Plasma burn in problem! What to believe?

[Veronica Mars]

OK, as of now I have 3 Panasonic plasmas. A 58" from 2009, and 46" from last year and a 42" from 2011.

I've never had anything but plasma and love the picture.

I take very good care of them and have never paused a movie or channel for more than a few minutes. I've never left a channel on all night with a static image.

So, if you believe what most "experts" say, there's no way that I should have actual burn in...but I do on the 58". It's a news banner logo and it's been there for 6 months and it hasn't faded a bit.

I'm leaning towards buying a Samsung 64" plasma, but it's $3,000 and I can't lie. I'm scared now.

But here's the kicker. I wrote to Panasonic HQ to tell them and they responded back that burn in doesn't need to be caused by pausing a static image for a long time, nor does it need to happen from leaving a channel on for many, many, many hours (overnight or longer if you believe the people who write the review to get permanent burn-in like I have), but the good people at Panasonic wrote to me that watching the same channel over years, not at once, can also lead to burn in.

So, if you watch a lot of ESPN, you don't just have to worry about the logo from watching a really long game or if you watch cable news, you don't have to worry about the banner if you watch ALL DAY, but they told me it's cumulative. If you watch a lot of ESPN, even if it's not all at one time, you're likely to get it says Panasonic.

They actually told me that people should use what they called the 15% rule. No more than 15% of any day should be viewed of channels with any kind of static image (logo, banner, etc). So, if you think about what they just told me, they're basically saying 85% of your plasma use should be movies.

HUH??

I can't find anyone, no matter how conservative/cautious of a reviewer, who says anything like that. I've never heard anything like this until now. It doesn't even seem reasonable. Unless your plasma is going into a home theater room, it would be completely impractical to own one if you could only watch 15% of your viewing on channels with no logos or banners of any kind. Forget all the network channels, Comedy Central, AMC, ESPN...pretty much everything on television. However you can spend 85% of your time streaming Netflix, watching HBO and watching blu-rays. I have the message right from Panasonic.

And it would explain why I have burn in when I know I didn't do the things most every expert says you have to do. I have watched a news channel more than any other news channel over the last 5 years and if this cumulative thing is to be believed, it doesn't matter that the viewing was spread out and mixed up with lots of movies and other channels.

I'm not sure what to think anymore. It's making me very nervous about buying this Samsung plasma.

What does everyone here think? Is Panasonic full of it? What about my burn in? I did not leave the channel on for hours in a row or paused. What person who even owns one plasma as their primary television can watch 85% of their content on channels with no static image at all?

Thanks!

[Suntory_Times]

Panasonic isn't full of it, what they say is certainly possible albeit unlikely. My reason IR/burn in simply uneven wear so over years it certainly could happen, personally I don't watch any tv and only watch movies and game. All games have different huds and movies of course have no fixed logo and thus this isn't something I need to worry about. You would have to be unlucky though I think.

The plasmas had more or less gotten rid of any IR/burn in and then 3d happened. The changes required to accommodate 3d seemingly caused the issues to be present again. Finally last year and the year before it become largely a moot point again (though of course it still can occur). There is always a risk of IR/burn in and this goes for every display tech (in order of most likely to least: oled, plasma, lcd) except dlp.

With my cheaper plasma I just let whatever happens happen to it (it was cheap and the only time I had any notable IR was once I fell asleep with a still image up on screen and woke up 10 hours later [and stupidly had sleep mode turned off which should always be on imho]), the other time was when I played 100+ hours of Gears of War 3 hoarde mode in a few weeks and the tv was used for nothing else. In both cases it only took 10 hours of white washing the screen for the IR to be invisible from normal viewing conditions again. I stress though this was a display I didn't care for at all and one of the first 3d plasmas which as above where notorious for more problematic IR then newer models.

