View Poll Results: Screen Finish
Matte (non-gloss) no reflections; anti-glare screen
17
73.91%
Glossy (shiney) has reflections; has glare
6
26.09%
Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll
Glossy TV & notebook screens! Welcome back to 1985!
11-29-2007, 12:53 PM
#1
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Glossy TV & notebook screens! Welcome back to 1985!
WTF is wrong with TV and notebook computer manufacturers. I went into best buy yesterday and looked around for awhile and came to the conclusion.
TV technology has taken some major steps BACKWARDS! I'd say to 1985!
A lot of the LCD TVs have glossy screens, they look like crap. Same with the projection ones that had it. I could see myself and all of the lights in the back of the bestbuy. REALLY annoying; I want to watch TV not myself/room reflecting off of the TV.
Lets now the states reasons as to why they are better
*Enhanced blacks
*Vivid colors
What they leave out is the screen causes washed out sub contrast (shadow details) and overly saturated inaccurate colors.
So the glossy screen is there to hide the faults of the technology you purchased. Meanwhile adding ANOTHER major WORSE fault in; screen reflections. What could me more distracting/take away form the picture than having a mirror finish on the TV. I'm also going to take a stab as that those glossy screens are required to get good side viewing angles for LCD/RPTV.
Glossy screens are a MAJOR step backwards; the only people who seems to like them are IMO newbie A/V people who state they don't see the reflections (which is a lie; unless their TV is in room with no windows). They bought the screen because it looked cool and all shiny; these people care more about what the TV looks like than it's picture quality.
Reflections off of ANY screen is an annoyance not a feature enhancement. No professional series display has a glossy screen. ALL have anti-glare screens.
I mean even look at the glare off of this Ibook. It's horrible! Some of the TVs I looked at in BB were like mirrors worse than this iBook. This ibook would be totally unusable outside...
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MFaswULM9u0&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MFaswULM9u0&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Notebook with the "glossy" screen!
Look at all of the detail you can see in this reflection on the glossy screen vs. the matte.
TVs with the glossy screen installed...
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7oXsHUBE8dc&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7oXsHUBE8dc&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sddxz4U__zg&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sddxz4U__zg&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
I do find it interesting that Plasmas (which are inherently glossy from the glass screen and have the best picture quality of flat panels made today) are working to be NON-glossy. While all the sub-par technologies LCD/RPTV technology are adding these "black enhancing" glossy screens when they had no glare/reflection problems before they added them.
Seems plasma people want a quality picture /w no glare/gloss while the LCD/RPTV just care that their TV is thin and looks cool on the wall. Early plasmas had high glare screens; they have been working hard to get rid of the glare to *improve* viewing of the TV.
Someone, please someone. Tell me why you like your glossy screens so you can look at yourself/room in the TV while your watching it? Tell me the advantage of having a reflective screen over a non-reflective one. Honestly who wants this junk?
In the end this "black enhancing technology" makes it so you have to watch your TV in your bat cave to not see any reflections... anyone with any daylight in the room with their TV/notebook is screwed and has to look at their room reflecting in their TV. Gee what an enhancement...
TV technology has taken some major steps BACKWARDS! I'd say to 1985!
A lot of the LCD TVs have glossy screens, they look like crap. Same with the projection ones that had it. I could see myself and all of the lights in the back of the bestbuy. REALLY annoying; I want to watch TV not myself/room reflecting off of the TV.
Lets now the states reasons as to why they are better
*Enhanced blacks
*Vivid colors
What they leave out is the screen causes washed out sub contrast (shadow details) and overly saturated inaccurate colors.
So the glossy screen is there to hide the faults of the technology you purchased. Meanwhile adding ANOTHER major WORSE fault in; screen reflections. What could me more distracting/take away form the picture than having a mirror finish on the TV. I'm also going to take a stab as that those glossy screens are required to get good side viewing angles for LCD/RPTV.
Glossy screens are a MAJOR step backwards; the only people who seems to like them are IMO newbie A/V people who state they don't see the reflections (which is a lie; unless their TV is in room with no windows). They bought the screen because it looked cool and all shiny; these people care more about what the TV looks like than it's picture quality.
Reflections off of ANY screen is an annoyance not a feature enhancement. No professional series display has a glossy screen. ALL have anti-glare screens.
I mean even look at the glare off of this Ibook. It's horrible! Some of the TVs I looked at in BB were like mirrors worse than this iBook. This ibook would be totally unusable outside...
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MFaswULM9u0&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MFaswULM9u0&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Notebook with the "glossy" screen!
Look at all of the detail you can see in this reflection on the glossy screen vs. the matte.
TVs with the glossy screen installed...
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7oXsHUBE8dc&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7oXsHUBE8dc&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sddxz4U__zg&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sddxz4U__zg&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
I do find it interesting that Plasmas (which are inherently glossy from the glass screen and have the best picture quality of flat panels made today) are working to be NON-glossy. While all the sub-par technologies LCD/RPTV technology are adding these "black enhancing" glossy screens when they had no glare/reflection problems before they added them.
Seems plasma people want a quality picture /w no glare/gloss while the LCD/RPTV just care that their TV is thin and looks cool on the wall. Early plasmas had high glare screens; they have been working hard to get rid of the glare to *improve* viewing of the TV.
