Poll. Do you prefer a glossy screen or an AG coated screen?

Do you prefer a glossy monitor or a monitor with AG coatings?

  • Total voters
    151
Pastuch said:
Glossy makes me want to punch babies and I use my pc in a light controlled home theater. Even with almost no light in the room I can still see my reflection...
Click to expand...
This times 1000. If there is enough light to see, there will be reflections.


Actual Glare isn't the real issue. If you shine bright light directly on the screen, both will give you glare. The matte will give you a wider diffuse glare and the glossy a sharper pinpoint glare.

Reflections are the issue:

If you have any kind of have decent room set up (No bright light shining directly on your screen to create actual glare). Then a decent AR/AG coating will eliminate reflections.

But glossy screens are like a mirror, no matter what you try to do, they will always have reflections.

Short of sitting in a pitch black room, with black walls and black furniture, wearing black ninja camouflage, glossy mirror screens always create reflections.

BTW this poll has been done many times and it always ends up with around 25% preferring glossy reflective screens. Pros never want this, it is always amateurs looking for more pop.

Thankfully the majority has it right on this one, and most good screens have matte AG/AR coatings.
 
daveswantek said:
SnowDog said it best in the old thread. Glossy is fine on a TV, but when sitting close to a computer screen the reflections are just too much.
Click to expand...

I don't think I would have said that. I HATE reflections. My monitor has matte screen, matte bezel: Perfect.

My TV has a matte screen which is perfect. But it has a huge glossy bezel which I hate with a passion. It shows reflections constantly, I am actually considering taking sandpaper to it.

IMO it is a crime to put a reflective glossy surface anywhere on the face of a display device, screens/bezels should be matted on both TVs and monitors.
 
Snowdog said:
BTW this poll has been done many times and it always ends up with around 25% preferring glossy reflective screens.
Click to expand...

You make some good points Snowdog, but again, I hate how these threads always end up turning into silly glossy versus AG coating wars.

Matte isn't the real issue. Many glossy buyers (such as myself) actually DO prefer matte displays, but simply aren't interested in the coating used specifically by LG. Redo this poll with IPS displays using a high quality anti-reflective panel as seen in Samsung products (sadly such a product does not exist yet, which is perplexing), and I'm guessing that 25% that voted for glossy will drop to 2.5%.
 
Ashok0 said:
You make some good points Snowdog, but again, I hate how these threads always end up turning into silly glossy versus AG coating wars.

Matte isn't the real issue. Many glossy buyers (such as myself) actually DO prefer matte displays, but simply aren't interested in the coating used specifically by LG. Redo this poll with IPS displays using a high quality anti-reflective panel as seen in Samsung products (sadly such a product does not exist yet, which is perplexing), and I'm guessing that 25% that voted for glossy will drop to 2.5%.
Click to expand...

I agree that LG's main coating is a bit too strong (My A-TW monitor has a similar coating to PVA/TN monitors), but I would still take that over glossy.

It appears that it is getting more problematic as pixels get smaller (like on the Dell U2711). Everything is shrinking but you still have a strong AR/AG, so in relative terms the AR/AG effect is magnified compared to shrinking pixel size.

LG really should work on a finer coating for smaller pitch screens. But I don't know if anything is getting back to them about how annoying some people find this. If you complain to Dell, you are talking to low level tech support, which is basically going nowhere.
 
Snowdog said:
I don't think I would have said that. I HATE reflections. My monitor has matte screen, matte bezel: Perfect.

My TV has a matte screen which is perfect. But it has a huge glossy bezel which I hate with a passion. It shows reflections constantly, I am actually considering taking sandpaper to it.

IMO it is a crime to put a reflective glossy surface anywhere on the face of a display device, screens/bezels should be matted on both TVs and monitors.
Click to expand...

Sorry if I got that wrong. I did some digging and could not find the thread.

I will just state it as my own opinion. I am OK with glossy on TVs, but not computer screens, because of the light reflecting from your face.

The other point I made the last time arround was, how many pro quality displays from NEC, Ezio and the like are glossy. Even my Sony GDM-F520 CRT has AG coating on it.

Dave
 
Haha! Hate , arrogance, and trolling -- signs of a true pro. :rolleyes:
 
Actually 'light AG' would be my choice for both Home Office and Office Office... (both have very good indirect lighting with the only daylight from behind the screen).... Glossy is showing too much reflectiveness for me as both settings are as bright as a surgery suite...
 
