Need a 15.6" 1366 that doesnt cause eye strain

I need to replace my laptops LCD screen with one that minimizes strain as much as possible ..
After doing a bit of research, it seems that most laptops LCD screen are compatible, assuming they have the same connector/resolution/size, which most do.

My current monitor which is causing me horrible eye strain:
LP156WH4-TLP1
interface:
LVDS-40P1C6B-060A

Where/How can I find good recommendation of LCD screens?

 

What is causing the eye strain? Have you tried using Flux? It'll adjust the color temperature to make the image warmer (removes some of the blue), and reduces eye strain for a lot of users.

15" 1366x768 causes eye strain for me because the PPI is so low that everything is blurry.

 

Usually people complain of eyestrain because of too high a ppi that the fonts are too small to read. Plus 1366x768 screens are just horrible, awful, pathetic. They for some reason make that resolution screen as bottom of the barrel in quality, regardless of make or model. You usually have to upgrade to a 1600x900 or 1920x1080 screen to get quality attributes like high brightness and contrast and viewing angles.

 

Not all 1366x768 screens are horrendous, but the most horrendous screens also happen to be 1366x768 since that is by far the most common resolution and that used at the bottom end. My stepfather's 17" HP laptop has a 1366x768 screen and it is one of the best screens I have ever seen (aside from the resolution).

One thing that may be causing eye strain is the brightness level. The LED backlight flashes the LED's on and off quickly to give it different brightness levels. At low brightness levels some people can notice the flickering. But other than that and having to squint to use a DPI that is far too high for your eyes, I'm not sure what the problem can be....

 

I dont think thats the issue

My laptop doesnt appear to support cables that accepts higher resolution screens, just trying to find a descent screen with this resolution.

I think so too, there are allot of low grade cheap screens that OEM choose just to save on costs, and i think that there might be a descent lcd out there with that resolution.

Not sure, but currently i dont have issues with ALL LCDs, only this one is horrible,
it is matte surface, and looking closely at it i can see grainy look, light colors are too bright and shiny (and not saturated properly), dark colors are too bright(gray-ish), very low contrast between whites and blacks,,
Cause me burning sensation.

 

What laptop are we discussing here to begin with?

 

Have you tried adjusting the brightness/contrast settings? You should be able to clean up the crushing blacks and washed out whites by adjusting those.

 

Lenovo Essentials b590

Tried trough intel graphics properties, couldn't find any comfortable settings.

I am sorry for quick typing the last paragraph of my last post, so here it is again:

light colors are too bright and shiny (and not saturated properly), dark colors are too bright(gray-ish), very low contrast between whites and blacks,

 

Oh yeah that's a horror show, not a screen.

Why do you say it's not upgradeable, though? Even lower-end Lenovos that I normally don't tinker with should be upgradeable to a higher-resolution/higher quality panel without major hacking...

 

According to the hardware manual, it comes with 7 different screens, all of which are 1366px and uses the "LVDS-40P1C6B-060A" (LVDS 1 ch, 6-bit) interface, so going to a higher resolution would require using a different connection, like for example, there is a 1920 screen with the interface "LVDS-40P2C6B-010E" (LVDS 2 ch, 6-bit), and i am guessing that the same screen cable would not work with both interfaces ..

 

I believe that you're correct, but swapping the LCD cable isn't a big deal if one is available for a proper upgrade.

 

I am hoping to find a descent 15.6", not really that eager to get higher resolution screen, and possibly dealing with DPI issues in windows.

I guess i am looking for ~500:1 contrast, 200cd/m2 brightness, glossy .. or something ..

 

Good luck with that one, seriously.

I have yet to see a 15.6" HD panel which is not utter garbage.

 

I don't know what advice you have received above regarding hardware, but you may want to at least try a possible software solution (for free, btw).

Not that this is recommended for accurate color work - but for eyestrain; it sure has a lot to offer. Make sure to enter your zip or postal code and possibly adjust the transition speed (60 minutes is my preference).

Give it a good try out: a week or more and possibly play with the settings (I use 4200K for night and 5500K for day, for example) and see if your eyes are not much more relaxed.

I am probably on a computer screen at least 18 hours a day if not 30+ hours straight sometimes and when color accuracy isn't needed; f.lux is running (and enabled) on my systems.


See:
f.lux: software to make your life better

 

@tilleroftheearth

tried it, but, it seems to decrease contrast between whites and blacks a little bit more, and there wasn't that much to begin with ,
Its a descent tool, will keep it installed and give it another try later.

Doing a bit of research, got more questions:

1. My screen have size:
Active Area : 344.232×193.536 mm (W×H)
Bezel Area : 350.0×197.1 mm (W×H)
Outline Dimension : 359.5×209.5 mm (W×H)

And there is another screen with size:
Active Area : 344.23×193.54 mm (W×H)
Bezel Area : 348.1×197.1 mm (W×H)
Outline Dimension : 359.3×209.5 mm (W×H)

The dimensions are slightly off, will it work , or do i need the exact same dimentions?


2. How bad is it for a screen to have Response Time = 35 (Typ.)(Tr/Td) (ms)
if i play very little games , will it be an issue?