Someone, please someone. Tell me why you like your glossy screens so you can look at yourself/room in the TV while your watching it? Tell me the advantage of having a reflective screen over a non-reflective one. Honestly who wants this junk?
In the end this "black enhancing technology" makes it so you have to watch your TV in your bat cave to not see any reflections... anyone with any daylight in the room with their TV/notebook is screwed and has to look at their room reflecting in their TV. Gee what an enhancement...
11-29-2007, 01:12 PM
#2
The Creator
I'm currently sitting at my kitchen counter on a non-glossy MacBook Pro, with a glossy MacBook sitting next to me. Low & Bright winter sun shining in right behind me. My MBP is pretty washed out, but usable. The MacBook looks like the screen is off theres so much glare.
My Pioneer plasma in the room has what I'd describe as a "semi-gloss" finish, and it is fighting the sun off just fine.
Summary: Glossy screens suck.
My Pioneer plasma in the room has what I'd describe as a "semi-gloss" finish, and it is fighting the sun off just fine.
Summary: Glossy screens suck.
11-29-2007, 01:15 PM
#3
Go Giants
Glossy = Better in dark room without light behind
11-29-2007, 01:17 PM
#4
The Creator
Originally Posted by Whiskers
Glossy = Better in dark room without light behind
For TV's, I disagree. As siggy pointed out, all that over-saturation crushes blacks... and movies without shadow detail are hardly movies at all.
The only exception would be some crap like Shrek... which I'm sure looks great with a glossy screen. heh
11-29-2007, 01:19 PM
#5
Go Giants
^^ Yea, I was referring to computer screens.
11-29-2007, 01:22 PM
#7
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Whiskers
^^ Yea, I was referring to computer screens.
Gotcha, ya...
But who owns a notebook and completely sits in a pitch black room to use it? Owning a portable computer that can only be used well in caves
And then no way a professional photographer would even touch a screen with that glossy coating on it. You couldn't even come close to calibrating it to NTSC standards.
Trending Topics
11-29-2007, 01:22 PM
#8
Benchwarmer
It sounds like you're on the fence. 
Well I won't speak to notebooks, but I'm typing this on a CRT with a "glossy" round screen and do not notice reflections. Are they there? Absolutely. I can see the rectangular fluorescent ceiling light reflected at the top of my screen if I focus on it. If I look at the text, all I see is text.
Now to my TV at home. When it is off it looks much classier than a matte finished TV. Fine, I know, "who watches a TV when it's off." So when it is on I do not notice reflected light. A matte screen reflects just as much light, it just disperses it. The eye tends to focus on the screen and ignore the reflection. Stand in front of a clean window and you will see what is on the other side, not your reflection--unless you are checking your teeth for spinach.
When you see reflection in the Best Buy TV's it is because you are looking for it. If you watched a TV program in a normally lit room, you would forget about any reflections you see in less than 30 seconds. I guarantee it.
With notebooks there is typically less action to follow, so your eye will probably gravitate more toward the reflections. 
Again, I can't speak to the advantages of the glossy finish on a notebook.
As for LCD settings, they are always terrible during the display mode in a store. They are rigged that way to distract customers away from other "duller" TV's. It also follows that if a matte screen diffuses light, you will see a sharper image from a glossy finish because it passes through the glass without "interruption". You don't purposely keep your eyeglasses cloudy for the same reason.
So that's my rebuttal. Basically, the human eye/brain trains itself to ignore the reflection. This is based on actual experience in my living room.
Well I won't speak to notebooks, but I'm typing this on a CRT with a "glossy" round screen and do not notice reflections. Are they there? Absolutely. I can see the rectangular fluorescent ceiling light reflected at the top of my screen if I focus on it. If I look at the text, all I see is text.
Now to my TV at home. When it is off it looks much classier than a matte finished TV. Fine, I know, "who watches a TV when it's off." So when it is on I do not notice reflected light. A matte screen reflects just as much light, it just disperses it. The eye tends to focus on the screen and ignore the reflection. Stand in front of a clean window and you will see what is on the other side, not your reflection--unless you are checking your teeth for spinach.
When you see reflection in the Best Buy TV's it is because you are looking for it. If you watched a TV program in a normally lit room, you would forget about any reflections you see in less than 30 seconds. I guarantee it.
With notebooks there is typically less action to follow, so your eye will probably gravitate more toward the reflections. Again, I can't speak to the advantages of the glossy finish on a notebook.As for LCD settings, they are always terrible during the display mode in a store. They are rigged that way to distract customers away from other "duller" TV's. It also follows that if a matte screen diffuses light, you will see a sharper image from a glossy finish because it passes through the glass without "interruption". You don't purposely keep your eyeglasses cloudy for the same reason.
So that's my rebuttal. Basically, the human eye/brain trains itself to ignore the reflection. This is based on actual experience in my living room.
11-29-2007, 01:27 PM
#9
Go Giants
Originally Posted by SiGGy
Gotcha, ya...
But who owns a notebook and completely sits in a pitch black room to use it? Owning a portable computer that can only be used well in caves
And then no way a professional photographer would even touch a screen with that glossy coating on it. You couldn't even come close to calibrating it to NTSC standards.
