negative (-120) voltage, the incandescent filament partially cools off.

How a light source flickers (phosphor decay, sinewave, ON:OFF duty cycle, color spectrum of flicker, etc) affects your threshold. 120Hz flicker on LCD strobe backlight is nowhere nearly as gentle as 120Hz flicker on a CRT. Most people are fine with it, but you might only merely get a "best of a pick-your-poison" effect, e.g. less pain than if there was lots of motion blur. People who are simultaneously blur-sensitive AND flicker-sensitive is extremely hard to satisfy with a display technology;

Unfortunately, the humble threshold is not a simple matter, contrary to what everybody tries to tell you.

For you, I recommend strobeless blur reduction instead. Get highest refresh rate (240Hz), a powerful GPU, and then get your framerates as high as possible, and use variable refresh rate to eliminate other discomforts (e.g. stutters). If you want the best VRR, then it's hard to beat NVIDIA's flavour of 240Hz GSYNC.

Alas, the 240Hz monitors don't use the best edgelights, although all GSYNC monitors are all PWM-free. You'll probably still need to wear orange glasses with them, but the rest may be OK.

Jason38 wrote:No blue light risk with the CRT. I have tried a lot of CCFL monitors. I don't need to wear the orange glasses with them but the Flicker always gets to me. I ordered a CCFL off eBay that was supposed to be flicker free but it actually had screen burn and seemed to have some other issues going on. Glad I didn't pay too much for it. It's too bad monitor manufacturers didn't tell you the quality of LEDs they put in these things. I guess that's my goal to use a monitor without the orange glasses.

It's going to be tough unless you purchase the right kind of orange filter to put on your screen (same material as your eye glasses that successfully blocks the correct light), or until they use those really expensive violet-chip LEDs to avoid the ultrapeaky blue light of common white LEDs.

Feel free to ignore this as is more of a personal interest of mine, and have no real helpful knowledge:
1- Have you tried OLED TVs? In your opinion are they comparable to Plasmas?
2- Do all kind of games (FPS, RTS,...) give you problems? For me, i get eye strain mainly on First Person Shooters, and sometimes, it helps when lowering mouse speed-sensibility in options. It helps me when i start to get motion sickness in games, although not all games give me motion sickness, it all depends on the game; i have some clear examples i cannot stand even lowering the mouse speed (2 are Estranged: Act I and II, they are free games if you want to try, but i would not xD ), and on others i can turn the camera really fast without big problems.
3- Do you get more pain at night or at day? Sometimes i "see" better at night, because sometimes the daylight is not "clear enough" and makes my eyes tired.

As I said, ignore this if you want, and good luck .

rasmas wrote:Feel free to ignore this as is more of a personal interest of mine, and have no real helpful knowledge:
1- Have you tried OLED TVs? In your opinion are they comparable to Plasmas?
2- Do all kind of games (FPS, RTS,...) give you problems? For me, i get eye strain mainly on First Person Shooters, and sometimes, it helps when lowering mouse speed-sensibility in options. It helps me when i start to get motion sickness in games, although not all games give me motion sickness, it all depends on the game; i have some clear examples i cannot stand even lowering the mouse speed (2 are Estranged: Act I and II, they are free games if you want to try, but i would not xD ), and on others i can turn the camera really fast without big problems.
3- Do you get more pain at night or at day? Sometimes i "see" better at night, because sometimes the daylight is not "clear enough" and makes my eyes tired.

As I said, ignore this if you want, and good luck .

I haven't tried OLED TV's yet mainly because of price. I research new OLED tech everyday and am hoping for the price to drop. The LG 2018 OLED looks incredible. I'm hoping to buy a new phone in the next 6 - 12 months that is DC dimmed OLED so I can get rid of my current 2014 OLED phone. I'm on the fence if the OLED TVS will work because they are WOLED which I'm not 100% if that translates to a lot of blue light or not. Flicker free phones with OLED have seemed fined for me. I have had two in my lifetime that are good. Phones are just pentile RGB I believe they don't use the white with color filters that OLED TV manufacturers use. I'm super interested in all the panels coming from JOLED because they are all RGB OLED just hope they will be using DC Dimming. I saw an OLED laptop just released I think it was razor looked like that one was flickering from the video I saw. As for games I overly don't have an issue with different types. If the game is flashing a crazy amount or back in the days when my kids were younger and they would play Minecraft with there kid eyes and the screen would be flying in every different direction that would cause issues. Maybe FPS games but I don't really play that type of game. I stopped playing those with Perfect Dark for the N64 and Golden Eye. I beat Skyrim and Oblivion and had no real issues with those games and I would say they are similar to FPS except way slower. I was even playing Kingdom Come Deliverance which I found had motion blur for some reason maybe because the game was just too big and the PS4 had a hard time with it. I didn't really notice any issue with that on my plasma. Usually for me as long as the screen is good and I haven't exposed myself to flickering LED's for long periods of time I'm good.

