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

Oct 3, 2012 2:58 AM in response to Eric Leung1

Thanks Eric. I'll have something to think about with the results. Did the white screen feel just as bad or worse (better?) than when you have normal content on the screen, like when reading internet sites? It seems that you have problems with the backlight rather than with the screen, but I'm still not completely sure. I final experiment would solve this: a transparent matte plastic bag over the screen with a white screen would diffuse all of the screen content and would leave only diffused light entering the eyes, just like the experiment with the light boucing of the wall I suggested. With this, all of the properties of the screen would be dismissed, leaving only the properties of the backlight. If you had no problems with a white screen and a diffuser bag, then the properties of the screen are to be blamed. If the opposite is the case, then it's the LED's fault. I'm not saying you have to try this, but it would give us data to work with in solving what the cause for the eye problem is.

Oct 3, 2012 9:56 AM in response to Dovez

Hi Dovez, I have tried the stuffs again just now. From the limited time I have tested, there didn't seem to have an apparent difference between a completely blank white screen versus a screen with graphics, texts, etc. in terms of comfortability.

I have also tried laying a semi-transparent plastic bag in front of the screen, the light intensity was dropped for sure, but it didn't seem to make the light more comfortable to look at.


HOWEVER, when I set the screen to a non-native resolution (from 1366x768 to 1152x720), the screen does seem to look a little bit more comfortable! This is very strange!

Oct 3, 2012 11:24 AM in response to Eric Leung1

Thanks for trying the tests. The results seem conflicting and perhaps they are. I am completely sure it’s light that is causing the problem, or to be more precise – one or more of its properties. From what I know so far, light has these properties:


-Light patterns


-Flicker


-Polarization


-Brightness level


-Spectrum


With the bag test we can exclude: light patterns (all of them should have been diffused into nothingness), polarization (the light should have been diffused into all directions), brightness level (brightness obviously made no difference).


The non-native resolution test excludes: spectrum, brightness level and polarization (the resolution brought relief without all of these properties of light having changed, so they can be excluded).


The only thing we cannot exclude completely from these two tests is flicker. The symptoms are identical to flicker symptoms.


It is some kind of not obvious flicker happening at the subpixel level even with pixels displaying white, which should normally mean that they are as transparent as they can be, displaying nothing at all, but the tests indicate that this could possibly be not so. A change in resolution seems to cause some information that is sent to the display to get lost or deformed, possibly the flicker information. The fuzzy image that a non-native screen resolution brings is responsible for some remaining discomfort with the screen.


This is the only explanation I can make with this data. Perhaps it is a chaotic subpixel flicker like the snowing on TVs and that’s why it can’t be detected with flicker detection methods, since all of the subpixels involved are not turning on and off at the same time. We can exclude the backlight flickering, since the change in resolution brings relief and is hasn’t influenced the LED backlight in any way.

Oct 4, 2012 10:06 AM in response to Dovez

Thank you for your analysis Dovez!


After resting for the night, I am trying the things again today. It seems the most comfortable setting for my MacBook Air is to use the 1152x720 (non-native) resolution and full brightness. It's still making my eyes uncomfortable, but I would say it's about 70% better.


I agree your say that something is flickering, my discomfort feeling certainly matches that, it's probably just we don't have a reliable method in detecting it.


It could be the subpixels flickering like you said, though I don't really understand why they has to flicker when displaying a blank white screen. It's even more weird to find that a blank white screen in a non-native resolution is more comfortable than a blank white screen in native resolution!


The difference is perhaps it's the OS handling the subpixels directly when the screen is at native resolution (and maybe there's a bug somewhere?), while it's the GPU that handles the subpixels in a more traditional way when the screen is at a non-native resolution.


I also wonder if the screen can display all the color it needs. Maybe it has to flash the pixel to get some of the shades it needs. (e.g. flash a green pixel when displaying dark green)

Just my guesses.

Oct 4, 2012 1:11 PM in response to Eric Leung1

I found a very interesting link about white pixels flickering.


http://superuser.com/questions/460524/snow-like-flickering-white-pixels-with-cer tain-applications-on-my-lcd-display


Quotes: " I am experiencing something like a snow effect", "The problem is not visible on screenshots or videos"


It sounds like the same problem that I theorised about, just exagerated to the point at which the white pixels flickering are visible. And it is not visible on video, which probably means cameras can't detect the snowing flicker effect. This case isn't evidence that the same is happaning here, but it seems very similar and software related.