But who owns a notebook and completely sits in a pitch black room to use it? Owning a portable computer that can only be used well in caves
And then no way a professional photographer would even touch a screen with that glossy coating on it. You couldn't even come close to calibrating it to NTSC standards.
11-29-2007, 01:28 PM
#10
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
It sounds like you're on the fence.
Well I won't speak to notebooks, but I'm typing this on a CRT with a "glossy" round screen and do not notice reflections. Are they there? Absolutely. I can see the rectangular fluorescent ceiling light reflected at the top of my screen if I focus on it. If I look at the text, all I see is text.
Now to my TV at home. When it is off it looks much classier than a matte finished TV. Fine, I know, "who watches a TV when it's off." So when it is on I do not notice reflected light. A matte screen reflects just as much light, it just disperses it. The eye tends to focus on the screen and ignore the reflection. Stand in front of a clean window and you will see what is on the other side, not your reflection--unless you are checking your teeth for spinach.
When you see reflection in the Best Buy TV's it is because you are looking for it. If you watched a TV program in a normally lit room, you would forget about any reflections you see in less than 30 seconds. I guarantee it. With notebooks there is typically less action to follow, so your eye will probably gravitate more toward the reflections. Again, I can't speak to the advantages of the glossy finish on a notebook.
As for LCD settings, they are always terrible during the display mode in a store. They are rigged that way to distract customers away from other "duller" TV's. It also follows that if a matte screen diffuses light, you will see a sharper image from a glossy finish because it passes through the glass without "interruption". You don't purposely keep your eyeglasses cloudy for the same reason.
So that's my rebuttal. Basically, the human eye/brain trains itself to ignore the reflection. This is based on actual experience in my living room.
Well I won't speak to notebooks, but I'm typing this on a CRT with a "glossy" round screen and do not notice reflections. Are they there? Absolutely. I can see the rectangular fluorescent ceiling light reflected at the top of my screen if I focus on it. If I look at the text, all I see is text.
Now to my TV at home. When it is off it looks much classier than a matte finished TV. Fine, I know, "who watches a TV when it's off." So when it is on I do not notice reflected light. A matte screen reflects just as much light, it just disperses it. The eye tends to focus on the screen and ignore the reflection. Stand in front of a clean window and you will see what is on the other side, not your reflection--unless you are checking your teeth for spinach.
When you see reflection in the Best Buy TV's it is because you are looking for it. If you watched a TV program in a normally lit room, you would forget about any reflections you see in less than 30 seconds. I guarantee it.
With notebooks there is typically less action to follow, so your eye will probably gravitate more toward the reflections. Again, I can't speak to the advantages of the glossy finish on a notebook.As for LCD settings, they are always terrible during the display mode in a store. They are rigged that way to distract customers away from other "duller" TV's. It also follows that if a matte screen diffuses light, you will see a sharper image from a glossy finish because it passes through the glass without "interruption". You don't purposely keep your eyeglasses cloudy for the same reason.
So that's my rebuttal. Basically, the human eye/brain trains itself to ignore the reflection. This is based on actual experience in my living room.
I get your point but...
Matte = light dispersion in all directions.
Glossy = light reflection following it's angle
Watch the 1st video I posted above where you can see the windows. How is that not a distraction? Picture is totally ruined....
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7oXsHUBE8dc&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7oXsHUBE8dc&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Ignore that reflection? That reflection is bleeding over the image behind it; bad.
11-29-2007, 01:37 PM
#13
Team Owner
My 
I have a glossy screen LCD TV. Reflections are not something that has bothered me because every TV I've ever had has had a reflective screen. I tend to watch without bothersome light sources behind me just from previous TVs.
My experience with non-reflective LCD screens says that a strong light source behind is bad news no matter what.
The glossy screen does have better colors and is easier to clean.
I have a glossy screen LCD TV. Reflections are not something that has bothered me because every TV I've ever had has had a reflective screen. I tend to watch without bothersome light sources behind me just from previous TVs.
My experience with non-reflective LCD screens says that a strong light source behind is bad news no matter what.
The glossy screen does have better colors and is easier to clean.
11-29-2007, 01:47 PM
#14
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by svtmike
My
I have a glossy screen LCD TV. Reflections are not something that has bothered me because every TV I've ever had has had a reflective screen. I tend to watch without bothersome light sources behind me just from previous TVs.
My experience with non-reflective LCD screens says that a strong light source behind is bad news no matter what.
The glossy screen does have better colors and is easier to clean.
I have a glossy screen LCD TV. Reflections are not something that has bothered me because every TV I've ever had has had a reflective screen. I tend to watch without bothersome light sources behind me just from previous TVs.
My experience with non-reflective LCD screens says that a strong light source behind is bad news no matter what.
The glossy screen does have better colors and is easier to clean.
See this is interesting...
Glossy screens have *inaccurate* punchy colors and horrible shadow detail. They do not have better color; you have interpreted bright/punchy as to being better. When actually it's far more inaccurate and diminishes the overall picture quality.
You also lose a ton of shadow detail/sub contrast with the screen as well. Especially with a LCD in combination /w glossy screen. LCD is the worst of all the TV technologies in terms of color. Most LCD screens can only display 40% of the NTSC color chart. So yes, you are missing 60% of the color! And of the 40% you do see it's mostly inaccurate; especially out of the box...