Snowdog said:
I don't think I would have said that. I HATE reflections. My monitor has matte screen, matte bezel: Perfect.

My TV has a matte screen which is perfect. But it has a huge glossy bezel which I hate with a passion. It shows reflections constantly, I am actually considering taking sandpaper to it.

IMO it is a crime to put a reflective glossy surface anywhere on the face of a display device, screens/bezels should be matted on both TVs and monitors.
Click to expand...

LOL Agree anything that distracts from screen sux, That includes lights. I had a HP elitebook and despite having AG it had this bar right below LCD that was lit up like a Christmas tree, Could not turn those dozens different color lights off for volume, web etc. I RMA.
 
HOw did you guys cope with the glossiness in the CRT days? It's not a real problem. The only problem is that there are close to zero options for glossy LCD monitors, y'know.

Also, matte screens don't look great in direct light, either. And glass instead of AG filter makes the colors look better: macbooks (glass TN) look better than most other laptops (indoors).
 
mahdiy85 said:
HOw did you guys cope with the glossiness in the CRT days? It's not a real problem. The only problem is that there are close to zero options for glossy LCD monitors, y'know.

Also, matte screens don't look great in direct light, either. And glass instead of AG filter makes the colors look better: macbooks (glass TN) look better than most other laptops (indoors).
Click to expand...

CRTs (at least the ones I bought) also had fairly strong AR coatings. Often when reading reviews in the CRT days, there would be a category about how effective the AR coating was.

Glossy LCDs OTOH look like they are trying to be mirrors with no attempt to cut reflections.
 
mahdiy85 said:
HOw did you guys cope with the glossiness in the CRT days? It's not a real problem.
Click to expand...
Well, back then we also coped with a lot of terribly shitty things compared to today. My 33Kbs modem was blazing fast in its day too. I "coped." The first Quake had awesome graphics as well for the time. Today they look like shit.

Yeah, I did think my little 17" CRT was excellent for the time too. But it can't come come close to creating the user experience of my u3011.

Progress changes expectations.
 
It still seems like most of the extremely "pro" graphics lcd's come with hoods for a reason. Lacies and Eizos , NEC's. Some Pro monitors actually come with a hood, colorimeter, and calibration software. Many professional cameras also have hoods. Light blasting any screens = bad. Aggressive AG is required for using your monitor in lighting conditions that it should not be in the first place. I'm not going to sugar coat it ! <-- AG pun intended
..
..
A hood for your monitor is the simple and effective way to shield your display from unwanted light and helps you create an accurate working environment. In addition, a hood can extend the life of your monitor by reducing power consumption by up to 40% through lower brightness settings and can also help to reduce eye strain. Monitor hoods are a pretty much essential part of a professional digital imaging set up.
Click to expand...
 
Snowdog said:
CRTs (at least the ones I bought) also had fairly strong AR coatings. Often when reading reviews in the CRT days, there would be a category about how effective the AR coating was.

Glossy LCDs OTOH look like they are trying to be mirrors with no attempt to cut reflections.
Click to expand...

I use two 20" CRTs and aside from laptops and other people's systems I have never used LCDs. Reflections/glare have never been an issue except when bright (sun)light was shining directly on something bright in front of the monitor. The AG/AR coating on these screens are pretty good.

Glossy LCDs (seen them in stores) are indeed like friggin' mirrors. In those store displays it was ridiculous with all the overhead lighting. Aside from glossy nuking any sense of contrast and making photo editing a joke, I do not feel the need to see my reflection in my screens while I am working.
 
mahdiy85 said:
HOw did you guys cope with the glossiness in the CRT days? It's not a real problem. The only problem is that there are close to zero options for glossy LCD monitors, y'know.

Also, matte screens don't look great in direct light, either. And glass instead of AG filter makes the colors look better: macbooks (glass TN) look better than most other laptops (indoors).
Click to expand...

CRT's have AG. Least all the ones I owned Diamondtrons and Trinitrons. Never bought those crappy Invar Shadow Masks.

