Mac Book Pro (Late 2008) and glossy screen

I actually use my iMac, which also has a glossy screen (and a crap one at that... the MBP one is FAR FAR better).

Good enough for most photographers. Photo prints are usually glossy anyway, so surely it's more accurate???

Those who need absolute 100% perfect colours should surely plug in a CRT, as they don't have the viewing angle issues that ALL LCDs have, and calibrate that.

All,
Is just me, but I have been to 2 different Apple stores and I have noticed the following. The MacBook 13" appears not to have the problem but the MacBook Pro 15" has it to an extreme level. Just like the 20" iMac but far worse if you look at the MacBook Pro 15" from even a slight angle the color gray / silver of iTunes becomes a very bad yellowish color. On one model it became green. The iMac 20" was explained as being a cheaper LCD manufacturing process whereas the 24" iMac does not have this problem. Glossiness is an issue but when even my wife doesn't want want because when my daughter shows her pictures on the iMac Pro she will be sitting at an angle. I can't even imagine why Steve Jobs let this out. I was so looking forward to these models. But the color shift is a massive deal killer on an otherwise amazing machine. For the life of me I don't understand why this is not a huge discussion point and none of the RSS feeds from the prominent websites are even mentioning it. Am I missing something here? Comments please.

As a long time user of Apple computers and products, I also wasn't pleased with the glossy only option. I must admit they do give a nice sheen when watching films or browsing photos.. but if I wanted my computer for that, I would have bought a iMac with Apple TV! It seemed to me that the glossy option was to appeal to users of windoze machines and boost Apple sales, which is good from a sales point of view but.. we did have the option on higher end laptops (mbp) of a non-glossy option. I suggest that Apple not only try and appeal to new customers but also support their loyal ones too.. If I wanted to sit in a dark room with no windows and a sweaty joystick, I would have been a long time windoze customer already... instead I wanted a computer that was a pleasure to use as well as a machine capable for my needs.

It seems like Apple is no longer thinking different... I hope they don't go all the way and start putting blue neon light displays on the front of the machines showing the processor temperature as well!

Very true, but if you read some other posts you would have noted I said I had my reservations about the glossy screen but I bought the new MacBook Pro anyway and after some time using it, I have no reservations about the screen.

The fact is colour correction on any notebook is restricted by the screen as none offer full Adobe colour gamut.

I also stated that the glossy screen is fine to do some light image editing with a view to showing a client the finished result, but further tweaking would be carried out on my Eizo based Mac Pro system.

The screen bit quality is paramount when it comes to colour correction. Most notebooks are fitted with very bright 6-bit LED panels which actually show @242k colours. The screen incorporates a dithering method to fool your eyes into seeing millions of colours.

I have 6-bit, 8-bit and 12-bit displays, all hardware calibrated. If I take an image I have colour corrected on the 12-bit display and show it at the same time on all three displays, using the same colour profile, the image looks different on each display.

The 6-bit display looks slightly washed out, the 8-bit looks much better but the 12-bit display looks stunning. A glass panel in front of the screen doesn't make that much difference, although with a 6-bit glossy screen, the image has a better contrast balance than on the 6-bit matte screen.
Glossy screens are a nightmare to calibrate accurately, but when it is a glossy 6-bit LED panel, it doesn't really make that much difference when compared to a 12 or 14-bit display.

My earlier comments were in an attempt to address the real issue of notebooks, namely by way of cutting costs, 6-bit LED panels are being used with dithering applied to fool you into thinking you are seeing millions of colours, when in fact you are only seeing a few hundred thousand colours.

LED colour depths: 6-bit LED shows @242 - 265 thousand colours, 8-bit shows @16 million colours, 12-bit @68 billion colours etc.

See here: http://www.chipshow.com/ledknowledge/LED-Display-Color-depth.htm

When you compare the colour capabilities in real terms as opposed to a cosmetic glass panel, the glass panel in front of a 6-bit dithered screen will not make it that much worse to colour correct.

Personally I do prefer a matte screen, but having used the new MacBook Pro, I was impressed enough to buy one and having used my own machine for the whole day today, I am thoroughly impressed with it's capabilities. I have edited and submitted images done on this machine without any negative comment about image quality.

You are not being forced into buying the new MacBook Pro. If you really can't stand a glossy screen and can see no way of working round the piece of glass, there are many matte screened notebooks out there, feel free to use your freedom of choice and buy one of them.

My earlier comments were an obviously unsuccessful attempt to explain the real issue with colour correction on notebooks, namely low bit depth LED panels being used, not whether it has a sheet of glass in front of the LED panel or not.

Many posters are harping on about matte screen over glossy screen, that is personal choice and doesn't really make that much difference when arguing the case about colour correction on the move. If colour correction is that important (as it is with me) I primarily use my Eizo based Mac Pro to image edit. Instead of glossy or matte, we should be arguing for manufacturers to put higher bit depth panels in their pro machines so that colour correction on the move can be as accurate as possible.

Message was edited by: necronym

It was mentioned somewhere that "only" 10% of purchases had a matte display.
I wonder why Apple thinks that 10% loss of customers is a good bargain.

