Hello Rtings,

Comparing this TV with an OLED like the LG G3 reveals that the lack of a polarizer in the S95C isn’t taken into account when calculating the score for reflections, or any other rating that takes reflections into account.

How come?

I understand that - when viewing the reflective properties through a photo that is displayed on a monitor - it’s very hard to appreciate the degree that blacks are raised in this manner, but when seen in person, it’s easy to see, even outside any side-by-side comparison.

Actually, the raised blacks is the reason I won’t consider a QD-OLED: The key selling point of OLED (perfect blacks) is lost when they’re used in a lit room. I’m sorry for being so direct, but it seems like an awful shame to rate products as well as you do, only to miss such an important point of critique and rate them so inaccurately.

I would have been very disappointed in my TV if I had bought a QD-OLED without having seen the effect in person, and only expected a slight tint of the blacks (as many reviewers describe it). Videos and images just don’t demonstrate the effect well enough, which is almost obvious when you consider how many monitors have incorrect gamma tuning, regardless of how good the camera or cameraman might be.

I think I can answer the question I posed myself: Your scoring system isn’t built to take the issue into account and put a number on it, causing inferior products to get rated equal to superior ones in tests with as narrow a focus as reflection handling.

It’s a real shame when you update your scoring system so rarely, and similar issues are bound to happen again as new technologies with new issues appear.

One solution could be to introduce subjective scoring on products, and treat it as an objective score to fit the rest of the system. When an issue isn’t able to be dealt with by the system, you could use a subjective multiplier on a score that reflects the reviewers opinion on a certain aspect. With reflections, the lack of a polarizer could result in a multiplier of less that 1, which brings the score down compared to products with similar reflective properties that aren’t burdened by an issue like this.

I hope you will consider updating your system in a way that doesn’t simply take into account new and specific issues (as more will always appear) but update it in a way makes it more flexible, in order to deal with unforeseen technological issues like this, that might be hard to measure objectively.

Best regards, Peter