With my vt60 I just run the scrolling bar once or twice every week after a movie for ten minutes and I haven't had a hint of IR that last for more then a few seconds at most (after gaming for 5+ hours it was gone in seconds). Remember though all panels (even for the same model number) are different and there is always a risk (even with lcd, albeit significantly reduced) of these issues showing up.

If you mostly watch in a dark or darkened room plasma is the way to go, the f8500 imho is the second best display I have seen and I am including oleds who for me are not up to par yet due to there motion and curved screen (only behind the vt60 [the zt60 was not sold where I live], and only slightly so). So ultimately it is obviously up to you, I however if was to buy a tv today would go for the f8500 (unless you could find a reasonably priced new vt60 which is unlikely in America from what I have seen).

[Veronica Mars]

Thanks but you only addressed on part of Panasonic's claims.

What about the 15% rule?

You pretty much stated you don't watch a lot of television. I do.

I think most people do. Certainly more than 15% of their viewing.

If I merely ended up with burn in after 5 years, really 4 1/2, because of the cumulative effect of watching a news channel all those years but never in excesss on ANY given day, then it very easily could have been an ESPN logo or any other network logo instead that I watch regularly over the years and I can't change that.

So does that mean plasma isn't for me? It sure seems like a lot of other users have it and have similar viewing habits as I do.

You had 10 consecutive hours or leaving a static image on and 150 hours of gaming in a few weeks and I never watched the news channel more than 3 hours in any given day. Every hour that banner is only on screen for 44 minute and 16 for commercials and then there's channeling flipping too. Yet you erased your problem, which seems worse than mine, in 10 minutes and mine is still there after 6 months.



PS-this is not a cheap plasma television so I also can't just go into this and not be concerned. My back up should I somehow decide against the plasma, is the Samsung 7150 LED. The 8000 is better but too expensive for an LED (for me) and I don't like the curve and its reviews are only marginally better than the 7150 which is about $700 less.

[floridaswamprat]

My burn in problem was created from the mute icon on my screen. When the mute is on, the icon appears but moves up and down along the side of the screen. Over four years, the icon has burned in due to it "repeating" the same pattern and "landing" on the same spots repeatedly. The burn is not that bad and is only visible on certain light colored screens (actually pretty rare). So, I would think that a network's static symbol could create much the same effect over time. But that is just my assumption.

[uncledougie]

I would not discount what Panasonic has told you, though this is the first I've heard of it, but it sound plausible. The absolute best reviews from C-Net and other sources went to the Panasonic and Pioneer plasmas. But mostly they rated them as I recall playing movies, understandable because televised sources can vary so widely in consistency and quality, and warnings of burn in were always present. Ten years ago I bought a 60" Sony LCD because of that very reason. That is now used for a movies only living area space, and the primary set is an LED Panasonic 58" set, which has a terrific picture with U-Verse and the more casual movie watching. Once the Sony bulb finally bites the dust, that set will be replaced by another LED, probably a UHD set. Plasmas have gotten relatively inexpensive, but like my old bulb and fan Sony WEGA, that technology has been relegated to a dying breed of sets. The average television set has been said to be expected to last for eight years (sounds unreasonable but that's the way the market works nowadays), so enjoy them as much as you can while they last, but LED technology, properly tweaked, can look about as good as plasma, and if the screen is somewhat too vibrant, you can tone it down for a more filmlike presentation on a well designed set. I love my 58" Panny, which was a very good deal at Costco late last year, but there are excellent sets from Samsung, LG, Sharp, Sony and others. It's just sometimes hard to tell from showroom pictures that are way too vivid. Check out their remotes and adjust the screens to find a comfortable fit, and don't buy anything in haste. Research and hands on testing pay off.

[Chiefy]

I have a VT60 that occasionally gets IR that goes away within minutes, but an older non-3D Insignia (Samsung rebadged) model from early 2010 that I've never had any image retention whatsoever. I've fallen asleep MANY times for hours, and awoken to a DVD/Blu-ray menu and nothing. I guess I've been very lucky with that TV. I do worry a bit with the VT60 though, but make it a habit of running the screen wipe any time I get up.

