You can make a difference in the Apple Support Community!

When you sign up with your Apple Account, you can provide valuable feedback to other community members by upvoting helpful replies and User Tips.

Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

Eye strain from LED backlighting in MacBook Pro

There is one relatively serious con of the new LED backlit displays in the new MacBook Pros that seems to not get too much mention in the media. About a month ago I bought a new MacBook Pro to replace my standard white MacBook. One feature of the MacBook Pro that I was unaware of was the introduction of the LED backlit display to replace the CCFL backlight.

Once I started using my new laptop for long periods of time, I noticed severe eye strain and minor symptoms almost similar to motion sickness. After 20 or 30 minutes of use, I felt like I had been looking at the screen all day. Much longer and I would get headaches. If I used the old white MacBook (with its CCFL display), I had no eye troubles at all. Moreover, I could detect a distinct flicker on the MacBook Pro display when I moved my eyes across it - especially over high contract areas of the screen. White text on a black background was virtually impossible for me to read without feeling sick to my stomach because of all the flickering from moving my eyes over the text.

The strangest thing about all of this was that nobody else I showed the screen to could see these flickers I was seeing. I began to question my sanity until I did a little research. Discovering that the MacBook Pro introduced a new LED backlit display started to shed some light (so to speak) on what might be going on. I had long known that I could see LED flicker in things like car taillights and christmas lights that most of my friends could not see. I also knew that I could easily see the "rainbow effect" in DLP televisions that many other people don't see.

My research into LED technology turned up the fact that it is a bit of a technological challenge to dim an LED. Varying the voltage generally doesn't work as they are essentially designed to be either on or off with a fixed brightness. To work around this limitation, designers use a technique called pulse width modulation to mimic the appearance of lower intensity light coming out of the LED. I don't claim to fully understand the concept, but it essentially seems to involve very briefly turning off the LED several times over a given time span. The dimmer the LED needs to appear, the more time it spends in the off state.

Because this all happens so very quickly, the human brain does not interpret the flickers as flickers, rather as simply dimmer light. For most people that is. Some people (myself included) are much more sensitive to these flickers. From what I can tell, the concept is called the "flicker fusion threshold" and is the frequency at which sometime that is actually flickering is interpreted by the human brain as being continuously lit. While the vast majority of people have a threshold that doesn't allow them to see the flicker in dimmed LEDs, some people have a higher threshold that causes them to see the flickering in things like LED car tail lights and, unfortunately, LED backlit displays - leading to this terrible eye strain.

The solution? I now keep my screen turned up to full brightness to eliminate the need for the flicker-inducing pulse width modulation. The screen is very bright, but there are no more flickers and I love my MacBook Pro too much to exchange it for a plain MacBook with CCFL backlighting (which will also supposedly be switching to LED backlighting in 2009 anyway.) The staff at my local Apple store was of course more than helpful and was willing to let me exchange my glossy screen for matte even though I was beyond the 14 day return period. I knew that wasn't the problem though as my old MacBook was a glossy display. I've decided to stick with my full brightness solution. Sitting in a brightly-lit room tends to help alleviate how blinding the full brightness of the screen can be. In a dimly-lit room I guess I just wear sunglasses. Either way, the extreme brightness is worlds better than the sickening flicker I saw with a lower brightness setting

I would caution anybody considering buying a product with an LED backlit display to pay careful attention to make sure you don't have this same sensitivity. Turn the screen brightness down, find a high contract area of the screen, and quickly move your eyes back and forth over the screen. If you can detect the flicker, you may end up with this same problem.

I have no idea what percentage of the population has this sensitivity. I imagine we will hear more about it as more and more displays start using this technology. Hopefully the Apple engineers will come up with a way to eliminate this flicker some of us can see.

Russ Martin

15-inch MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.5.4)

Posted on Aug 23, 2008 8:25 AM

Reply
2,489 replies

Jan 30, 2012 9:56 AM in response to santoz64

I have a early 2011 15" MBP with the high-res antiglare screen.


I am currently writing my thesis and spending about 8-12 hrs in front of my comp. I would advise reducing the brightness to more than half and zooming in when reading any small font.


I find the more I squint while reading text the faster I get headaches.


I have also purchased apple's bluetooth keyboard and trackpad, which helps keep the MBP at a good distance while typing.

