New LED LCDs have a more reflective screen

[Nasir]

It has dawned on me that the more recent LED LCD TVs and especially the 3D TVs have a highly reflective glassy screen. Some reviews claim that it enhances the picture, while that may be the case, I found that on dark shots, the room is reflected quite annoyingly by the glass like panel. I have all white walls and white sofas to match, so am seriously considering waiting a while before I buy a TV. That is unless some of you have managed to reduce this problem or figured a way around it. Please comment on solutions or did you eventually get used to the reflections and no longer find it a nuisance. Until now, Philips had low reflecting screens on their models, but their 3D ready new TV has a glass window like screen - looks amazing but the daylight reflection of what was behind me has put me off, for the moment. I have curtains that will stop such harsh reflections, but because everything behind my sitting position is white, I THINK it may become an issue. If I remember correctly, the older Plasma TVs had a similar glass panel look. As I said, this is a problem only when dark colors are being displayed by the TV .....
I do not want this thread to turn into a 3D bashing of sorts, so please only input personal experiences OR suggestions to help...

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

My Samsung does have a more reflective screen than let's say my Kuros. However, 3D needs that reflective screen to keep light levels high to compensate for the loss of light levels through the shutter glasses.

The room the Samsung sits in is largely grey, so my problems with reflections are quite a bit less than yours. If reflections do become a problem, I have some black painted diffusion panels I can attached to the wall via a push in connector already installed in the wall. I am not sure I will ever need it because I can cover up all the windows via motorized darkening shades. I can turn that room pitch black in the middle of the day. This comes in handy when I have to do reviews during the daylight hours, and really needed to control the light entering the room.

[Woochifer]

I don't think this has anything to do with LED or LCD or 3D. Reflective screens simply reflect demand and market trends.

Samsung has installed reflective glossy screens with many of their LCD TVs for the last three years, and the glossy trend has been ongoing with computer monitors and laptops for even longer. You can hardly find a laptop or smartphone or tablet in retail stores nowadays that doesn't have a glossy screen.

The irony is that while LCD TVs have trended towards more reflective glossy screens, plasma TVs now all come with some sort of anti-glare or anti-reflective coating.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I don't think this has anything to do with LED or LCD or 3D. Reflective screens simply reflect demand and market trends.

Samsung has installed reflective glossy screens with many of their LCD TVs for the last three years, and the glossy trend has been ongoing with computer monitors and laptops for even longer. You can hardly find a laptop or smartphone or tablet in retail stores nowadays that doesn't have a glossy screen.

The irony is that while LCD TVs have trended towards more reflective glossy screens, plasma TVs now all come with some sort of anti-glare or anti-reflective coating.

I have to disagree with you bud. I have seen both the glossy and non glossy screens on 3D televisions, and you definately have an advantage with a reflective screen than you do with the non glossy in terms of keeping light levels high when watching 3D through the shutter based glasses.

As far as regular 2D application of LED and LCD, then I have no comments on that.

[Woochifer]

I have to disagree with you bud. I have seen both the glossy and non glossy screens on 3D televisions, and you definately have an advantage with a reflective screen than you do with the non glossy in terms of keeping light levels high when watching 3D through the shutter based glasses.

As far as regular 2D application of LED and LCD, then I have no comments on that.

My comments don't have anything to do with the performance of glossy screens, simply the market trend in that direction on the LCD side.

Interesting comment on the 3D performance, because I recall the concerns with graphic designers when more and more flat panel computer monitors started coming with glossy screens. With still images on a LCD panel, a matte screen supposedly maintains better color accuracy (then again, high end digital prepress shops kept their CRT monitors, which don't have matte finishes, because of their superior color accuracy).

[Nasir]

I have to disagree with you bud. I have seen both the glossy and non glossy screens on 3D televisions, and you definately have an advantage with a reflective screen than you do with the non glossy in terms of keeping light levels high when watching 3D through the shutter based glasses.

As far as regular 2D application of LED and LCD, then I have no comments on that.

Well, I have to hand it to you, once again Sir Terrence, you are SO right. I checked out the Samsung 3D LCD next to 3D LED LCD TVs and the shutter glasses DO reduce the light coming through so significantly, that it only makes sense opting for the LED version with a significant USD 600 price difference!!!
With that cleared up, I am still waiting patiently for the Philips 3D ready TV to come up the prices and physically available transmitter and glasses for a taste of whats being promised.
Also, I am looking keenly at the Plasma 3D TVs as well, but there does not seem to be any with a 42 in screen.
I also attended a 3D showing of RESIDENT EVIL and liked it.