[Veronica Mars]

Originally Posted by uncledougie

I would not discount what Panasonic has told you, though this is the first I've heard of it, but it sound plausible. The absolute best reviews from C-Net and other sources went to the Panasonic and Pioneer plasmas. But mostly they rated them as I recall playing movies, understandable because televised sources can vary so widely in consistency and quality, and warnings of burn in were always present. Ten years ago I bought a 60" Sony LCD because of that very reason. That is now used for a movies only living area space, and the primary set is an LED Panasonic 58" set, which has a terrific picture with U-Verse and the more casual movie watching. Once the Sony bulb finally bites the dust, that set will be replaced by another LED, probably a UHD set. Plasmas have gotten relatively inexpensive, but like my old bulb and fan Sony WEGA, that technology has been relegated to a dying breed of sets. The average television set has been said to be expected to last for eight years (sounds unreasonable but that's the way the market works nowadays), so enjoy them as much as you can while they last, but LED technology, properly tweaked, can look about as good as plasma, and if the screen is somewhat too vibrant, you can tone it down for a more filmlike presentation on a well designed set. I love my 58" Panny, which was a very good deal at Costco late last year, but there are excellent sets from Samsung, LG, Sharp, Sony and others. It's just sometimes hard to tell from showroom pictures that are way too vivid. Check out their remotes and adjust the screens to find a comfortable fit, and don't buy anything in haste. Research and hands on testing pay off.

I'm getting the impression from the posts that plasma isn't right for me and that's making me freak.

I can only explain again that my viewing habits for my living room tv won't and can't change. I don't have a room I can dedicate to just home theater viewing. This television will also be where we watch a lot of television and news and the television we watch when friends come over. I can't afford to throw away $3000. I have someone who offered me the 8500 for $2900 shipped. That's maxing me out. Can't afford a service plan too and I think only Best Buy offers one that covers burn in. It would cost me around $3700 to get the set and service plan and of course the plan ends right about the time you'd expect burn in from watching the same channel a lot over the years to happen.

The Samsung LED 7150 is my back up. Very solid reviews. I think I could get used to the more cartoonish look and even get used to the blacks not being so great. The living room is set up where no one is ever going to be too far to the side, but what I keep hearing is how bad the blur will be with sports. Anyone here know much about this and/or the Samsung 7150?

Thanks again everyone.

PS-still would love to hear from anyone on the 15% rule. There have to be plasma users out there who watch a lot of television on it as well. If not, then I'm definitely wrong for thinking a plasma will work. Again, however, I cannot have a casual home theater tv. If I get LED, that's going to be the set used for the vast majority of my blu-ray watching. Casual viewing is only in the bedroom and we are not buying films like Edge of Tomorrow to watch in our bedroom.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Veronica Mars

I'm getting the impression from the posts that plasma isn't right for me and that's making me freak.

I can only explain again that my viewing habits for my living room tv won't and can't change. I don't have a room I can dedicate to just home theater viewing. This television will also be where we watch a lot of television and news and the television we watch when friends come over. I can't afford to throw away $3000. I have someone who offered me the 8500 for $2900 shipped. That's maxing me out. Can't afford a service plan too and I think only Best Buy offers one that covers burn in. It would cost me around $3700 to get the set and service plan and of course the plan ends right about the time you'd expect burn in from watching the same channel a lot over the years to happen.

The Samsung LED 7150 is my back up. Very solid reviews. I think I could get used to the more cartoonish look and even get used to the blacks not being so great. The living room is set up where no one is ever going to be too far to the side, but what I keep hearing is how bad the blur will be with sports. Anyone here know much about this and/or the Samsung 7150?

Thanks again everyone.