Feb 7, 2012 9:04 PM in response to RMartin111

i had a G4 Powerbook for several years that I never had a problem with. after that finally died, I shopped extensively for a new mac over the last few years, looking at the new screens about a million times, all different models, in the stores, and also tried a 2010 antiglare MBP, as well as two different 2011 MBAs at home, before returning them.


all the new screens look weird to me, high res, low res, glossy or not. my eyes simply do not like them. reading text, just looking at the screen at all, is unnatural and uncomfortable.


i considered several explanations for this, including resolution (or pixel density, rather), font-smoothing, brightness, as well as LED backlighting. having become accustomed to my high res PC laptop, with the cleaner windows font-smoothing, i thought perhaps i'd 'outgrown' Apple's font smoothing, and lower pixel densities. however, while i still don't really know, my current theory, for my own problems, is that its the LEDs.


i brought this up in the MacRumors forums and didn't get very many responses. seeing this gigantic thread is reassuring. i've taken up the mac search again, used this time, and have been deciding if i should go pre-LED vs multitouch trackpad. this thread sealed it for pre-LED.


i used to stand there at the store thinking, "How are they selling these things?! I can barely even read on this!", knowing of course, that they were selling tons of them. i guess this doesn't affect everyone. i also guess there are a lot of people that don't realize they have a problem.

Feb 8, 2012 7:11 PM in response to rohanzsta

I should have mentioned this in my previous post, but I also happen to have an older, pre-LED 23" Apple Cinema Display, which does not cause my eyes any of the discomfort I described above.


Re Rohanzsta's question:


The ACD I have was a hand me down and isn't in the world's best shape. It's also 'only' 1920x1200. For a while, I was drooling over the newer 2560x1440 ACDs, but I figured, because of the LEDs, I'd be better off, (if I could ever afford one in the first place, and I probably can't), with a Dell Ultrasharp U2711, which is the same size and resolution and price as the 27 ACD, but is not glossy like the quite unfortunately mirror-faced ACD, and also does not use LED backlighting.


Of course, those are $1000 monitors we're talking about. If you want something normal and are worried about eye-strain, I'd go with a non-LED Samsung or (smaller) Dell Ultrasharp. Aside from the 23" ACD I have, I can't speak from experience, but I think these have good reputations, (which you can verify online), and you can always return them if they bother your eyes.


Good luck!

Feb 8, 2012 10:50 PM in response to rohanzsta

I purchased an NEC 2490WUXi2 24" CCFL display in December. It's an excellent quality monitor favored by many photographers for its excellent color and value for the money. It's the second version of a model that has been around for a number of years. I got it for $549, which is a steal. But I wouldn't mind paying the current lowest price either: it's that good. It has a matte panel and it is very easy on the eyes. I have had no problems using it.


http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/lcd2490wuxi2-bk Color-Critical Monitor $899 LIST $700 B&H Prices on select displays can vary widely at B&H; if you can be patient it is possible to get a very good deal. The 2490 fluctuated in price between $590 and $650 for at least two months before it went down to $549 for a week or two. Since the beginning of the year it has been $700.


NEC has a good reputation. I particularly appreciate the easy height adjustments compared to no adjustment except for tilt with Apple displays and iMacs. Some models can be lowered so they almost touch the top of a desk. Like any display company there can be quality variation among panels but I think that NEC is better than most when it comes to QC. The better stores will allow easy returns of defective displays. I recommend taking pictures of the unpacking process just in case. It will greatly simplify repacking for a return or moving.


Since you don't specify your budget, here is the list-price range of NEC CCFL displays:


20"-23" CCFL $189- $1000 13 models

24"-27" CCFL $359-$1650 10 models

28"-30" CCFL $2550 and $2300 2 models


Go to http://www.necdisplay.com/category/desktop-monitors and select the display parameters to see the available models.

Feb 9, 2012 7:09 AM in response to MisterMojo

Like most on here I have come to the conclusion that cheap LED backlight driven monitors are simply not worth it. Foolishly, I jumped onto the LED bandwagon in 2011 and have two of these 22" LED driven BenQ monitors. On low brightness levels, these monitors remind of the ‘LED Incapacitor’ used by special enforcement units, they make you feel nauseous, dizzy and are no better than cheap CCFL monitors. However, unlike the LED Incapacitor, these LED backlit monitors take time to incapacitate their victims, it may be a few minutes, days or even weeks before you start to feel nauseous, dizzy or just plain ill. It's quite obvious that LED driven monitors are still in their infancy and some manufacturers (BenQ, Apple, etc.) are clearly not all that bothered if their customers stare into a rebadged strobe light for several hours a day.


Computer hardware reviewers need to start assessing the level of flicker, or strobe, these LED driven screens produce when writing reviews!! Don’t trust a review that doesn’t provide this vital piece of information or you may just end up with a Widescreen LED Incapacitor of your own: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Jsr53yvyrM

Feb 9, 2012 8:54 AM in response to cams0ft

Seems only weird to me that on the manufacturer's website, people are exchanging hints and advices on the "how to buy the accessories which permits me to use what is sold by the above mentioned manufacturer" ?