Jason38 wrote:The LG 2018 OLED looks incredible. I'm hoping to buy a new phone in the next 6 - 12 months that is DC dimmed OLED so I can get rid of my current 2014 OLED phone. I'm on the fence if the OLED TVS will work because they are WOLED which I'm not 100% if that translates to a lot of blue light or not.

At least on the 2016 and 2017 models, there is a blue peak on WOLED to watch out for, but supposedly LG switched away from blue/yellow for generating the whites, into full R/G/B generation.

I don't know if this has already occured in newer LG OLED televisions. Also some risk, is that lots of quantum dot tech coming to both LCD (as backlight or wavelength converter) and OLED (as wavelength converter), is that a lot are blue light based and generate the red/green via the quantum dots. That said, quantum dots also work on violet light to convert to red/green/blue.

Apple is also readying an OLED-based MacBook, so watch for that one too. Hopefully that'd be 120Hz since Apple's been raising refresh rates recently (120Hz iPads and all). You can bet to pay a huge arm and leg for that one though but at least possibly paying a price that actually includes a computer, rather than only being a display.

Chief Blur Buster wrote:

Jason38 wrote:The LG 2018 OLED looks incredible. I'm hoping to buy a new phone in the next 6 - 12 months that is DC dimmed OLED so I can get rid of my current 2014 OLED phone. I'm on the fence if the OLED TVS will work because they are WOLED which I'm not 100% if that translates to a lot of blue light or not.

At least on the 2016 and 2017 models, there is a blue peak on WOLED to watch out for, but supposedly LG switched away from blue/yellow for generating the whites, into full R/G/B generation.

I don't know if this has already occured in newer LG OLED televisions. Also some risk, is that lots of quantum dot tech coming to both LCD (as backlight or wavelength converter) and OLED (as wavelength converter), is that a lot are blue light based and generate the red/green via the quantum dots. That said, quantum dots also work on violet light to convert to red/green/blue.

Apple is also readying an OLED-based MacBook, so watch for that one too. Hopefully that'd be 120Hz since Apple's been raising refresh rates recently (120Hz iPads and all). You can bet to pay a huge arm and leg for that one though.

Thank you chief! I'm going to print all this information out as you have given me so much new information to work with to start going back to the drawing board with as I have been kind of stuck for awhile as how to proceed to find a screen that doesn't cause pain. It's funny because a guy like me should probably not like LED's very much but when my city switched to full LED in 2016(I'm 45 minutes from the Blur Busters HQ) I started having more luck. I find them more tolerable then the old lights we used to have. My city installed flicker free LEDS I believe 3200K not 100% sure on that. I have been interested in the quantum dots for quite some time. That was why I bought the Samsung CFG2470. I believe that was blue LEDs that generated the color I got it around 2017. I ended up letting my son use it as It didn't work well with me. I read on this forum there was some issues with that first model. I think mine was OK because I had bought it maybe 6 months after it came out didn't notice anything. So are you saying new quantum dot monitors use the violet light to generate the RGB? if that's the case I need to look into that. I noticed that HP has a new monitor out HP Pavilion 27-inch Quantum Dot on Glass Monitor. Too bad it's only 60 hertz but it's worth a shot if there is no pain. I will continue to research. I know Samsung has some new quantum dots out as well. Lots of stuff to try!

Jason38 wrote:So are you saying new quantum dot monitors use the violet light to generate the RGB? if that's the case I need to look into that. I noticed that HP has a new monitor out HP Pavilion 27-inch Quantum Dot on Glass Monitor. Too bad it's only 60 hertz but it's worth a shot if there is no pain. I will continue to research. I know Samsung has some new quantum dots out as well. Lots of stuff to try!

It can be done either way. But most use blue light with quantum dots to generate green/blue. There's a fairly huge blue peak with many of them but on some of them the red/green can be well balanced peaks.