Loss of Shadow Detail= your dark blacks to to very bright without a lot of gradient shades in the middle.
As an example; the top image is what a LCD/glossy screen does to the image. Below it shows what it should look like. You have interpreted your over saturated punchy image to be better. When it's clearly not when you can see a good side by side comparison like this.
Look at the loss of shadow detail in his hair....
Look at the trash cans...
Is the bright and punchy glossy screen still looking good?
Bottom line: Glossy screens are just a marketing tool to lure people in who like shiny things... they offer no enhancements to the picture what so ever. Although I do think they help side viewing for LCD/RPTV. It's not worth the trade-off. And everyone high-end PLASMA > high end LCD...
11-29-2007, 01:49 PM
#15
Registered but harmless
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Age: 59
Posts: 14,842
Received 1,102 Likes
on
763 Posts
Originally Posted by SiGGy
WTF is wrong with TV and notebook computer manufacturers. I went into best buy yesterday and looked around for awhile and came to the conclusion.
TV technology has taken some major steps BACKWARDS! I'd say to 1985!
TV technology has taken some major steps BACKWARDS! I'd say to 1985!
My HP laptop has a glossy glass screen that can get annoying in many areas since the house get lots of light in the daytime.
My LCD computer monitor at work is matte and there is no light source shining on it, so there's no reflection problem at all.
I don't understand the glossy flat TV screen concept either, since most people have the TVs in rooms that don't have blackout curtains.
11-29-2007, 02:05 PM
#16
Big Block go VROOOM!
The glossy fad is simply playing on a the human trait that we typically like images with as much contrast as possible. The problem with the glossy displays (as explained by Siggy and illustrated by his examples) is that manufacturers are basically passing off an optical illusion an something better or an improvement.
11-29-2007, 02:27 PM
#17
Team Owner
Short reply:
I see the pictures and no question the bottom ones are preferable.
It's not obvious that the only difference is matte vs. glossy. The pics seem to be of two different TVs, potentially different display technologies, and at least one of them seems to not have the brightness/contrast set anywhere close to optimally.
I see the pictures and no question the bottom ones are preferable.
It's not obvious that the only difference is matte vs. glossy. The pics seem to be of two different TVs, potentially different display technologies, and at least one of them seems to not have the brightness/contrast set anywhere close to optimally.
11-29-2007, 02:40 PM
#18
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by SiGGy
I get your point but...
Matte = light dispersion in all directions.
Glossy = light reflection following it's angle
Watch the 1st video I posted above where you can see the windows. How is that not a distraction? Picture is totally ruined....
Ignore that reflection? That reflection is bleeding over the image behind it; bad.
Matte = light dispersion in all directions.
Glossy = light reflection following it's angle
Watch the 1st video I posted above where you can see the windows. How is that not a distraction? Picture is totally ruined....
Ignore that reflection? That reflection is bleeding over the image behind it; bad.
I agree with you that old LCD's had bad black crush and poor shadow detail. But the newer sets have come a long way. I don't have any problem with either (that I'm aware of, of course). It does seem to be a silly fad with laptops because most of the time what you see is stationary (text or photos, etc.), but the picture on my LCD does please me more than it's plasma counterpart.
11-29-2007, 02:41 PM
#19
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by svtmike
Short reply:
I see the pictures and no question the bottom ones are preferable.
It's not obvious that the only difference is matte vs. glossy. The pics seem to be of two different TVs, potentially different display technologies, and at least one of them seems to not have the brightness/contrast set anywhere close to optimally.
I see the pictures and no question the bottom ones are preferable.
It's not obvious that the only difference is matte vs. glossy. The pics seem to be of two different TVs, potentially different display technologies, and at least one of them seems to not have the brightness/contrast set anywhere close to optimally.
Bottom is reference image direct from the disc not a TV or camera. Only one TV technology shown... LCD /w glossy screen "enhancement" screen. And the TV is setup correctly.
That is how far off the picture is...
11-29-2007, 02:43 PM
#20
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by Billiam
The glossy fad is simply playing on a the human trait that we typically like images with as much contrast as possible. The problem with the glossy displays (as explained by Siggy and illustrated by his examples) is that manufacturers are basically passing off an optical illusion an something better or an improvement.
11-29-2007, 02:44 PM
#21
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
I've got a problem with your visual examples. The first is in a massive room with light directly behind. This is not a typical household living room, and with that kind of space and direct light, a matte screen would be just as difficult to view. Instead of reflections of window you would see a whiteout glare. Secondly, in the Nicholson picture, the contrast is set too high and the color is washed out. This looks like the factory settings to me. You leave those color, contrast, and hue settings on the plasma and it will look like that too. Also it is more difficult to see details on a plasma in a bright room.
I agree with you that old LCD's had bad black crush and poor shadow detail. But the newer sets have come a long way. I don't have any problem with either (that I'm aware of, of course). It does seem to be a silly fad with laptops because most of the time what you see is stationary (text or photos, etc.), but the picture on my LCD does please me more than it's plasma counterpart.
I agree with you that old LCD's had bad black crush and poor shadow detail. But the newer sets have come a long way. I don't have any problem with either (that I'm aware of, of course). It does seem to be a silly fad with laptops because most of the time what you see is stationary (text or photos, etc.), but the picture on my LCD does please me more than it's plasma counterpart.