[Nasir]

Thanks for the input.
Apparently, LG 3D TV has a matte screen.
The way I see it is that I will have to convince the wife to put something above the sofas to eliminate " wall reflections" ( dear me, a term heavily used by audiophiles, now to become a videophile´s pain in the bum ) , like a large tapestry or carpet. It will have to be something cheap as the 2 remaining cats will autograph it frequently with their claws. Also, new darker covers for the sofa, the chandelier will probably have to go as well..... I hope she does not let ME go as well.....

[pixelthis]

Thanks for the input.
Apparently, LG 3D TV has a matte screen.
The way I see it is that I will have to convince the wife to put something above the sofas to eliminate " wall reflections" ( dear me, a term heavily used by audiophiles, now to become a videophile´s pain in the bum ) , like a large tapestry or carpet. It will have to be something cheap as the 2 remaining cats will autograph it frequently with their claws. Also, new darker covers for the sofa, the chandelier will probably have to go as well..... I hope she does not let ME go as well.....

you are overthinking this.
ALL YOU need is light that is not in line of sight of your screen, lights that are either besides
or behind the TV.
THESE are for serious watching, the rest of the time you can use others.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

you are overthinking this.
ALL YOU need is light that is not in line of sight of your screen, lights that are either besides
or behind the TV.
THESE are for serious watching, the rest of the time you can use others.

What about light that washes off the walls brightness? This is going to accentuate reflections in the room. Light does not just shine in one place leaving the rest in darkness.(or maybe you didn't know this).

Also brightness, you don't watch 3D TV with the lights on - it reduces the 3D effect. But of course you don't know this with your best buy five minute 3D education.

[pixelthis]

What about light that washes off the walls brightness? This is going to accentuate reflections in the room. Light does not just shine in one place leaving the rest in darkness.(or maybe you didn't know this).

Also brightness, you don't watch 3D TV with the lights on - it reduces the 3D effect. But of course you don't know this with your best buy five minute 3D education.

It reduces the 3d "effect" because any light not coming from the tv is background "noise",
and 3d is dim enough as it is.
But while side and rear light will interfere some, not greatly, and sometimes even enhance the picture slighty.
MAYBE DARKNESS is best, but if you have to have some light, side and rear lighting is best,
dimness. SOMETIMES THE OLD LADY WANTS A LIGHT.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

It reduces the 3d "effect" because any light not coming from the tv is background "noise",
and 3d is dim enough as it is.
But while side and rear light will interfere some, not greatly, and sometimes even enhance the picture slighty.
MAYBE DARKNESS is best, but if you have to have some light, side and rear lighting is best,
dimness. SOMETIMES THE OLD LADY WANTS A LIGHT.

Pixel, now you and I both know you have zero experience with 3D in the home(or more specifically in your house), so from what perspective could you credibly come from which would make any of this true? My guess is it would be from no perspective.

Light and 3D do not work well together - hence why polarization is used in the theater, and not at home were one sits closer to the screen, in a far smaller room. The shutter based technology(what we use in the home) uses a darker tint on their glasses than polarization methods do, which is why light control is even more important at home than in the theater.

Any suggestion of using a backlight with 3D stands starkly in contrast to the reality of viewing 3D at home. A backlight works well when the individual sits out of the standard viewing distance based on SMPTE and THX recommendations, and the display size is below 50". All 3D TV's are 50" and over for the most part because any size less contracts the convergence versus divergence ratio to a point of total discomfort, especially when fast moving images are present. If you sit too far away from a 3D set, the effect becomes diminished. This is why light levels must be controlled(that means no backlight), and viewing distance is extremely important(which also negates the need for backlighting).

Any lighting in the room will be reflected back to the screen, whether it is via behind you where it is most annoying, or anywhere in the room which reduces the contrast levels, and shadow detail as well. Backlighting is not a universal approach, but has very specific condition which demands its usage.

