Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
DisplayMate Praises New iPad Screen Sharpness and Color
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Retina Display is State-of-the-Art
I don't think people will be happy with lesser resolutions after this. How about an Apple TV with that resolution? The idea is to make pixels disappear. This requires roughly twice the resolution previously calculated.
Sooner or later, 2K or 4K can be released. At present, they're just in digital archives that way.
3D is phony. Extra definition? Makes it real.
I don't think people will be happy with lesser resolutions after this. How about an Apple TV with that resolution? The idea is to make pixels disappear. This requires roughly twice the resolution previously calculated.
Sooner or later, 2K or 4K can be released. At present, they're just in digital archives that way.
3D is phony. Extra definition? Makes it real.
Spent the first few hours just overwhelmed, literally laughing, at how incredible the new display is. I love all the reviews calling this a minor upgrade. If you dramatically improve the most fundamental component of the iPad -- the screen -- it transforms the whole user experience. For me it's night and day.
Text is pin sharp. Pictures so much more lifelike. Not fussed about the camera, I have a dslr for that, but it takes acceptable snaps. I guess I'll use it for Evernote and barcode scans, etc., but probably not much else.
There's a big speed increase, but I've come from an iPad 1. But the wifi performance is not good. My iPad 1 has much better signal pickup, and this one keeps dropping the wifi to go to cellular. Probably just a dud, so it's going back -- Apple didn't blink about providing a replacement.
But the screen! Wow, it is something else.
Text is pin sharp. Pictures so much more lifelike. Not fussed about the camera, I have a dslr for that, but it takes acceptable snaps. I guess I'll use it for Evernote and barcode scans, etc., but probably not much else.
There's a big speed increase, but I've come from an iPad 1. But the wifi performance is not good. My iPad 1 has much better signal pickup, and this one keeps dropping the wifi to go to cellular. Probably just a dud, so it's going back -- Apple didn't blink about providing a replacement.
But the screen! Wow, it is something else.
A little off topic, but that DisplayMate website looks like it was designed in 1996 and not updated since.
You hold an iPad at arms length. Your TV is about 10-20 feet away.
A "retina" TV already exists - 1080p on sets up to about 37" from a normal viewing distance won't look any less sharp than 4k.
If you're talking about a 60" TV, then 2k would be nice indeed.
iPhone you hold inches from your face so of course a better screen will be a noticable improvement.
An iPad is held about 12 inches away, in which the retina upgrade is minimal but notiable.
Sharpness isn't useful? Also, according to the article the color accuracy is better. That also sounds useful.
Its designed to be as simple as possible so that factors like browser choice don't effect the way certain reference drawings look that are on the website.
You can have a simple yet great design that works flawlessly on all browsers, you know.
Please read my post. I said you.
I agree that those holding their new iPad inches from their face will need to visit an optometrist in their immediate future.
I love it, it's actually close to neutral white, the previous iPads have been too blue (which is the case with the default settings of almost all consumer screens). Finally looks like a decent greyscale to me. The one big complaint I still have with the iPad screen is the black levels are mediocre, which you really only notice in dark lighting. Other than that it's outstanding. But I would really like to be able to use my Colormunki Display to calibrate it, it could probably be even better with a custom calibration.
I have viewed such iPad retina images on posts such as these on my iMac, MacBook Air and original iPad. While I can see some differences of posted photos, I can't see the Retina Hoopla because none of the screens I am using to look at those images are retina display devices.
So I guess my question is, if you can't view in retina and all its glory, why even post images stating such value? If I have a iPhone 4 or iPad 3 then sure I can see the difference but not having that capability, doesn't that make posting these photos mute.
Okay, now you can flame me... But I'm not being anti Apple just saying as I type this post from my MacBook Air that I don't see anything special with the crispness, sharpness, colors, look, feel etc. that those WITH a retina device do. So teh pics coming with this post touting the new iPad's retina screen does nothing for me. Unless someone can explain what I am missing...
But go Apple and your new iPad!
/
/
/
So I guess my question is, if you can't view in retina and all its glory, why even post images stating such value? If I have a iPhone 4 or iPad 3 then sure I can see the difference but not having that capability, doesn't that make posting these photos mute.
Okay, now you can flame me... But I'm not being anti Apple just saying as I type this post from my MacBook Air that I don't see anything special with the crispness, sharpness, colors, look, feel etc. that those WITH a retina device do. So teh pics coming with this post touting the new iPad's retina screen does nothing for me. Unless someone can explain what I am missing...