Set is ISF calibrated and wasn't adjusted between pictures... all pics are from the same calibration.
They still do have black crush and shadow detail problems. You leave out the fact that 99% of the LCDs can only display 40% of the NTSC color chart of all the TVs made today. I'm only aware of one that can do better than 60% and it's the Samsung LED back light model.
Not a typical room!?!?
Dude, unless your in the basement or your in a room with no windows. You NEED to have blackouts on the windows to get no reflections from a glossy screen. Room needs to be pitch black. Any ambient light will cause you to see a reflection; your only shimmer of hope is that what's being displayed on the screen is brighter than the reflection. But once a black scene comes up... you'll be watching yourself on your TV.
11-29-2007, 02:48 PM
#22
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
TV programs are optical illusions! The better the illusion, the better the picture, the better the display.
Having multiple reflections and over saturated colors/brightness doesn't help it meet the known standards. It in fact moves it further away from the goal of reproducing the video as it was recorded.
11-29-2007, 02:55 PM
#23
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by SiGGy
Set is ISF calibrated and wasn't adjusted between pictures... all pics are from the same calibration.
They still do have black crush and shadow detail problems. You leave out the fact that 99% of the LCDs can only display 40% of the NTSC color chart of all the TVs made today. I'm only aware of one that can do better than 60% and it's the Samsung LED back light model.
They still do have black crush and shadow detail problems. You leave out the fact that 99% of the LCDs can only display 40% of the NTSC color chart of all the TVs made today. I'm only aware of one that can do better than 60% and it's the Samsung LED back light model.
I won't argue your color chart data. I don't notice or miss it on my set vs. my old matte finish DLP. Maybe every matte finish I've ever seen had bad settings, but I doubt it.
One caveat: I had my set calibrated and I tweaked many of the settings (especially sharpness) to suit my taste, so it is possible that my taste sucks.
But there are also a bunch of LCD glossy videophiles on avsforum that would disagree with you.
11-29-2007, 02:55 PM
#24
Team Owner
Originally Posted by SiGGy
I'm only aware of one that can do better than 60% and it's the Samsung LED back light model.
11-29-2007, 03:00 PM
#25
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by SiGGy
Not a typical room!?!?
Dude, unless your in the basement or your in a room with no windows. You NEED to have blackouts on the windows to get no reflections from a glossy screen. Room needs to be pitch black. Any ambient light will cause you to see a reflection; your only shimmer of hope is that what's being displayed on the screen is brighter than the reflection. But once a black scene comes up... you'll be watching yourself on your TV.
Dude, unless your in the basement or your in a room with no windows. You NEED to have blackouts on the windows to get no reflections from a glossy screen. Room needs to be pitch black. Any ambient light will cause you to see a reflection; your only shimmer of hope is that what's being displayed on the screen is brighter than the reflection. But once a black scene comes up... you'll be watching yourself on your TV.
Once again, you've disregarded my entire premise that the human eye ignores normal reflection after a few seconds of viewing. I'm not an A.D.D. kid with coke bottle vision, and I'm telling you I don't notice my reflection regardless of night/day conditions.
11-29-2007, 03:04 PM
#26
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
So the only difference is a glossy screen? I know I can get my LCD to display an image like the bottom in every example. The brightness/backlight is set too high. There is no way the top image on my TV would be acceptable to me.
I won't argue your color chart data. I don't notice or miss it on my set vs. my old matte finish DLP. Maybe every matte finish I've ever seen had bad settings, but I doubt it.
One caveat: I had my set calibrated and I tweaked many of the settings (especially sharpness) to suit my taste, so it is possible that my taste sucks. But there are also a bunch of LCD glossy videophiles on avsforum that would disagree with you.
I won't argue your color chart data. I don't notice or miss it on my set vs. my old matte finish DLP. Maybe every matte finish I've ever seen had bad settings, but I doubt it.
One caveat: I had my set calibrated and I tweaked many of the settings (especially sharpness) to suit my taste, so it is possible that my taste sucks.
But there are also a bunch of LCD glossy videophiles on avsforum that would disagree with you.Probably same guys who believe their Samsung LED set is better than the new Kuro Plasmas. The samsung unit is good, but it's nowhere near being at Kuro levels.
These guys also brag about how deep black the blacks are on the Samsung when it's fed no signal... Which is real important. I sit around watching my TV with no signal all the time. The moment you apply any signal to the Samsung unit the contrast is no longer as black.
They leave out the problems with halos around text that show up because of the LED backlighting, contast ratio that randomly bounces around depending on the video content.
So ya if your talking about those guys... you couldn't convince them that looking at the actual movie being filmed in person has a better picture than their TV.
11-29-2007, 03:06 PM
#27
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
The room on your clip looks like a gymnasium with those high windows. Most living rooms don't have 10 foot high windows directly behind the viewer. Either way, a matte finish will be hard to see too.
Once again, you've disregarded my entire premise that the human eye ignores normal reflection after a few seconds of viewing. I'm not an A.D.D. kid with coke bottle vision, and I'm telling you I don't notice my reflection regardless of night/day conditions.