3. My screen is LVDS-40P1C6B-060A
and another screen is LVDS-40P1C6B- 050A
and another screen is LVDS-40P1C6B- 040C
and another screen is LVDS-40P1C6B- 060G
What is the difference? , will they work ?

 

hhhd1,

Just curious, did you try f.lux for a few minutes or a week or more?

 

Just few minutes actually, ..

The monitor gives me quick strain, so I chose to stay away from it for a few days, the screen is so bad that i dont think it would help that much ...

 

I've seen nice 1366x768 screens with great colors, contrasts and blacks, however for every good 768p screen I see, I also see three bad ones.

 

can somebody please explain to me what eye strain is in this context...?

 

Please specify which 15" HD screen (heck any size HD screen - 1366x768) that is considered "good" even and I'll give you a cookie, heck a bag of cookies. I have not seen a single one that isn't either horribly washed out, suffer screen door, tunnel vision viewing angles, horrible contrast, bad backlight bleed, low brightness, and usually at least two of those.

 

Just want to suggest that a few minutes worth of testing is not worth anything in this context.

Let your eyes rest as long as you want away from this screen, but at least give this a real try.

Lower contrast is more relaxing, along with less (absolute) brightness of the panel.

I gave this at least a week before I decided to install it on all the systems I use directly. What convinced me most was how quickly looking at a 'blue' tinted screen (my client's low end monitors or even my color calibrated setups) would make my eyes water and dry out at the same time.

Again; use the controls to manage the night and day 'defaults' for your own preference (because this is all it is at this point). I use 4200K and 5500K (night/day) to warm up the image enough without causing the screen to look too red/orangey for my taste. You may be able to tolerate more warmth or less; adjust accordingly but give it a good try (more than a few days).

I also (last decade or more) always dim the display I'm using to ~100 cd/m2 or less (depending on the quality of the panel) - this too helps with eye fatigue. Along with f.lux, I am once again able to work for as long as I want on a computer screen instead of needing multiple breaks (with no real relief) in between.


For someone asking about what is eye strain in this context: some panels for some people are extremely aggravating to their eyes. I don't think f.lux can combat the physical way the display works (as it is based on it's physical and electrical design/construction). It can alleviate the 'too blue' that most displays output to look brighter however.

Using it in addition to setting the brightness at a sane level helps to keep our eyes healthy because the balance of the light spectrum is more like looking away from the sun, rather than right into it.

 

He's probably talking that reading small text strains his eyes, hence why he wants a lower resolution.

 

I get burning sensation and discomfort from looking at this monitor specifically, i use other 15.6" 1366px screens, which are also bad quality , but dont cause such sensation.

True also, i prefer this resolution for this screen size for easier reading without dealing with windows dpi settings.

 

Would be great if you can recommend something ?

i can live with bad viewing angles, have been dealing with them for as far as I can remember, and won't feel like i am missing anything.

 

I'm also looking for bad (vieweing) angels... any recommendations?

 

Using this search:
LCD Panel Advanced Search - Panelook.com

Those specs looks not that bad:



LP156WHA-SLL1
LP156WHA-SLL1 Datasheet download - Panelook.com
Contrast Ratio : 800 : 1 (Typ.) (Transmissive)
Display Color : 262K (6-bit)
Color Gamut : 45%
Response Time : 35 (Typ.)(Tr/Td) (ms)
Viewing Angle : 85/85/85/85 (Typ.)(CR≥10) (L/R/U/D)

This sounds good i think ..
IPS, contrast 800:1 , good viewing angles
could it be not as good as it looks ?
I am not a gamer, so not worrying about response times


AUO B156XTN02.4
AUO B156XTN02.4 Overview - Panelook.com
Surface : Antiglare, Hard coating (3H)
Brightness : 200 cd/m2 (Typ.)
Contrast Ratio : 400 : 1 (Typ.) (Transmissive)
Response Rime : 8 (Typ.)(Tr+Td) (ms)
Viewing Angle : 60/60/70/70 (Typ.)(CR≥10) (L/R/U/D)

N156BGE-L21
CHIMEI INNOLUX N156BGE-L21 Overview - Panelook.com
Contrast Ratio : 650 : 1 (Typ.) (Transmissive)
Response Rime : 3/8 (Typ.)(Tr/Td) (ms)
Viewing Angle : 45/45/20/45 (Typ.)(CR≥10) (L/R/U/D)


Opinions please?

 

The first one does look very good.

 

First one: 45% color gamut? Sheesh, might as well be grayscale, and 35ms response, and 35ms response time? Hope you don't plan on gaming because anything above 30fps will be ghosting

Second one: Low brightness and contrast and meh viewing angles, decent response

Third one: Low brightness, good response, but tunnel vision viewing angles //cringe//

Of the 3 I'd choose the second one.

 

It is important to note the percent of what color gamut. Here they are talking about 45% of the CIE 1931 color space, which means that the monitor displays 45% of all visible colors. It is pretty much as good as you can get on any LCD monitor.

 

Good nutrition and rest: Not enough of either.

After that, screen brightness in a dim room. Balance the light and the fatigue should subside.

 

They all refer to the same gamut as the reported spec. 45% is horrendous. It's 262k 6-bit panel like the rest.

Beamed from my G2 Tricorder