Oct 8, 2012 8:54 AM in response to RMartin111

Hello again.


After a few tries with different screens, I came to the conclusion that my problem laid with the latency between images.


I realize I might be sensitive to a latency <5ms, which I can't bear.


For example this screen is fine with me:

http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/ea243wm-bk


It has LED backlight, but 5ms of latency.


On the other end, this screen quickly gave me eye strain:

http://www.iiyama.com/be_fr/produits/prolite-b2409hds-1/#les spécifications

(sorry, this one is in French)


Does anyone know what's the latency on Apple's laptop screens? Or even on the iMac?

Oct 9, 2012 4:27 AM in response to AxelTerizaki

Both of those screens use TN panels, which have the best pixel response time of all (and worst everything else), the NEC you said has 5ms prt, the iiyama I read has 2ms. These are all specs from the company of course, and usually mean grey to grey response, actual response time is somewhat higher, but still small. Apple displays use IPS panels, which have a higher (slower) response time than the ones you listed. Usually over 10ms. My advice is you shouldn't be looking at the response time as the source of your problems.


But the fact you had different experiences with two at first look very similar monitors is interesting. Can you perform the flicker test on the NEC?

Oct 9, 2012 6:43 AM in response to Dovez

there are interesting thing with resolutions with rMPB:



System settings allows you to select 5 screen sizes – 1024 x 640, 1280 x 800, 1440 x 900(default one), 1680 x 1050, 1920 x 1200
Once you select one, it retinezes it (x2 on both dimensions) so you get 2048×1280, 2560×1600, 2880×1800, 3360×2100, 3840×2400

then it upscales (in case of first two) ot downscales(in case of last two) the image to fit 2880×1800.
So blur (in case of upscale) and lost pixels (after downscale) are not that noticable when pixels are small (220 pixel per inch).


(c) http://netkas.org/?p=1139


this combined with internal LCD dither can lead to subtle flickering/subpixel drizzling of image on some resolutions.

Oct 9, 2012 9:37 AM in response to CoreLinker

Flicker test? Do you have a link to it?


I'm currently using the NEC display right now, I did return the iiyama one, so I won't be able to run any test on the iiyama.


Also, I used this screen since 2009-2010 :

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF06a/382087-382087-64283-72270-3884470- 3955309.html?dnr=1

and it worked fine for me as well. By looking at its specs, I realized the major difference between it and the iiyama was the latency, so I decided to try the NEC one, and it worked just fine (I needed about one or two days to get used to it.)

Oct 9, 2012 12:39 PM in response to AxelTerizaki

The major difference between the HP and the iiyama is that the HP is CCFL backlit. The major difference between the iiyama and NEC COULD be flicker.


You don't need to test the iiyama, I'm 100% sure it flickers. I haven't seen the NEC on a list of flicker free LED monitors (nor any monitor lesser than 27") but who knows.


Here's the article about flicker: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/pulse_width_modulation.htm

It tells you how to test for it. But at first it's much simpler to just lower the backlight and wave a pencil in front of a white background. If you see many individual pencils instead of a blur, a stroboscopic/staccato effect, then there's definite flicker and you don't need to test further. There's also other methods of detection as we found, like filming the screen with the iPhone 4> camera and looking for scan lines.


I really suggest you read this thread to catch up on some of the stuff we discovered and problems people have encountered.

Oct 9, 2012 4:56 PM in response to RMartin111

hey guys, sorry to veer off topic slightly, but could any one confirm if, seeing as this monitor doesnt say LED backlit anywhere on the specs, can I be confident that means its CCFL backlit?


http://www.dell.com/ed/business/p/dell-e170s/pd


From my reading and (very basic) understanding of the specs, it doesnt say either way, whereas for other models on the site it clearly advertises LED. It makes sense that they wouldnt broadcast that its CCFL if that is outdated technology though...


Im sure i used this model number, without any pain whatsoever in my last job, (2005-2011) so want to recommend to my new job they install this monitor for me as my problems with their HP LED monitors are well documented, but want to be sure its CCFL not LED (or is there another alternative it could be to those two?), as they have already made one wasted purchase on me and i dont want it to happen again. It seems odd that a company as big as DELL would still sell discontinued technology. I wonder if it is a newer take on an older model?


Any clarification is much appreciated! thanks all!

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.