Once again, you've disregarded my entire premise that the human eye ignores normal reflection after a few seconds of viewing. I'm not an A.D.D. kid with coke bottle vision, and I'm telling you I don't notice my reflection regardless of night/day conditions.
Your eye does NOT ignore the issue...
That like saying you eventually won't see yourself and everything in the background of this photo
Your only glimmer of hope is whatever you put on the screen is bright enough to overpower it.
And the matte screen diffuses the light in all directions. It is by FAR more usable with any ambient light. They are not equal. Did you read soopas 1st post or did you ignore that? He said his glossy screen was unusable where his matte was usable in the same lighting. Same applys for TVs. Diffusing the light in all directions allows for the screen to be seen.
All of the sharp details in the reflections below are EXTREMELY annoying... there's a reason they made anti-reflective screens for CRTs. Because everyone got eyestrain problems from the reflections... Hell i can read the letters and numbers on the card board box from the reflection better than I see anything on the screen.
11-29-2007, 03:16 PM
#28
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by SiGGy
Probably same guys who believe their Samsung LED set is better than the new Kuro Plasmas. The samsung unit is good, but it's nowhere near being at Kuro levels.
These guys also brag about how deep black the blacks are on the Samsung when it's fed no signal... Which is real important. I sit around watching my TV with no signal all the time. The moment you apply any signal to the Samsung unit the contrast is no longer as black.
They leave out the problems with halos around text that show up because of the LED backlighting, contast ratio that randomly bounces around depending on the video content.
So ya if your talking about those guys... you couldn't convince them that looking at the actual movie being filmed in person has a better picture than their TV.
These guys also brag about how deep black the blacks are on the Samsung when it's fed no signal... Which is real important. I sit around watching my TV with no signal all the time. The moment you apply any signal to the Samsung unit the contrast is no longer as black.
They leave out the problems with halos around text that show up because of the LED backlighting, contast ratio that randomly bounces around depending on the video content.
So ya if your talking about those guys... you couldn't convince them that looking at the actual movie being filmed in person has a better picture than their TV.
I've got no halos or backlight issues, but I also keep the backlight pretty low and have a reasonably dark room most of the time. I have seen the issues you speak of on 2 year old Sonys.
I only mention the avs guys to show that stubbornness will line up behind anything.
11-29-2007, 03:17 PM
#29
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by svtmike
That's the one I've got, so maybe I'm just biased by having a really good LCD.
That's the best LCD TV to date! Ya you should be happy. I watched one for 30-40 minutes yesterday. While it does suffer somewhat from shadow detail problems. It's not nearly as bad as any other LCD I have seen. Huge improvement...
11-29-2007, 03:20 PM
#30
Benchwarmer
Originally Posted by SiGGy
Your eye does NOT ignore the issue...
That like saying you eventually won't see yourself and everything in the background of this photo
Your only glimmer of hope is whatever you put on the screen is bright enough to overpower it.
And the matte screen diffuses the light in all directions. It is by FAR more usable with any ambient light. They are not equal. Did you read soopas 1st post or did you ignore that? He said his glossy screen was unusable where his matte was usable in the same lighting. Same applys for TVs. Diffusing the light in all directions allows for the screen to be seen.
All of the sharp details in the reflections below are EXTREMELY annoying... there's a reason they made anti-reflective screens for CRTs. Because everyone got eyestrain problems from the reflections... Hell i can read the letters and numbers on the card board box from the reflection better than I see anything on the screen.
That like saying you eventually won't see yourself and everything in the background of this photo
Your only glimmer of hope is whatever you put on the screen is bright enough to overpower it.
And the matte screen diffuses the light in all directions. It is by FAR more usable with any ambient light. They are not equal. Did you read soopas 1st post or did you ignore that? He said his glossy screen was unusable where his matte was usable in the same lighting. Same applys for TVs. Diffusing the light in all directions allows for the screen to be seen.
All of the sharp details in the reflections below are EXTREMELY annoying... there's a reason they made anti-reflective screens for CRTs. Because everyone got eyestrain problems from the reflections... Hell i can read the letters and numbers on the card board box from the reflection better than I see anything on the screen.
If you look at a moving train through a clean glass window with light behind you will you focus on your own face or will you follow the individual cars of the train?
11-29-2007, 03:24 PM
#31
Go Giants
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
Did you read any of the multiple times I said I won't speak to laptops? This whole damn post is irrelevant. I agree with you on the laptop issue.
If you look at a moving train through a clean glass window with light behind you will you focus on your own face or will you follow the individual cars of the train?
If you look at a moving train through a clean glass window with light behind you will you focus on your own face or will you follow the individual cars of the train?
11-29-2007, 03:35 PM
#33
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
No, I'll grant you the Pioneer and Kuro plasmas are fantastic pictures. They are also, what triple the cost? IMO, apples to apples, I prefer an LCD and I prefer the 4665 to the 4661 (glossy vs. matte).
I've got no halos or backlight issues, but I also keep the backlight pretty low and have a reasonably dark room most of the time. I have seen the issues you speak of on 2 year old Sonys.
I only mention the avs guys to show that stubbornness will line up behind anything.
I've got no halos or backlight issues, but I also keep the backlight pretty low and have a reasonably dark room most of the time. I have seen the issues you speak of on 2 year old Sonys.