PS-still would love to hear from anyone on the 15% rule. There have to be plasma users out there who watch a lot of television on it as well. If not, then I'm definitely wrong for thinking a plasma will work. Again, however, I cannot have a casual home theater tv. If I get LED, that's going to be the set used for the vast majority of my blu-ray watching. Casual viewing is only in the bedroom and we are not buying films like Edge of Tomorrow to watch in our bedroom.

Plasmas may or may not be for you, there is no reason to freak about it. I vastly prefer plasma to lcd, but have recommend many (friends and people online) go for an lcd instead for various reasons instead of a plasma. The fact that you said that though,a nd that you seem to primarily concerned with pq suggests you do want a plasma. To me the potential risk of burn in is a risk I would be happy to make (though with my viewing habits so unlikely it isn't even worth considering).

As for the 15% rule I can't say (I wish I could help but alas I can only speculate). I would speculate that it does sound like a made up company line to try put emphasis the risk for IR/burn in that does exist to consumers who know nothing about the different techs. Usually I would be skeptical about this but Panasonic has never been able to figure out how to effectivly sell what where the best displays on the market so in terms of marketing I give them zero credit.

I can see why they say that, but why should the static logo be any different then a game hud and I have never had an issue and have gone on huge gaming stints (over 80 hours of Dark Souls in two weeks ). BTW, you didn't have your contrast cranked up overly high did you? If you set it to high, not only will image quality suffer but IR will increase to problematic levels with nearly any plasma (but you shouldn't have your contrast so high to begin with so a moot point to me).

LCD's can look very good. Try and look at some FALD sets, sets like the Sharp Elite show that they can compete with plasmas excluding viewing angles (just not at the same price point). Personally though the killing point for me with lcd's has been screen uniformity and there motion.

Also, how long do you expect to have this tv set at the very least? If you plan on 5+ years and are still worried about burn in it may be worthwhile seeing if you can hunt down the much cheaper st60 (or lower end samsung plasma). Not sure about what size tv your after but amazon has the f8500 60" for $2400. How far away from the tv do you sit?

[Veronica Mars]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Plasmas may or may not be for you, there is no reason to freak about it. I vastly prefer plasma to lcd, but have recommend many (friends and people online) go for an lcd instead for various reasons instead of a plasma. The fact that you said that though,a nd that you seem to primarily concerned with pq suggests you do want a plasma. To me the potential risk of burn in is a risk I would be happy to make (though with my viewing habits so unlikely it isn't even worth considering).

As for the 15% rule I can't say (I wish I could help but alas I can only speculate). I would speculate that it does sound like a made up company line to try put emphasis the risk for IR/burn in that does exist to consumers who know nothing about the different techs. Usually I would be skeptical about this but Panasonic has never been able to figure out how to effectivly sell what where the best displays on the market so in terms of marketing I give them zero credit.

I can see why they say that, but why should the static logo be any different then a game hud and I have never had an issue and have gone on huge gaming stints (over 80 hours of Dark Souls in two weeks ). BTW, you didn't have your contrast cranked up overly high did you? If you set it to high, not only will image quality suffer but IR will increase to problematic levels with nearly any plasma (but you shouldn't have your contrast so high to begin with so a moot point to me).

LCD's can look very good. Try and look at some FALD sets, sets like the Sharp Elite show that they can compete with plasmas excluding viewing angles (just not at the same price point). Personally though the killing point for me with lcd's has been screen uniformity and there motion.

Also, how long do you expect to have this tv set at the very least? If you plan on 5+ years and are still worried about burn in it may be worthwhile seeing if you can hunt down the much cheaper st60 (or lower end samsung plasma). Not sure about what size tv your after but amazon has the f8500 60" for $2400. How far away from the tv do you sit?

See, this entire debate has to revolve around one thing. My viewing habits. There hasn't been on plasma poster yet who's posted in here that they watch much television. We watch it A LOT. If that is a big factor or what probably caused my problem, I have to weight that very heavily.

I'm looking for the tv to last 7-10 years.

What is FALD? What do you think of my current back up, the Samsung 65" 7150?

