New CNET Article On Screen Reflections - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 15 Old 09-03-2011, 09:32 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
GeorgeAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,293
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 101
This is a helpful beginner article on how to deal with screen reflections from Geoffrey Morrison: http://howto.cnet.com/8301-11310_39-...ons/?tag=mncol .
GeorgeAB is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 15 Old 09-03-2011, 10:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NuSoardGraphite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 1,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 110
My hated enemy.

I would sacrifice a bit of PQ for better light handling capability because IMO it doesn't matter how good your TV's PQ if it can't handle light for $#!t. Reflections absolutely destroys any PQ advantages a glossy screen conveys and a significant amount of ambient light will reduce the apparent brightness as well. Give me Matte or give me death!

Stand tall and shake the heavens...
NuSoardGraphite is offline  
post #3 of 15 Old 09-03-2011, 12:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by NuSoardGraphite View Post

My hated enemy.

I would sacrifice a bit of PQ for better light handling capability because IMO it doesn't matter how good your TV's PQ if it can't handle light for $#!t. Reflections absolutely destroys any PQ advantages a glossy screen conveys and a significant amount of ambient light will reduce the apparent brightness as well. Give me Matte or give me death!

Matte screens have horrible glare issues compared to newer glossy screens with more advanced coatings.

Early glossy screens were terrible, but I would not buy a matte screen any more after comparing the newest of each.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #4 of 15 Old 09-03-2011, 12:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NuSoardGraphite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 1,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Matte screens have horrible glare issues compared to newer glossy screens with more advanced coatings.

Early glossy screens were terrible, but I would not buy a matte screen any more after comparing the newest of each.

I have yet to see a glossy screen that can handle direct light and reflections better than a matte screen. Granted, I haven't really checked out any of the 2011 models, but the 2009 and 2010 models I have looked at, glossy performed far worse than matte when it came to direct light and reflection.

Glossy screens are like a mirror. I really don't like watching a movie with a dark scene and seeing a reflection of myself and my couch in the movie. It destroys the immersion factor for me.

I never have that problem with a matte screen.

Stand tall and shake the heavens...
NuSoardGraphite is offline  
post #5 of 15 Old 09-03-2011, 01:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 226
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...5&postcount=27

This is not even one of the screens I would consider to have a "good" glossy coating. (it's an older set, and Sony's high-end glass screens are far better - at least last year's were)
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #6 of 15 Old 09-03-2011, 04:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NuSoardGraphite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 1,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...5&postcount=27

This is not even one of the screens I would consider to have a "good" glossy coating. (it's an older set, and Sony's high-end glass screens are far better - at least last year's were)

The Samsung is better than the Sharp, that's true. However the near-perfect reflection of your window seen in the shadow of the wings of that creature in Avatar is still unacceptable in my eyes. My own matte screen LCD (a Samsung. It is an A530) would handle that like a champ. You would not see a reflection of the window at all, merely a dull spot of light on the screen. And that's only if the scene is almost totally dark. Any sort of light on the screen at all will render the "bright spot" nigh invisible.

Stand tall and shake the heavens...
NuSoardGraphite is offline  
post #7 of 15 Old 09-03-2011, 05:11 PM
Advanced Member
 
irfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 16
i think the color neutrality requirement for bias lights is a little exaggerated. Mine is a rope light from Lowes, probably 3500K, and when the light is on or off I dont noticed a visible difference in perceived color difference.

It DOES give the image more noticible contrast, and I always watch movies with it on.
irfan is offline  
post #8 of 15 Old 09-04-2011, 01:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
specuvestor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Glossy gives better contrast.

I can understand why most of us don't like glossy, but what confounded me most is that buyers of high end displays ie I assume they are videophiles, complain about glossy and dark room watching.
specuvestor is offline  
post #9 of 15 Old 09-04-2011, 05:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dsinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor View Post

Glossy gives better contrast.

I can understand why most of us don't like glossy, but what confounded me most is that buyers of high end displays ie I assume they are videophiles, complain about glossy and dark room watching.