I only mention the avs guys to show that stubbornness will line up behind anything.
The halos I speak of only exist on the Samsung LED backlight LCDs. They exist because there are not enough LEDs for the backlighting. One LED might back light 2 square inches of screen. And if it's bright white lettering in that 2" it'll call for full brightness. There is no way to get rid of the halos. Well until they add more LEDs in... I'm sure the next version will be better. Seems most LCD manufacturers are going with LED back lighting. Expect to see more of it.
I can't argue with your last sentence.
So you have you tell me one enhancement the glossy screen gives us... tell me why it exists other than to sell people on it because it makes the screen look punchy?
The plain and simple answer is it was simple monkey see monkey do. One company added it to make their screen appear brighter than everyone else. So everyone else jumped on the bandwagon as well... Even though it's a major step backwards... Can you imagine trying to use your notebook with the glossy screen outside....
I'm starting to think you really haven't done your homework...
Triple? Nope... The Kuro is actually cheaper and 3" larger. And a better picture /w no glare problems boot.
A 60" Kuro can be had for about $5800 (someone in this thread paid $5500)
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....ci_sku=8483456
A 57" Samsung LED display is about $8000 (might be able to find this cheaper...)
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....=1184369167214
11-29-2007, 03:41 PM
#34
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
Did you read any of the multiple times I said I won't speak to laptops? This whole damn post is irrelevant. I agree with you on the laptop issue.
If you look at a moving train through a clean glass window with light behind you will you focus on your own face or will you follow the individual cars of the train?
If you look at a moving train through a clean glass window with light behind you will you focus on your own face or will you follow the individual cars of the train?
Your very defensive over the TV vs. notebook thing. But the screens are the same, there is in reality no difference between a TV and a notebook screen besides size. Both digital, both can have the glossy screen. Both are viewed for many hours at a time. Both are used in environments with ambient light.
Now, why the hell would I want a reflective TV screen? Why would I want to put ANY other image on my TV screen BUT the TV signal.
You haven't answered that. Why is the glossy better? It offers NO enhancements; it does however attempt to fix some of the LCDs short comings but ends up making things a lot worse with the reflections.
11-29-2007, 04:21 PM
#35
Benchwarmer
All of the lighting issues you have with the Samsungs seem to be due to too much backlight. I've got very discriminating eyes and find no halos at my settings. My TV is 46". Anything larger and I would get a plasma due to cost.
I have no notebook computer. If I did, I imagine it would be annoying to try to read text through a reflection. With the train example, you wouldn't see it through a dirty window (matte) either. Come on, you have to admit your eye would focus on the moving object behind the window instead of your reflection after 5 seconds.
The difference between TV and notebook is the viewing distance and the stuff you're looking at. A football game vs. text. Big difference between what the eye will follow and ignore. I'm not claiming glossy is better per se; I'm refuting your reasoning that the glossy sucks because of the reflection. I have experience with both; I'm telling you it is not an issue. svtmike, synth19, is350eater will all back me up here.
You will obviously not come to an informed conclusion until you watch a movie on a high-quality glossy LCD and the same movie on a matte screen. I've done both.
Why did I pick glossy? It is a better picture than the matte IMO, and reflections are not an issue. Whether it is a measureable scientific difference was irrelevant to me. It sounds like it would be important to you.
I have no notebook computer. If I did, I imagine it would be annoying to try to read text through a reflection. With the train example, you wouldn't see it through a dirty window (matte) either. Come on, you have to admit your eye would focus on the moving object behind the window instead of your reflection after 5 seconds.
The difference between TV and notebook is the viewing distance and the stuff you're looking at. A football game vs. text. Big difference between what the eye will follow and ignore. I'm not claiming glossy is better per se; I'm refuting your reasoning that the glossy sucks because of the reflection. I have experience with both; I'm telling you it is not an issue. svtmike, synth19, is350eater will all back me up here.
You will obviously not come to an informed conclusion until you watch a movie on a high-quality glossy LCD and the same movie on a matte screen. I've done both.
Why did I pick glossy? It is a better picture than the matte IMO, and reflections are not an issue. Whether it is a measureable scientific difference was irrelevant to me. It sounds like it would be important to you.
11-29-2007, 05:21 PM
#37
Team Owner
When I bought the Samsung, I bought it based on the picture quality that I could see -- the detail and the dynamic range of the colors. There was not a single TV in the store -- LCD or Plasma -- that measured up to what I perceived in the Samsung 81F.
Glossy vs. matte was not a factor in my decision. I could not be happier with the TV now that I have had it for a few months. the picture is clear and vivid in all lighting conditions. Text is incredibly crisp. The haloing effects that are so ballyhooed I don't even notice. It's no worse than minor blooming on a CRT, and it really doesn't bother me because generally it's most visible in the credits. No one has ever commented on it either -- I probably only notice it because I know that the TV has the LED backlights.
Disclaimer: I am not and do not claim to be a videophile, so don't take this as a videophile assessment. I was just the guy with the $5k to spend on a TV.
Glossy vs. matte was not a factor in my decision. I could not be happier with the TV now that I have had it for a few months. the picture is clear and vivid in all lighting conditions. Text is incredibly crisp. The haloing effects that are so ballyhooed I don't even notice. It's no worse than minor blooming on a CRT, and it really doesn't bother me because generally it's most visible in the credits. No one has ever commented on it either -- I probably only notice it because I know that the TV has the LED backlights.