The only lower end plasma has no reflective filter at all. Nothing...nada...zip. Even my entry level 58" inch plasma for 2009 has one. Having a mirror in my living room would bother me much more than viewing angles not being great like plasmas. Believe me, the other Samsung is only $1300, if they had added nothing to that set but a filter, I would just buy it (even with the pentile display).

Contrast is only at 67. I'm seated around 10-11 feet away and the closest chair/loveseat on the side is around 4 1/2-5 feet away from the stand, so there really isn't terrible, terrible side viewing to worry about. Obviously it's not plasma.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by Veronica Mars

See, this entire debate has to revolve around one thing. My viewing habits. There hasn't been on plasma poster yet who's posted in here that they watch much television. We watch it A LOT. If that is a big factor or what probably caused my problem, I have to weight that very heavily.

Of course, i'm sorry I can't help you here though as my tv hasn't even been connected to a tv signal.

I'm looking for the tv to last 7-10 years.

I would honestly be starting to decrease that along with your current tv budget with uhd tv very likely becoming the norm in around 5ish years. 7 years sounds more reasonable to me, 10 years however will leave even the best tv's of today looking sub par (assuming that tech improves as much as it did in the last 10 years). Then again giving your viewing distance unless UHD goes beyond a higher resolution (which we hope it does, but only the resolution is confirmed currently) it will be useless for the screen sizes you seem to be looking at given your viewing distance.

What is FALD? What do you think of my current back up, the Samsung 65" 7150?

fald = full array local dimming. The newer samsung lcd's I have seen impressed me for lcd's, but I wouldn't buy one for myself. The motion was the real killer for me still. I haven't spent a large amount of time with them though or done any critical viewing with them as the motion alone was enough for me to look elsewhere. Also I should say I can't recall exactly which models I saw, but they have made notable strides in the last few years. However my priority was only the picture quality in a dark room and thus they where not the best option for me. I was planning on checking out the lg oled again soon (not to purchase, just out of interest) so I may see if they have this lcd in stock and give it a/another look. If you want to keep your spending levels down a little more the st60 if you can still find one is essentially the best bang for your buck tv around (not sure what stock is like in America though, the st60 is gone where I live where the vt60 can still be found). Worth having a look around for though I fell.

The only lower end plasma has no reflective filter at all. Nothing...nada...zip. Even my entry level 58" inch plasma for 2009 has one. Having a mirror in my living room would bother me much more than viewing angles not being great like plasmas. Believe me, the other Samsung is only $1300, if they had added nothing to that set but a filter, I would just buy it (even with the pentile display).

Once again the filter is of minimal (meaning no) importance to me (I always watch in a dark room [as in pitch black]) but I understand the problem.

Contrast is only at 67. I'm seated around 10-11 feet away and the closest chair/loveseat on the side is around 4 1/2-5 feet away from the stand, so there really isn't terrible, terrible side viewing to worry about. Obviously it's not plasma.

At that distance you deff want to go at least for 65" imho regardless of what tech you decide on. the thx recommended viewing distance for a 65" is actually only a bit over 7 foot.

Answers in bold. I want to make sure you understand that I am not a professional and don't want to present myself as one. I am 'just' an enthusiast. Most importantly though remember to do as much research as you can (even if it takes a month or more to decide on what to get). When you are looking to spend the kind of money you are, you should really do everything you can to ensure you are happy with your purchase.

[Veronica Mars]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Answers in bold. I want to make sure you understand that I am not a professional and don't want to present myself as one. I am 'just' an enthusiast. Most importantly though remember to do as much research as you can (even if it takes a month or more to decide on what to get). When you are looking to spend the kind of money you are, you should really do everything you can to ensure you are happy with your purchase.

I appreciate the the help. I really do.