I like that advices:"get a CRT!" I wonder where you can buy a new one. CRTs are dead.

Apple probably knows that a good percentage of the matte screen buyers will eventually cave in and buy anyway. I'm a good example of that. I was a die-hard fan of matte screens, but after getting accustomed to it on my black MacBook, I've come to prefer the glossy screens. To me they seem to be sharper.

Also, lest anyone doubts the validity of my opinion, I used to do a lot of working in our publishing department so I do know the difference. How anyone can claim that any screen can perfectly or near-perfectly match printed output--photos or other publications--I will never understand. They are fundamentally different visual experiences; displays are transmissive and additive (light sources where all colors add together to create white, photos/paper are reflective and subtractive because all colors sum to black.

Finally, just a pet peeve, but who made the rule that because the machine has Pro at the end of its name that they can only be used by publishing professionals?

BanditoB wrote:


Finally, just a pet peeve, but who made the rule that because the machine has Pro at the end of its name that they can only be used by publishing professionals?

No one said that, it's just 90% of the hardware makes is geared towards hobbyists and amateurs.

If they are going to tack Pro on to the end of a piece of hardware you'd think that they would at least talk to a few of them to find out what they prefer.

RamaFan, for some unexplained reason, tried to get noticed by posting the following: "...Glossy Screen! Oh no! boo-hoo; we don't want it!....."But, but... why?" Says a pro photographer buddy of mine (I just dabble). I say. "Sit down here and pull up a few photos." He does and low-and-behold the glossy screen isn't a problem. At all..."

Why don't I believe a single word of what you just said? Well...maybe because any 'pro photographer' worth spit would never act that way?!! Oh He||...why do I bother at all??? You obviously don't have a clue, but I wonder...why did you feel the need to go through all the trouble to register, then post something so ****** lame? This discussion isn't just about reflections on a screen...and a pro photographer would know that! Not being able to effectively calibrate is the only problem as far as I'm concerned...I could give a rip about reflections! Hey, I like pretty monitors as much as the next guy, but NOT for the machine I hafta do work on!

BT in NYC

I am a freelance photographer and I will admit that I was concerned about the new MBP. The glossy display is the first for me in fourteen years and I will need an adapter to connect my 1DsII for tethered shooting. After four days, I am getting used to the display and I've just started to edit a couple images. The machine feels faster and the trackpad takes a little time to get used to while using CS3. The images on my website were edited on a PB Aluminum and then previous generation MBP. The proofs for promo pieces were spot on converted to CYMK and PDN used one for their issue on careers in the photo business. Let me know if the images are unacceptable... www.tcphoto.org

I saw the Mac forums that leaked the details and was not happy about the predictions. But, I decided that I was not going to be an old dog and learn a few new tricks. If Apple is going to abandon the matte displays I better adjust. What else am I going to do, by a Dell? BTW, imagine the next generation 30" Cinema Display connected to the MBP in the studio.

from necronym: "The 6-bit display looks slightly washed out, the 8-bit looks much better but the 12-bit display looks stunning. A glass panel in front of the screen doesn't make that much difference, although with a 6-bit glossy screen, the image has a better contrast balance than on the 6-bit matte screen."

Is the 17" Macbook Pro matte screen 6 bit or 8 bit?

I found the post above with the link to video showing game play of bioshock on MBP funny... you can see the reflection of the guy filming it the whole time.

Why at the very least wouldn't Apple use a less reflective glass? like museums use?

I went to the apple store today and looked at the new laptops. The over reflective glass is what gets me. I was a windows switcher, my fist mac was a mac mini. I found I really liked OS/X. Next I got a Macbook. I was ready to buy a 24" Imac, but apple had changed from the white to the alu Imac. I couldn't stand the reflections from the shinny glass, it just turned the display into a big mirror. So that turned into a No-go. I just kept the mini instead.

Now I'd like to upgrade to a MBP from my black Macbook. BUT it's the same problem here too. So no sale to me. I've sent Apple feedback asking for a non glare version of the MBP. They make make one, I'll buy it, they don't too bad.

P.S.> I've seen several comments above to the effect: "if you don't like it go buy a Dell". Well, maybe I will, but it makes me wonder, if folks go "buy a Dell" and spend the time and money to get windows versions of the type of software they need, do you think they'll really ever go thru that again to come back to Apple?

@tcphoto1
Did you edit the photos on your site with the new MBP? What do you mean with "PB alu and then previous MBP"?

I edited the images on the old Powerbook Aluminum 1.33. I then had a MBP 2.4 from the previous design for a short period of time when I redesigned my website to fit a wide screen display. I like the way my images look with the glossy display and have to get used to editing on it.

I’ve purchased a new Apple pro notebook every year since the early 90’s. Just came back from the Apple Store where I had wanted to purchase a new 15” MacBook Pro.

Nice machine except the glossy screen is way too reflective and a deal killer for me.

So I’m hoping that either Apple will offer a matte screen option or some vendor will come up with a quality screen overlay to accomplish that. It is very frustrating to have Apple abandon its Pro users wanting non-reflective screens.