CSI: BudapestBudapest: 2017-12-21 13:05
Buenos Aires: 2017-12-21 09:05
Praha: 2017-12-21 13:05

I gave a second chance for The War of the Pixels, to roll up the problem.

First, I didn't plan to throw out the money, neither get astigmatism on the long run.
Second, peace is better.
Third, as the well known fact, I still like to examine the events - to know what, why and how happened.
During its course the dealer sent me the specification of the manufacturer, the responsibility they accept for the bright pixel errors:

Inspection ItemCriteria
R.G or B 1 dotMax 3 allowed
Adjacent 2 dots0
Minimum distance between bright dots>= 15mm

The second item shall be interesting: pixels next to each other cannot be erroneous. Aka: if there are one-two-three pixel errors randomly located on the whole screen, the manufacturer can just spread their arms and hide behind the back of the lawyers. But should 2 failed pixes touch each other - that's under warranty.

I put back the new screen knowing this, because browsing the below pictures put the notion into my 6th sense that I ain't no seeing only 1 wrong pixel - the scarlet is much more luminous than that. I couldn't prove it - until now.

Prepared myself and built a most intricate CSI laboratory session, then started to shoot the screen. Obviously not with screenshot. Clearly with a macro lens, with tripod leaning above the screen, because the historical, still used but ultimately dinosaur Nikon D200 body held in hands doesn't offer any useful ISO help.

The result is VIOLÁ!

So, there are two stuck red pixels in the 6th column. Which is still under the manufacturer's 3 allowed threshold - but since they're next to each other == factory failure, warranty replacement.

Which had happened, currently the screen is neither cut into half or bright red doublepixels would demand eye problems.

Alarms can be silenced, suspension released, waves settled down, sorry ladies but it seems that I remain as a boring IT person for now.

^ to the top