The Samsung that does the local dimming is just not something that I can do. The 2013 model is flat and costs $3000 when you can find it. That's more than I'm willing to pay right now for LED. If I'm going to be somewhat disappointed, I'd rather do it for $2000. If I eventually end up with the plasma, I'll do it...but not for LED, as the reviews I've read state the overall difference in picture between the 7150 and the 8000 is only marginally better anyway. Oh, and the 2014 8000 models are all curved. UGH!

I really don't know how much I can really learn until I get someone in here who watches plasmas like I do. I really think a lot do. I don't think I'm a freak for watching a lot of television on one and needing it to have at least some basic filter just to not drive me totally nuts. Our living room tends to stay on the dark side, but, still, just plain glass with no filter in the daytime is going to drive me crazier than almost anything on the LED. However, at this point, I suppose the big question is motion for LED. Others have said this is the biggest problem too. I need to see it, I guess. It's 240 and then they call it 960 effective, but I'm not sure how much of that number is just a gimmick. Then again, I had no idea Panasonic people would tell me they had the 15% rule (not that a 30% rule would make it any better).

[Far Out]

Originally Posted by Veronica Mars

I'm not sure what to think anymore. It's making me very nervous about buying this Samsung plasma.

What does everyone here think? Is Panasonic full of it? What about my burn in? I did not leave the channel on for hours in a row or paused. What person who even owns one plasma as their primary television can watch 85% of their content on channels with no static image at all?

Thanks!

Panasonic is telling you the truth.

Plasma burn-in definitely can be the result of cumulative usage - and is almost certainly the cause of your issue.

The plasma cells making up the pixels of your picture *do* get dimmer with usage. So having a white news channel logo on the screen for 5 years means that collection of logo shaped pixels will have the most 'wear', which will eventually show up as a visible contrasting shadow to the rest of the screen.

The more typical case than yours is when someone leaves daytime 4:3 TV running on a 16:9 ratio screen. Within a year or two, you can start to see the faint square of 'burn in' at the borders of the 4:3 image. Or on plasmas that have been used in waiting rooms or airports showing news channels with running tickers. For people that I know in this situation, I've tried getting them to run in stretch or zoomed modes so these burn in borders won't happen.

Even LCD screens can burn in the same way, though it's less well known.

My opinion is Panasonic is the least burnable, LG the most, and Samsung sits in between.

To make the logo shadow vanish now, you could build a static image with a reverse mask of it and 'age' the surrounding area for hundreds of hours. Some devices have a reverse image mode which you could also try.

As for the 15%/85%, some manufacturers will have a mode that shifts the image around slightly every so often to even out the wear pattern. In your case though, that mode would probably just mean your burn pattern would be a blurry blob instead of a distinct logo shape. That might be preferable?

One thing you could have done (and may still be able to do) is run the TV a lot dimmer. The burn rate is a function of time and brightness. Turning down the brightness can really slow down the burn. Most TV's are way, way too bright anyway.

[Veronica Mars]

Originally Posted by Far Out

Panasonic is telling you the truth.

Plasma burn-in definitely can be the result of cumulative usage - and is almost certainly the cause of your issue.

The plasma cells making up the pixels of your picture *do* get dimmer with usage. So having a white news channel logo on the screen for 5 years means that collection of logo shaped pixels will have the most 'wear', which will eventually show up as a visible contrasting shadow to the rest of the screen.

The more typical case than yours is when someone leaves daytime 4:3 TV running on a 16:9 ratio screen. Within a year or two, you can start to see the faint square of 'burn in' at the borders of the 4:3 image. Or on plasmas that have been used in waiting rooms or airports showing news channels with running tickers. For people that I know in this situation, I've tried getting them to run in stretch or zoomed modes so these burn in borders won't happen.

Even LCD screens can burn in the same way, though it's less well known.

My opinion is Panasonic is the least burnable, LG the most, and Samsung sits in between.

To make the logo shadow vanish now, you could build a static image with a reverse mask of it and 'age' the surrounding area for hundreds of hours. Some devices have a reverse image mode which you could also try.

