For optimum viewing quality a displays black should be adjusted to be proportional to the ambient light level.
As the sun rises the black level should be raised by increasing the brightness.
However if a display has an inherently high absolute black level then raising the ambient light level actually helps to makes blacks look blacker to our eyes. In an ideal situation the goal is to match the displays dynamic range to our eyes given the current amount of ambient light. In practice this gets a bit tricky as we don't know how much our eye's pupil is stepping-down (similar to the iris in a camera lens). One thing is for certain, is the other sources of light should be exponentially less bright as the pupil reaches full diameter. In a very dark room even the equipment LEDs can degrade the viewing enjoyment.
Is there a relationship between perceived black level and the rejection of ambient light by screen coatinga/filters? In other words is a screen with a narrow field-of-view better at rejecting ambient light (from other angles than nearly straight-on)? Does a narrow field of view help maintain daytime viewing black levels and keep the picture from being washed out?
That is the subject of endless arguments between plasma and LCD enthusiasts, because we don't understand what we are observing.
Most reviewers rate the Pioneer excellent in their commercial office space windowless bat-caves, while most everyone else prefers LCD’s (by a 15:1 ratio). Incredibly only Consumer Reports advises which type of display to purchase based upon ambient light levels. Even here they are not fair as the down-grade displays for having a narrow-field-of-view (FOV), but not for those that "wash-out" in a normal daylight room.
Progress is being made in reaching absolute black level now with the advent of local-dimming LCD (do not mistake these for global edge-dimming design such as in the new 2009 Samsung line).
Which brings me to the point the Blu-ray disc of the Blue Man Group (How to be a Megastar Live) The disc is on sale at Magnolia/Best Buy for $15. The entertaining concert was recorded at 16:9 24Hz and has outstanding picture quality. The image tests any displays resolution, color, contrast, shadow level and black level. For these image quality parameters, shadow-detail is the easiest to “get lost” as the ambient light level varies.
I watched the concert on the latest Kuro Elite 60” in the darkened environment at Magnolia then watched it again on a Samsung 55” 950 under similar conditions. The blacks on the Kuro Elite were washed-out grey from the ambient light. The blacks on the Samsung were far superior, but the shadow detail was initially lost. Simply increasing the brightness from 45 to 50 restored it so that all the minute detail of the audience was awesomely stable, clear and observable.
In conclusion narrow FOV is actually a benefit in maintaining picture fidelity as the screens filter passively rejects large amounts of ambient light. It's a great practical ultra-clear feature that nearly everyone (except reviewers) notices! Should not such clarity be acknowledged?
As the sun rises the black level should be raised by increasing the brightness.
However if a display has an inherently high absolute black level then raising the ambient light level actually helps to makes blacks look blacker to our eyes. In an ideal situation the goal is to match the displays dynamic range to our eyes given the current amount of ambient light. In practice this gets a bit tricky as we don't know how much our eye's pupil is stepping-down (similar to the iris in a camera lens). One thing is for certain, is the other sources of light should be exponentially less bright as the pupil reaches full diameter. In a very dark room even the equipment LEDs can degrade the viewing enjoyment.
Is there a relationship between perceived black level and the rejection of ambient light by screen coatinga/filters? In other words is a screen with a narrow field-of-view better at rejecting ambient light (from other angles than nearly straight-on)? Does a narrow field of view help maintain daytime viewing black levels and keep the picture from being washed out?
That is the subject of endless arguments between plasma and LCD enthusiasts, because we don't understand what we are observing.
Most reviewers rate the Pioneer excellent in their commercial office space windowless bat-caves, while most everyone else prefers LCD’s (by a 15:1 ratio). Incredibly only Consumer Reports advises which type of display to purchase based upon ambient light levels. Even here they are not fair as the down-grade displays for having a narrow-field-of-view (FOV), but not for those that "wash-out" in a normal daylight room.
Progress is being made in reaching absolute black level now with the advent of local-dimming LCD (do not mistake these for global edge-dimming design such as in the new 2009 Samsung line).
Which brings me to the point the Blu-ray disc of the Blue Man Group (How to be a Megastar Live) The disc is on sale at Magnolia/Best Buy for $15. The entertaining concert was recorded at 16:9 24Hz and has outstanding picture quality. The image tests any displays resolution, color, contrast, shadow level and black level. For these image quality parameters, shadow-detail is the easiest to “get lost” as the ambient light level varies.
I watched the concert on the latest Kuro Elite 60” in the darkened environment at Magnolia then watched it again on a Samsung 55” 950 under similar conditions. The blacks on the Kuro Elite were washed-out grey from the ambient light. The blacks on the Samsung were far superior, but the shadow detail was initially lost. Simply increasing the brightness from 45 to 50 restored it so that all the minute detail of the audience was awesomely stable, clear and observable.
In conclusion narrow FOV is actually a benefit in maintaining picture fidelity as the screens filter passively rejects large amounts of ambient light. It's a great practical ultra-clear feature that nearly everyone (except reviewers) notices! Should not such clarity be acknowledged?