Disclaimer: I am not and do not claim to be a videophile, so don't take this as a videophile assessment. I was just the guy with the $5k to spend on a TV.
11-29-2007, 05:41 PM
#38
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by IlliNorge
All of the lighting issues you have with the Samsungs seem to be due to too much backlight. I've got very discriminating eyes and find no halos at my settings. My TV is 46". Anything larger and I would get a plasma due to cost.
I have no notebook computer. If I did, I imagine it would be annoying to try to read text through a reflection. With the train example, you wouldn't see it through a dirty window (matte) either. Come on, you have to admit your eye would focus on the moving object behind the window instead of your reflection after 5 seconds.
The difference between TV and notebook is the viewing distance and the stuff you're looking at. A football game vs. text. Big difference between what the eye will follow and ignore. I'm not claiming glossy is better per se; I'm refuting your reasoning that the glossy sucks because of the reflection. I have experience with both; I'm telling you it is not an issue. svtmike, synth19, is350eater will all back me up here.
You will obviously not come to an informed conclusion until you watch a movie on a high-quality glossy LCD and the same movie on a matte screen. I've done both.
Why did I pick glossy? It is a better picture than the matte IMO, and reflections are not an issue. Whether it is a measureable scientific difference was irrelevant to me. It sounds like it would be important to you.
I have no notebook computer. If I did, I imagine it would be annoying to try to read text through a reflection. With the train example, you wouldn't see it through a dirty window (matte) either. Come on, you have to admit your eye would focus on the moving object behind the window instead of your reflection after 5 seconds.
The difference between TV and notebook is the viewing distance and the stuff you're looking at. A football game vs. text. Big difference between what the eye will follow and ignore. I'm not claiming glossy is better per se; I'm refuting your reasoning that the glossy sucks because of the reflection. I have experience with both; I'm telling you it is not an issue. svtmike, synth19, is350eater will all back me up here.
You will obviously not come to an informed conclusion until you watch a movie on a high-quality glossy LCD and the same movie on a matte screen. I've done both.
Why did I pick glossy? It is a better picture than the matte IMO, and reflections are not an issue. Whether it is a measureable scientific difference was irrelevant to me. It sounds like it would be important to you.
Glossy isn't better per se;
It is a better picture than matte IMO
Yet you can't tell me why it's a better picture. Nor can you tell me why any professional/high-end screen doesn't have a glossy screen. Reflecting images off the screen you are trying to view is a problem; not an enhancement.
How you don't find this distracting is beyond me...
Glossy
Anti-glare matte
How do you ignore that they spent years making CRT (tube) screens non-reflective and anti-glare to remove eye strain is confusing as well... All eye doctors agree that reflective surfaces cause eye strain.
It's like you think this is some new wave of technology that enhanced HD that has never existed before... this glare problem has existed since the TV was 1st born. They spent years trying to get rid of glare...
Lets read some quotes on what professionals think about glare; and WHY every display up until recent times has had anti-glare screens...
Your screen has a glass faceplate that reflects - into your eyes - light that originates behind you. Any reflected, bright object will interfere with your perception of the content of the display at the location where it is reflected.
Glare is a leading cause of eyestrain and other vision difficulties. Over illumination from lamps, overhead banks of lights, and sunlight streaming through windows can reflect onto a computer screen from various angles, "wash out" sections of your screen image, and reduce contrast. The muscles of your eye continually refocus to attempt to gain clarity. Such repetitive straining has its effects on the eye muscles.
Glare is a leading cause of eyestrain and other vision difficulties. Over illumination from lamps, overhead banks of lights, and sunlight streaming through windows can reflect onto a computer screen from various angles, "wash out" sections of your screen image, and reduce contrast. The muscles of your eye continually refocus to attempt to gain clarity. Such repetitive straining has its effects on the eye muscles.
You might have liked the 1980's and feel free to stay there.... me I'd rather be in the year 2007 with technology progressing forward not backwards... LCD just set itself back 50 years adopting the CRTs 1st set of problems...
Sorta sad no commercial TV technology to date has surpassed CRT in quality...
11-29-2007, 09:18 PM
#40
Benchwarmer
Those TV's are obviously turned off. With nothing playing, the eye is drawn to the reflection. I don't deny that my TV functions like a dark mirror when it is off. No still picture is going to be a fair comparison, because, as I've said before, the action on the screen will be the focus of attention because it is moving. The reflection is not moving.
And for what it's worth, my Samsung doesn't reflect nearly as much as the TV in your last picture, even when it's off.
You can show me all the still frames you want, but it won't convince me to disbelieve what my own eyes see at home. And consumers aren't stupid. Why aren't there thousands of these TV's returned?
To sum up, I said that in my opinion, a glossy screen is better. That doesn't make it better, per se.
And for what it's worth, my Samsung doesn't reflect nearly as much as the TV in your last picture, even when it's off.
You can show me all the still frames you want, but it won't convince me to disbelieve what my own eyes see at home. And consumers aren't stupid. Why aren't there thousands of these TV's returned?
To sum up, I said that in my opinion, a glossy screen is better. That doesn't make it better, per se.