Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TechLife" data-source="post: 416528" data-attributes="member: 81810">A little off topic but I feel it's necessary to chime in here.&nbsp; As I have been a high-end audio/video installer for 12 years and know a little something about this, I would like to clarify a couple points as they are slightly inaccurate.On the contrary...When the screen is &quot;blanked&quot;, the display is actually receiving an input signal forcing it to display all black.&nbsp; Black is the most difficult color for a display to reproduce.&nbsp; All pixels must be driven to their full potential to display black therefore a fully black screen consumes the *most* power causing your display to draw more power than if it was displaying an actual image.The benefit of this is that you don't have to worry about static images being burned into your screen.&nbsp; The drawback is that you are in fact shortening the overall life of your display faster than anything else you can do.The idea of a faded screen has been mentioned before and it would actually consume less power then a fully black screen.&nbsp; Faded or not, it's still a static image.&nbsp; It just wouldn't burn as fast.If you truly want to conserve power over extended pause periods, the display would have to switch to stand-by.&nbsp; I'm not sure but it seems to me as if the windows screensaver were allowed to take over in a paused or idle menu state then the power settings would be active as well and, depending on your connection method, be able to put the display to sleep as well as wake it upon activity thus satisfying all requests.Whether this is a viable option or not - I don't know.&nbsp; It should be noted I have a $5K 50&quot; plasma that took me a very long time to save up for and I am very protective of.&nbsp; I want to come up with a solution to this as badly as anyone else here...just not sure this is the best answer.This is 100% true.&nbsp; Pixel shifting technology has had a significant impact on the burn potential of static images on plasmas but there is only so much it can do.&nbsp; It helps but it's not the miracle sales people want you to believe it is.--PLEASE NOTE:I in no means mean to hijack this thread, step on anyone's toes or any other nasty thing my response could be construed as.&nbsp; I simply do not want anyone to be misinformed or misled.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TechLife, post: 416528, member: 81810"] A little off topic but I feel it's necessary to chime in here. As I have been a high-end audio/video installer for 12 years and know a little something about this, I would like to clarify a couple points as they are slightly inaccurate. On the contrary...When the screen is "blanked", the display is actually receiving an input signal forcing it to display all black. Black is the most difficult color for a display to reproduce. All pixels must be driven to their full potential to display black therefore a fully black screen consumes the *most* power causing your display to draw more power than if it was displaying an actual image. The benefit of this is that you don't have to worry about static images being burned into your screen. The drawback is that you are in fact shortening the overall life of your display faster than anything else you can do. The idea of a faded screen has been mentioned before and it would actually consume less power then a fully black screen. Faded or not, it's still a static image. It just wouldn't burn as fast. If you truly want to conserve power over extended pause periods, the display would have to switch to stand-by. I'm not sure but it seems to me as if the windows screensaver were allowed to take over in a paused or idle menu state then the power settings would be active as well and, depending on your connection method, be able to put the display to sleep as well as wake it upon activity thus satisfying all requests. Whether this is a viable option or not - I don't know. It should be noted I have a $5K 50" plasma that took me a very long time to save up for and I am very protective of. I want to come up with a solution to this as badly as anyone else here...just not sure this is the best answer. This is 100% true. Pixel shifting technology has had a significant impact on the burn potential of static images on plasmas but there is only so much it can do. It helps but it's not the miracle sales people want you to believe it is. -- PLEASE NOTE: I in no means mean to hijack this thread, step on anyone's toes or any other nasty thing my response could be construed as. I simply do not want anyone to be misinformed or misled. [/QUOTE]

Verification