I suspect that a lot of the derogatory comments about the X5's are driven by TV "envy".
dsinger is offline  
post #10 of 15 Old 09-04-2011, 06:43 AM
AVS Special Member
 
serialmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor View Post

Glossy gives better contrast.

I can understand why most of us don't like glossy, but what confounded me most is that buyers of high end displays ie I assume they are videophiles, complain about glossy and dark room watching.

Glossy doesnt give any better contrast than semi or matte. There is no samsung with a glossy that has any better contrast ratio than a comparable version sony with a semi gloss. In fact some might argue the sony offers better black levels for similar model sets with difference being semi or glossy screens.

Most of the reason matte screens have less contrast in the models is because the models with matte have long been deemed low wnd models with lower contrast lcd screens nothing to do with the coating choice. To prove the point there was no difference at all to the contrast or black level between an ex500 with semi gloss screen or the hx700 that had the glossy screen on it. In fact it was argued that the gloss tinted screen had a hair less shadow detail but provided no more black level.

Gloss in most average homes show well to much glare which is annoying and eyestraining if you watch your set during the day. Although many people here watch only at night and can put thier lamps in location that doesnt glare there are way more people that do not post on forums that watch their tvs when there is sunlight and or lamp lighting that would and does reflect.

Most and I DO mean most people do not move a lamp or orient thier tv to avoid windows and lamps. On the contrary it is the job of the tv itself to be seen easily in the average home enviroment.

Settings
60EX500

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


60ex500 new version

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

serialmike is offline  
post #11 of 15 Old 09-04-2011, 07:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
specuvestor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Check out how matte or antireflection filters are done. When you manipulate light, the flip side is that output will inadvertably be affected. Contrast is not just about black level.

That is why high brightness LCD can be matte while plasma matte (which they tried for a short period) was a disaster. And why LED LCD look punchier when for marketing purpose they change to gloss to misled consumer that LED edge lit is better than CCFL, and hence sold at a premium.

They are glossy for a reason. It was not a casual mistake.
specuvestor is offline  
post #12 of 15 Old 09-04-2011, 08:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary McCoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: San Jose, California, USA
Posts: 6,249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 43
In actual fact, glossy and matte screens both reflect the same amount of light. The only difference is the angle at which the light is reflected. A glossy screen reflects a visible and clear image via "specular reflection", where there is but a single angle of reflection, equal to the angle of incidence. The matte screen reflects a diffused image - a lighted area - where there are a variety of angles of reflection. There are degrees of diffusion involved, glass screens with anti-glare treatments are all mildly suppressive of specular images at best - only plastic matte screens are true effective light diffusers.

I am among those people who prefer a full-on, matte screen with a heavy texture. I have a room that lacks total light control in daytime, and a spouse who sits on the opposite end of the same couch at night and works with papers and a reading lamp, or a laptop computer. (For her, watching video is a part-time experience, and I doubt if this will ever change.)

The heavy matte texture brings about a general lightening of the dark areas of the screen, due to the diffuse reflection of the matte screen surface. The television is tweeked for high ambient light in "standard" video mode, if I am watching alone and in the dark, I use the "movie" mode, a different calibration for darkness.

It's not really a serious compromise to have ambient light in the room. In fact, your pupils contract which tends to minimize any image distortions seen on screen, I find that my borderline 20/25 eyesight (slight astigmatism) gets a good clear image without glasses in ambient light, but I MUST wear the glasses in the dark or I lose a lot of detail. Your constricted pupils also darken the apparent black levels, which is the underlying principle of bias lighting. In this room, I don't have bias lighting - only light-colored walls and relatively high ambient lighting, which serves the same purpose of constricting your pupils.

In fact, it is in the dark that the compromised image from the matte screen texture is most visible, even with the HDTV tweeked for such viewing. The screen loses shadow detail when the emitted light is diffused, and your pupils wide open. But most often, it's me alone, watching just "one more show" wearing wireless headphones, after the wife has gone to bed. It's typically a non-critical viewing of both HD and SD TV shows on one of two DVRs, never a Blu-Ray or even a DVD, both of which I prefer to watch with surround sound during the day, and with the wife present.