LCD's look like glass with a massive reflective index.
 
elvn said:
It still seems like most of the extremely "pro" graphics lcd's come with hoods for a reason. Lacies and Eizos , NEC's. Some Pro monitors actually come with a hood, colorimeter, and calibration software. Many professional cameras also have hoods. Light blasting any screens = bad. Aggressive AG is required for using your monitor in lighting conditions that it should not be in the first place. I'm not going to sugar coat it ! <-- AG pun intended
..
..
Click to expand...

So? What does having a hood, colorimeter and calibration software have to do with this poll?
 
Elledan said:
I use two 20" CRTs and aside from laptops and other people's systems I have never used LCDs. Reflections/glare have never been an issue except when bright (sun)light was shining directly on something bright in front of the monitor. The AG/AR coating on these screens are pretty good.

Glossy LCDs (seen them in stores) are indeed like friggin' mirrors. In those store displays it was ridiculous with all the overhead lighting. Aside from glossy nuking any sense of contrast and making photo editing a joke, I do not feel the need to see my reflection in my screens while I am working.
Click to expand...

Quite correct.

We have a few CRT's still in service where I work and none of them are glossy like glossy LCD's. You can't see your reflection in them even in a brightly lit room.
 
ssnake51 said:
So? What does having a hood, colorimeter and calibration software have to do with this poll?
Click to expand...


Maybe you didn't read the rest of that post
It still seems like most of the extremely "pro" graphics lcd's come with hoods for a reason. Lacies and Eizos , NEC's. Some Pro monitors actually come with a hood, colorimeter, and calibration software. Many professional cameras also have hoods. Light blasting any screens = bad. Aggressive AG is required for using your monitor in lighting conditions that it should not be in the first place. I'm not going to sugar coat it ! <-- AG pun intended
.....Monitor hoods are a pretty much essential part of a professional digital imaging set up.
..
Click to expand...

...The hoods are there because blasting any screen with light is bad for accuracy, and their use on the higher end screens would seem to support that high lighting hitting your lcd is bad for image quality. Some people in this thread are trying to say heavy AG is "Pro" and that they use their "pro" screens in high lighting. I still think its a matter of preference and this poll is about how many participating prefer one or the other..., however the thread itself seems more of an argument and to some even a rant.
..
...Considering using any monitor in high lighting conditions (hitting the display) "Pro" doesn't seem right. Thus the hood / canopy references to show what high end professional monitors (and cameras for that matter) use - light avoidance/shielding, even though they are not glossy. So arguments about strong reflections on any monitor imagery have to be questioned, if you are using a really high end pro monitor you 'should' be using hood and/or generally avoiding intense and direct lights hitting the display.
..
.. Heavy AG is trying to compensate for using a monitor in bad lighting conditions, and has trade-offs/failings in doing so. Its all about the tradeoffs, and should be about choice. I'd prefer if models had more suffixes so you could order the screen and coating types you want.
 
elvn said:
Maybe you didn't read the rest of that post


...The hoods are there because blasting any screen with light is bad for accuracy, and their use on the higher end screens would seem to support that high lighting hitting your lcd is bad for image quality. Some people in this thread are trying to say heavy AG is "Pro" and that they use their "pro" screens in high lighting. I still think its a matter of preference and this poll is about how many participating prefer one or the other..., however the thread itself seems more of an argument and to some even a rant.
..
...Considering using any monitor in high lighting conditions (hitting the display) "Pro" doesn't seem right. Thus the hood / canopy references to show what high end professional monitors (and cameras for that matter) use - light avoidance/shielding, even though they are not glossy. So arguments about strong reflections on any monitor imagery have to be questioned, if you are using a really high end pro monitor you 'should' be using hood and/or generally avoiding intense and direct lights hitting the display.
..
.. Heavy AG is trying to compensate for using a monitor in bad lighting conditions, and has trade-offs/failings in doing so. Its all about the tradeoffs, and should be about choice. I'd prefer if models had more suffixes so you could order the screen and coating types you want.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I did read your previous post all the way through. And I've read this one all the way through. Still don't think it has anything to do with the poll itself.