As for the 15%/85%, some manufacturers will have a mode that shifts the image around slightly every so often to even out the wear pattern. In your case though, that mode would probably just mean your burn pattern would be a blurry blob instead of a distinct logo shape. That might be preferable?

One thing you could have done (and may still be able to do) is run the TV a lot dimmer. The burn rate is a function of time and brightness. Turning down the brightness can really slow down the burn. Most TV's are way, way too bright anyway.

Just to be clear, the logo wasn't on the screen for 5 years. It was a channel we watched consistently over the years. Like ESPN or ABC. I suppose it could have been any logo from any channel that got regular use over the years.

Again, I know most people prefer plasma and I prefer plasma, but whatever television I end up choosing, our viewing habits will not change. We don't want them to change. We don't abuse the television, we do however watch a good deal of television and almost all the channels have these logos now.

If cumulative effect is real, and I have no reason now to believe anything but that it does, it seems to me that we don't really have any choice but to get an LED for the living room, leaving a plasma in the bedroom and guestroom. We love our blu-rays, but we average 1-2 per week. That pales in comparison to our television viewing.

I just hope that I don't have to spend $3000 on an LED that's not even 4k.

PS-My Panny is equipped to move the pixels around and I didn't end up with a blob. Honestly, even with the "bad" burn-in, you really can only see it when the background is white or light blue. Most of the time, the other colors hide it. But when it's there, it's not like you have to look very closely to make out what is there. It's the long rectangle banner shape, words on the left aren't clear, but it's very easy to see the MSNBC letters.

The odd thing still, is that the MSNBC banner changes. I assume that's to help with the burn-in issue, because I've heard networks are aware of it. So it doesn't always say MSNBC on the side where we see it. You'd think that with the banner moving around itself and changing what's in there that the pixels would have had a tough time burning in one very clear image. But it did.

[JJ]

I watch a LOT of sports on my ZT60, but I always run the screen wipe when Im done (going to sleep) then shut it off the next morning when I wake up.

No permanent burn in to date, but I do get some fleeting IR.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by JJ

I just hope that I don't have to spend $3000 on an LED that's not even 4k.

PS-My Panny is equipped to move the pixels around and I didn't end up with a blob. Honestly, even with the "bad" burn-in, you really can only see it when the background is white or light blue. Most of the time, the other colors hide it. But when it's there, it's not like you have to look very closely to make out what is there. It's the long rectangle banner shape, words on the left aren't clear, but it's very easy to see the MSNBC letters.(

Sorry but I have to correct you, in terms of consumer gear you will never be buying 4k products. You will be buying uhd tv products (just like hd [1080p] is not the same as 2k [in terms of resolution and the numerous other standards in place]). UHD is currently not worth paying any premium for. Their is essentially no content and the current models are like the original hd tvs that where made redundant very quickly (the ones without hdmit etc). Furthermore the jump to uhd tv hopefully will have far more changes then dvd to blu-ray had (although the difference is almost certainly going to be less notable as we are starting to reach a point where the possible improvements are increasingly decreasing) so the uhd tv's of today are going to age even less gracefully then the first hd tv's. However if one is on sale and it is the tv you want and you aren't paying a premium for it, it is then of course not a bad purchase at all. Also so called 'led' tv's are just lcd's with an led light source (which has its pros and cons).

As it isn't clear, you seem to own 3 plasmas currently. Is this so and does only one of them have this issue? What model plasma does have the issue? I ask as you may have a panel that is prone to IR and knowing this should be useful in making your decision as what to go for (2011ish was still hit and miss from what I recall after IR made a return when 3d came to be). Of course the big question, why are you looking to get a new tv? Is it just the IR (possibly burn in) or are their other reasons as well?