We are actually talking about a lifestyle choice here - and what fits my lifestyle and works best in my home is a bright LCD with a full on matte screen. This HDTV and my simple 5.1 sound (or headphones) is what I use for 95+% of my viewing. In another part of my home I have a Home Theater with front projector and 100-inch screen and 7.1 channel surround sound. It sees relatively little use nowadays - although for a few years you would find me sitting there alone in the dark, revlling in the huge clear images and the breathtaking reference-level sound.

Truthfully, most of the time I'd rather be in the company of spouse or friends in the family room, watching the 46-inch HDTV with the vanilla 5.1 sound, and even that typically set 10db below reference volume level. It beats being a lonely video geek, sitting in the dark.

Gary McCoy
The United States Constitution ©1791. All Rights Reserved.

Gary McCoy is offline  
post #13 of 15 Old 09-04-2011, 08:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Chronoptimist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 226
Quote:
Originally Posted by serialmike View Post

Glossy doesnt give any better contrast than semi or matte. There is no samsung with a glossy that has any better contrast ratio than a comparable version sony with a semi gloss. In fact some might argue the sony offers better black levels for similar model sets with difference being semi or glossy screens.

Most of the reason matte screens have less contrast in the models is because the models with matte have long been deemed low wnd models with lower contrast lcd screens nothing to do with the coating choice.

Matte screens are far flower contrast than glossy screens. Matte screens work by diffusing any light that hits the panel, which creates significant glare and reduces contrast considerably.

In a pitch-black room there should be no difference in contrast (though the image is somewhat less sharp due to the diffusion) but as soon as there is any ambient light, a matte screen starts losing contrast.

I have a couple of Sony LCDs here that are the same size, a high end HX900 and a lower end one, EX400 I think? The image completely washes out from glare and requires the backlight to be turned up much higher during the daytime on the matte EX400. (similar viewing environments)

The HX900 image stays high contrast (black still looks black) the backlight does not need set as high, and reflections are far less of an issue.

While reflections are sharper, it is far easier to remove their effects by moving where you're sitting slightly, and. Even when there are reflections on the screen. They are less distracting than the huge diffused reflections and glare you get on a matte screen.

A matte LCD is nowhere near as bad as a plasma in the daytime though, those things are just unwatchable.
Chronoptimist is offline  
post #14 of 15 Old 09-04-2011, 09:43 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
GeorgeAB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,293
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 101
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) produced a helpful graphic depiction of three categories of flat panel screen reflections. They no longer have it on their web site, but it's available in the body of this article: 'The Importance of Viewing Environment Conditions In a Reference Display System.' It reveals effectively how any ambient light originating from in front of a video screen will contaminate the image by degrees. The best anyone can do is manage the effect of room lighting to produce the least interference, while prioritizing conflicting lifestyle issues. Anti-reflective screen treatments, and/or LCD versus plasma display selection, appeal to different users. Glossy screens deliver the best picture quality, producing no interference of their own, when viewing environment conditions are sufficiently controlled according to video industry recommended practice.
GeorgeAB is offline  
post #15 of 15 Old 09-05-2011, 12:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
hughh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Arlington TX
Posts: 2,194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by specuvestor View Post

Check out how matte or antireflection filters are done. When you manipulate light, the flip side is that output will inadvertably be affected. Contrast is not just about black level.

That is why high brightness LCD can be matte while plasma matte (which they tried for a short period) was a disaster. And why LED LCD look punchier when for marketing purpose they change to gloss to misled consumer that LED edge lit is better than CCFL, and hence sold at a premium.

They are glossy for a reason. It was not a casual mistake.

Chou said it will still be difficult for prices of LED TVs to stand at a similar level as those of CCFL TVs in 2012, because the end price of LED TVs in 2011 is 30-40% higher than that of CCFL TVs. So it is possible for LED TVs to still have a 20% price difference from CCFL models in 2012, he said.
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20110905PD201.html
hughh is offline  
Reply OLED Technology and Flat Panels General

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off