If you were pointing out that most high-end, professional monitors were glossy or if they were coated, I could see the relevance. That would be an objective fact you could point to that would lend support to taking your preference seriously. But you seem to be talking about proper ways to set up a monitor. :confused:
 
Ok. You can lead a horse to water.. no offense.
..
.... So as I said , the poll is just flat preference, pick a bullet... the thread discussion however seems to be insights and opinions (and in some cases rants) regarding the coatings themselves and their usability - and I don't think you can properly discuss that without bringing the lighting environment into it, and seeing what the higher end professional displays and setups use.
..
..The relevance is that AG coatings are trying to compensate for improper/"non-professional" lighting conditions (as supported by the existence of hoods on the highest end professional monitors) and have failings in doing so. If you were using a monitor in the 'correct' lighting conditions you would not need aggressive AG, and by extension - most arguments against glossy would be invalidated or at least greatly minimized in those same setups.
..
 
Last edited:
elvn said:
Ok. You can lead a horse to water.. no offense.
..
.... So as I said , the poll is just flat preference, pick a bullet... the thread discussion however seems to be insights and opinions (and in some cases rants) regarding the coatings themselves and their usability - and I don't think you can properly discuss that without bringing the lighting environment into it, and seeing what the higher end professional displays and setups use.
..
..The relevance is that AG coatings are trying to compensate for improper/"non-professional" lighting conditions (as supported by the existence of hoods on the highest end professional monitors) and have failings in doing so. If you were using a monitor in the 'correct' lighting conditions you would not need aggressive AG, and by extension - most arguments against glossy would be invalidated or at least greatly minimized in those same setups.
..
Click to expand...

Are most of these professional, high-end monitors that have been set up properly glossy or coated?
 
You miss the point but you already know the answer to your question.. It still doesn't disprove my point regarding the invalidation/minimization of most arguments against glossy were they in the same "proper" lighting conditions.
 
Yeah like snowdog said with black out shades, flat black walls, flat black furniture, and a black ninja costume you're good to go.

I have best glossy made 20WGMX2 and it's almost impossible not to see reflections.
 
elvn said:
You miss the point but you already know the answer to your question.. It still doesn't disprove my point regarding the invalidation/minimization of most arguments against glossy were they in the same "proper" lighting conditions.
Click to expand...

I think you are the one missing the point here.
But as you said earlier: You can lead a horse to water...no offense."
 
ZoNe said:
Yeah like snowdog said with black out shades, flat black walls, flat black furniture, and a black ninja costume you're good to go.

I have best glossy made 20WGMX2 and it's almost impossible not to see reflections.
Click to expand...

Yes. It is impossible because even in that scenario the screen itself wil be emitting light that will reflect off of your black ninja costume and show up as a reflection on the glossy screen.::eek:
 
I just can't stand the grain/haze on the heavier of AG coatings and would rather adjust my lighting environment. I don't live like a ninja and in a black room. My desk faces out toward the room rather than it being against the wall in the corner though - so lights are hitting the back of my monitor not the front. Similarly, my tv's back faces the windows in my living room.

I'm pretty sure the color space testing on even AG coated monitors is done in dark rooms by the way. I'm pretty sure there is a reason for that too.

So you prefer to compensate for over-saturating your panels with light by using (sometimes over-aggressively without choice) anti-glare coatings with their trade-offs/failings and I prefer to compensate for glossy screen's reflectivity trade-offs/failings with my room and lighting layout.. I can live with that. I'd just prefer if everyone had the choice on model runs with different model suffixes.
 
-------------------------AG ------------------------------------------- Glossy

replacement-screen-door-picture-02.jpg


Now set the room up proper and sit with your back to the wall , monitor facing the wall rather than facing the room - and you wouldn't get such reflections. ;)
..
..
 
I have a glossy laptop, and an AG desktop monitor. Definitely prefer my AG even though my laptop is 1080p on 15.6".
 
I can notice the AG coating on my U3011 while reading text on a white background, but that is only when I am specifically looking for it. Otherwise I don't notice it at all.
 
I have not seen a glossy IPS screen, not sure if the animal even exists. Glossy is fine, if under low lighting and being directly straight on to the screen. But in most situations, matte screens will have an advantage.

Glossy screens and now only building widescreen laptops instead of 4:3 are both negative developments IMO.
 
27" apple cinema display is 2560x1440 LED backlit ips, and is glossy. Mine is due to arrive friday ;)
..
I've seen them in person several times now and I think they look awesome if your room is set up for it properly, as I've stated in many prior replies.
..
Every screen type has has tradeoffs.
...
 
The Apple displays are gorgeous. Not by any means perfect, but they're very solid displays overall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top