And with ca. 100 000 views, still not taken in consideration by... well, nothing official.


Speaking about the "official" character of the disease, (and thanks for the LED-incapacitor vid, I have yet the impression to be a rabbit at night on a highway), nobody has taken contact or has had review of epileptics associations, communities or groups ?

Because shinning spots could be a productive scheme for epileptic crisis an seizures... ?

Feb 10, 2012 12:26 PM in response to nebulos

It's not just the LED backlighting - I have a Lenovo laptop with LED backlighting which is fine even though it is much smaller and ought to be harder to read. I also have LED backlit monitors which are fine (I use the HP LA2306x).


I first noticed this when I moved from my MBP 15" standard-res (early 2010, Core2Duo, GeForce switchable display) to a late-2010 MBP 15" (Core i5 2.53ghz, nVidia GT330M) hi-res anti-glare. I thought I was going crazy. My eye doctor said maybe I needed reading glasses, but that there was nothing 'wrong' with my eyes.


I switched to a 17" (bigger screen should be better, right?) hi-res antiglare... virtually identical dot pitch (I honestly don't think I should be able to tell the difference between 128dpi and 133dpi) and loved it. Gave it to my wife, got another... and it wasn't great.


I do Mac administration at work (in addition to my normal job). So I've seen a lot of Macs lately. In my experience, the 15" hi-res is ALWAYS bad, the 15" lo-res can vary, and the problem is getting WORSE. Last year's Macbook Air was GLORIOUS. I used one for a month and it became my primary machine. But the Core2Duo was slow. So I got a new one - Core i7. Ended up returning it THE SAME DAY. The display was that painful to look at.


So I broke down and sprung for a 17". Top of the line. Heavy, but amazing... and the screen is BARELY tolerable. I haven't made up my mind yet, but honestly I don't think I can keep using Macs. They're just that bad to look at. 5 minutes with a bad Macbook display and my eyes are shot ALL DAY.


I honestly can't believe Apple hasn't addressed this yet. Everything else in their systems is absolutely TOP QUALITY, but the screens are just nausea-inducing for a not-insubstantial percentage of the population.


- Gurm

Feb 10, 2012 12:34 PM in response to Gurm42

And just for background. I am:


- Nearsighted (-4.75)

- Wear glasses but sometimes contacts

- Sensitive to low-refresh displays. When I used to use CRT's, if it was't 85hz or higher (100 was better) it hurt to look at.

- In my late 30's.

- An IT professional, I spend literally 8+ hours a day looking at monitors.

- Not at all bothered by LED backlit TV's. My father-in-law got a new Sony, and I can watch it for hours with no problems.

Feb 10, 2012 1:23 PM in response to Gurm42

Hi Gurm,


Regarding your comments on the MacBook Air, can you clarify which one was glorious - the current shipping model or the previous one, and was it the 11" or 13"? I have the curent 13" MBA and it was the beginning of problems for me. We're getting along relatively OK now, having tweaked the setting as discussed much earlier in this thread and keeping brightness close to 50% under most circumstances. I can now read on it for hours without discomfort. Although it still isn't as good as the cheap, bottom-of-the-line 14" Acer notebook I used before buying the MBA. The Acer had a mediocre, dim screen but it never bothered me for a minute.


Dave

Feb 10, 2012 1:29 PM in response to Dave Nikkel

It was last year's 13" that I loved. The top-end final Core2Duo model. It was a little slow (especially compared to the i7) but the screen was GREAT and I miss it terribly...


I'm essentially NOT using a Macbook at this point, which makes me cranky, but not as cranky as the headaches did. My Lenovo has a mediocre, dim screen - but as you say I can look at it for hours and hours without issue.

Feb 10, 2012 1:45 PM in response to Gurm42

I have an MBA 11" mid-2011, and most of the time it is plugged into an Apple 27" Thunderbolt display. The screen looks cool, and I love the T-bolt connectivity -very simple. But the font seems very tiny, even at 12 point font (historically I use 10 or 11). I'd need 16 pt to make this legible. My eyes are killing me.


I just switched to Mac from a dell Laptop using an acer 27" screen and blindly trusted that everything Apple makes woudl be stellar. But I have had nothing but problems. I've tried the apps, dimmed it down, all sorts of things but it is still giving me headaches.


I really don't know enough about backlit LED, glossy, or anything else. All I know is I have a $2000 headache.


Does anyone else use a T-bolt display and suffer from this?

Eye strain from LED backlighting in MacBook Pro

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple Account.