# Do LCD Monitors get more susceptible to image persistence as they age? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 6, 2016, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-lcd-monitors-get-more-susceptible-to-image-persistence-as-they-age/765161 "2016-09-06T01:40:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2016, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-lcd-monitors-get-more-susceptible-to-image-persistence-as-they-age/765161/1 "2016-09-06T01:40:56Z")
Note that I am talking about temporary [image persistence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_persistence) here that disappears when the monitor has had a few hours rest. The monitor in question is a Samsung SyncMaster 245BW, which is probably about 8 years old, and been used pretty continuously. I’ve recently started noting a few such artifacts which go away when the monitor is switched off overnight. They’re weird, though. Specifically - I don’t tend to move or resize my browser much - I just close or minimize it when not using it, or open something else on top of it, and it probably uses about 3/4 of the screen width when opened, and most of the height. The artifact I really notice is a “ghost” of the border right underneath the tab area, plus an outline of the left most tab border. I find it curious that, given that, I have to look really close to see an artifact of the taskbar if I hide it (I utterly HATE the “Autohide task bar option”, so the bar is always there, unless I go out of my way to hide it). It didn’t used to do this - an excuse to buy a new monitor? ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2016, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-lcd-monitors-get-more-susceptible-to-image-persistence-as-they-age/765161/2 "2016-09-06T01:49:48Z")
The LCD shutters can wear out, yes, producing slower-responding and unresponsive pixels. But “persistence” in the sense of CRT or plasma burn, no. I’m not even sure that the wearout is due to continuous white/color value at that point or because of excessive level changes - literally worn out from changing phase, rather than stuck from always showing one value. New, good, big monitors are cheap. Knock yerself out. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2016, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-lcd-monitors-get-more-susceptible-to-image-persistence-as-they-age/765161/3 "2016-09-06T02:13:14Z")
The exact mechanism is not pinned down, but yes LCD shadowing can happen on some monitors. My mid tier 24" PC monitor with a static Windows taskbar is about 7 years old and has no shadowing at all so it’s not inevitable. > [@](#): > > Liquid crystals have a natural relaxed state. When a voltage is applied they rearrange themselves to block certain light waves. If left with the same voltage for an extended period of time (e.g. displaying a pointer or the Microsoft Windows Taskbar in one place), the liquid crystals can develop a tendency to stay in one position. This ever so slight tendency to stay arranged in one position can throw the requested color off by a slight degree, which causes the image to look like the traditional “burn-in” on phosphor based displays. In fact, the root cause of LCD image persistence is the same as phosphor burn-in, namely, non-uniform usage of the display’s pixels. > > The cause of this tendency is unclear. It might be due to accumulation of ionic impurities inside the LCD, electric charge building up near the electrodes,[1][2] parasitic capacitance,[3] or “a DC voltage component that occurs unavoidably in some display pixels owing to anisotropy in the dielectric constant of the liquid crystal”.[4] ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2016, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-lcd-monitors-get-more-susceptible-to-image-persistence-as-they-age/765161/4 "2016-09-06T02:16:07Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > The LCD shutters can wear out, yes, producing slower-responding and unresponsive pixels. > > But “persistence” in the sense of CRT or plasma burn, no. I’m not even sure that the wearout is due to continuous white/color value at that point or because of excessive level changes - literally worn out from changing phase, rather than stuck from always showing one value. > > New, good, big monitors are cheap. Knock yerself out. 🙂 What exactly do you refer to when you say LCD “shutters” with respect to a direct view LCD screen? ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2016, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-lcd-monitors-get-more-susceptible-to-image-persistence-as-they-age/765161/5 "2016-09-06T02:22:35Z")
> [@astro](#): > > The exact mechanism is not pinned down, but yes LCD shadowing can happen on some monitors. My mid tier 24" PC monitor with a static Windows taskbar is about 7 years old and has no shadowing at all so it’s not inevitable. Yeah, I know it happens. I just wondered if it was normal as a symptom of age - it’s reasonable that it would be. I was set to bump up from 24" to 28 or 30 anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a88e4f/32.png) [@Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_is_the_new_Analog)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2016, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-lcd-monitors-get-more-susceptible-to-image-persistence-as-they-age/765161/6 "2016-09-07T01:09:12Z")
Note that OLED displays - more popular in phones than desktop displays - have a reverse burn-in problem. The different colors “wear out” at different rates, so you can end up with what’s effectively an inverted image. I understand that there has been quite of a bit of improvement in the field since I was looking at them in my last life as a phone designer, so it might not be as big a deal any more. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2016, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-lcd-monitors-get-more-susceptible-to-image-persistence-as-they-age/765161/7 "2016-09-07T14:30:02Z")
> [@astro](#): > > What exactly do you refer to when you say LCD “shutters” with respect to a direct view LCD screen? Individual LCD cells. I might be using an antique term.