[Nasir]

Perhaps, I shall explain myself better:
The family room is usually where the lights are always on. All the walls are white and so are the sofa covers. So, when I sit in front of the TV everything behind me is reflected by the CRT screen. If I wear a white T-shirt and dark jeans, the white T-shirt interferes on dark shots. Its not so bad with the CRT, but these LED LCD screens are more reflective than the CRT screen. In the stores, I tried the same experiment, and found that my dark jeans did not have an effect but the white T-shirt was annoying in the reflection.
Most of the viewing will be done with the lights on, so I have to find a solution for this.
Thanks for pointing out that 3D should be watched in darkness... one more thing I learned today. So, the Philips ambilight should be disabled, one presumes.
I may be wrong, but the impression I get is that the 3D TV should be slightly bigger than recommended size of TV for a given viewing distance. The 40 in is about right for my sitting distance, but with the 3D content, I feel that a bigger screen is needed... any opinions?

[pixelthis]

Perhaps, I shall explain myself better:
The family room is usually where the lights are always on. All the walls are white and so are the sofa covers. So, when I sit in front of the TV everything behind me is reflected by the CRT screen. If I wear a white T-shirt and dark jeans, the white T-shirt interferes on dark shots. Its not so bad with the CRT, but these LED LCD screens are more reflective than the CRT screen. In the stores, I tried the same experiment, and found that my dark jeans did not have an effect but the white T-shirt was annoying in the reflection.
Most of the viewing will be done with the lights on, so I have to find a solution for this.
Thanks for pointing out that 3D should be watched in darkness... one more thing I learned today. So, the Philips ambilight should be disabled, one presumes.
I may be wrong, but the impression I get is that the 3D TV should be slightly bigger than recommended size of TV for a given viewing distance. The 40 in is about right for my sitting distance, but with the 3D content, I feel that a bigger screen is needed... any opinions?

YOU SEE, Sir talky likes to sit in the dark, watching his "shows", completely oblivious
to the fact that most watch at home with the lights on.
YOUR best solution, only run lights from behind the TV, THIS will minimize
reflections somewhat.
Not perfect, but the only thing that will help people with a LIFE.

[Nasir]

The way I understand 3D is ( and feel free to correct me), the TV is putting out a full screen for the left eye ( so the 3D glasses blank out the right eye ) and vice versa. To my understanding, this means that the TV is NOT putting out half the light, but continues to put out the full amount of light, just that only one eye is allowed to see this image. This does NOT mean that the eye for which the image is meant for will see a less intense image, but rather that the intention of fooling the stereo depth of the visual image is made possible, and hence 3D is made possible!! And its done so fast that image for the other eye is still retained by the eye ( and brain ) . I would further argue, that if one were to close the left eye, the monitor one would be looking at would not seem any the dimmer, nor would one see half the picture, rather, the accuracy of depth only is compromised....
OK, for cable 3D signals, the resolution suffers, as they are transmitting at normal HD channel bandwidth, but with BLURAY nothing should be lost, that is full 1080p for the left eye and ditto for the right eye.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

The way I understand 3D is ( and feel free to correct me), the TV is putting out a full screen for the left eye ( so the 3D glasses blank out the right eye ) and vice versa. To my understanding, this means that the TV is NOT putting out half the light, but continues to put out the full amount of light, just that only one eye is allowed to see this image. This does NOT mean that the eye for which the image is meant for will see a less intense image, but rather that the intention of fooling the stereo depth of the visual image is made possible, and hence 3D is made possible!! And its done so fast that image for the other eye is still retained by the eye ( and brain ) . I would further argue, that if one were to close the left eye, the monitor one would be looking at would not seem any the dimmer, nor would one see half the picture, rather, the accuracy of depth only is compromised....
OK, for cable 3D signals, the resolution suffers, as they are transmitting at normal HD channel bandwidth, but with BLURAY nothing should be lost, that is full 1080p for the left eye and ditto for the right eye.

Basically you are spot on. However, there is a small loss of light of light that comes from the flashing of the shutter glasses(and a bit of dark tint as well), but a small adjustment to the brightness(or turning off all of the lights in the room) can compensate for it. It quite frankly is a non issue in reality, as LCD displays have migrated over to LED(both of my sets are LED backlit). Even when turned up to full brightness, they last longer the CCFL backlights.

[TECHNICAL 1]

3d was out over 15 years ago it in only better now 3d has been in the books and on cereal boxes with free glases think of the way we see it is 3d no replys or lies from anyone unless u agree technology has improved a lot u know maby read some old books on 3d technology