[JJ]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Sorry but I have to correct you, in terms of consumer gear you will never be buying 4k products. You will be buying uhd tv products (just like hd [1080p] is not the same as 2k [in terms of resolution and the numerous other standards in place]). UHD is currently not worth paying any premium for. Their is essentially no content and the current models are like the original hd tvs that where made redundant very quickly (the ones without hdmit etc). Furthermore the jump to uhd tv hopefully will have far more changes then dvd to blu-ray had (although the difference is almost certainly going to be less notable as we are starting to reach a point where the possible improvements are increasingly decreasing) so the uhd tv's of today are going to age even less gracefully then the first hd tv's. However if one is on sale and it is the tv you want and you aren't paying a premium for it, it is then of course not a bad purchase at all.

As it isn't clear, you seem to own 3 plasmas currently. Is this so and does only one of them have this issue? What model plasma does have the issue? I ask as you may have a panel that is prone to IR and knowing this should be useful in making your decision as what to go for (2011ish was still hit and miss from what I recall after IR made a return when 3d came to be). Of course the big question, why are you looking to get a new tv? Is it just the IR (possibly burn in) or are their other reasons as well?

Wait, I didn't say what you quoted me

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by JJ

Wait, I didn't say what you quoted me

lol, how on earth did that happen. I did quote you and my quote of yours and my response seems to be gone and replaced with the op's words quoted as you. Strange. All I was saying in response to you was essentially that I thought my leaving my tv on the scrolling bar once or twice a week for a few minutes was overkill, and was surprised to see you left yours on all night.

[Veronica Mars]

Originally Posted by Suntory_Times

Sorry but I have to correct you, in terms of consumer gear you will never be buying 4k products. You will be buying uhd tv products (just like hd [1080p] is not the same as 2k [in terms of resolution and the numerous other standards in place]). UHD is currently not worth paying any premium for. Their is essentially no content and the current models are like the original hd tvs that where made redundant very quickly (the ones without hdmit etc). Furthermore the jump to uhd tv hopefully will have far more changes then dvd to blu-ray had (although the difference is almost certainly going to be less notable as we are starting to reach a point where the possible improvements are increasingly decreasing) so the uhd tv's of today are going to age even less gracefully then the first hd tv's. However if one is on sale and it is the tv you want and you aren't paying a premium for it, it is then of course not a bad purchase at all. Also so called 'led' tv's are just lcd's with an led light source (which has its pros and cons).

As it isn't clear, you seem to own 3 plasmas currently. Is this so and does only one of them have this issue? What model plasma does have the issue? I ask as you may have a panel that is prone to IR and knowing this should be useful in making your decision as what to go for (2011ish was still hit and miss from what I recall after IR made a return when 3d came to be). Of course the big question, why are you looking to get a new tv? Is it just the IR (possibly burn in) or are their other reasons as well?

Well, first the guest room plasma gets very light use. The bedroom plasma is mostly for movies and it to doesn't get nearly as much use as the living room one with burn in. That's a Panny TCP58S1.

New TV for 2 reasons. Burn in and finally want to go from 58" inches to a bigger size like 64 or 65 inches.

I'm not paying $3000 right now for anything but the plasma, should I decide to risk it. Never had LED before, so I'll be as cautious as possible without being cheap. The 7150 gets strong reviews as far as LEDs go and can be had for $1900.

[Naiera]

I had a Pioneer plasma for four or five years and never gave burn in a thought. I don't recall ever seeing any image retention that didn't go away within minutes of the screen doing something else. Never used any wiping discs or anything; just used it however I damned wanted to.

My friend's been using it for almost two years after I moved and went into front projection.

[Veronica Mars]

Originally Posted by Naiera

I had a Pioneer plasma for four or five years and never gave burn in a thought. I don't recall ever seeing any image retention that didn't go away within minutes of the screen doing something else. Never used any wiping discs or anything; just used it however I damned wanted to.

My friend's been using it for almost two years after I moved and went into front projection.

Yes, but how much television did you watch? If you watched a lot, as we do, then you might have a different story to tell because pretty much every channel has logos and/banners now.