But go Apple and your new iPad!
/
/
/
Agreed. I think Adobe was a bit stupid to release Photoshop on the iPad before Lightroom.
I have viewed such iPad retina images on posts such as these on my iMac, MacBook Air and original iPad. While I can see some differences of posted photos, I can't see the Retina Hoopla because none of the screens I am using to look at those images are retina display devices.
So I guess my question is, if you can't view in retina and all its glory, why even post images stating such value? If I have a iPhone 4 or iPad 3 then sure I can see the difference but not having that capability, doesn't that make posting these photos mute.
Okay, now you can flame me... But I'm not being anti Apple just saying as I type this post from my MacBook Air that I don't see anything special with the crispness, sharpness, colors, look, feel etc. that those WITH a retina device do. So teh pics coming with this post touting the new iPad's retina screen does nothing for me. Unless someone can explain what I am missing...
But go Apple and your new iPad!
/
/
/
That picture in the MR article isn't meant to highlight the sharpness of the new iPad, but rather the saturation. In fact, if you go to that page on the original article, they state that inaccuracies are introduced when posting pictures for comparison on the web. But it's still quite obvious that the saturation of the new iPad is significantly improved from that picture...
http://www.displaymate.com/Color_Diffs_6.html
The reflective screen is the thing I would most like to see improved now that that the resolution has been sorted. Same goes for all the reflective Apple screens.
I have viewed such iPad retina images on posts such as these on my iMac, MacBook Air and original iPad. While I can see some differences of posted photos, I can't see the Retina Hoopla because none of the screens I am using to look at those images are retina display devices.
So I guess my question is, if you can't view in retina and all its glory, why even post images stating such value? If I have a iPhone 4 or iPad 3 then sure I can see the difference but not having that capability, doesn't that make posting these photos mute.
Okay, now you can flame me... But I'm not being anti Apple just saying as I type this post from my MacBook Air that I don't see anything special with the crispness, sharpness, colors, look, feel etc. that those WITH a retina device do. So teh pics coming with this post touting the new iPad's retina screen does nothing for me. Unless someone can explain what I am missing...
But go Apple and your new iPad!
/
/
/
I was actually wondering the same thing. Even if we see a full scale 1:1 pixel representation of the iPad screen, on a computer screen for instance, the pixel density just isn't there to see much of a difference. For the article image I think it is mostly about the color.
The important thing to take away from all this, and the thing they are trying to stress, is that this is an incredible, sharp display. That is really hard to explain to people in general or represent on medium that isn't as high quality.
Wow
The struck me most from the article: "In fact with some minor calibration tweaks the new iPad would qualify as a studio reference monitor."
That is truly amazing. Congrats to the Apple team.
I saw the new iPad today for the first time, at an Apple store. Wow. I will not be able to resist for long. I couldn't tell any difference in weight or size for the iPad 2 (which i use extensively). Sweet Momma!
The struck me most from the article: "In fact with some minor calibration tweaks the new iPad would qualify as a studio reference monitor."
That is truly amazing. Congrats to the Apple team.
I saw the new iPad today for the first time, at an Apple store. Wow. I will not be able to resist for long. I couldn't tell any difference in weight or size for the iPad 2 (which i use extensively). Sweet Momma!
I agree with you in terms of current screen quality. But with a true retina display, it may be that 1650x1050 or something in that range would work quite well. One can read much smaller sizes in decently reproduced print than you can on screen. As screen resolution approaches print, smaller sizes should suffice and I say that as someone who now has to use glasses to read just about anything. I'd like to see the 15" displays to go 1080 vertical, so they can play back HD without rescaling.
I have viewed such iPad retina images on posts such as these on my iMac, MacBook Air and original iPad. While I can see some differences of posted photos, I can't see the Retina Hoopla because none of the screens I am using to look at those images are retina display devices.
So I guess my question is, if you can't view in retina and all its glory, why even post images stating such value? If I have a iPhone 4 or iPad 3 then sure I can see the difference but not having that capability, doesn't that make posting these photos mute.
Okay, now you can flame me... But I'm not being anti Apple just saying as I type this post from my MacBook Air that I don't see anything special with the crispness, sharpness, colors, look, feel etc. that those WITH a retina device do. So teh pics coming with this post touting the new iPad's retina screen does nothing for me. Unless someone can explain what I am missing...
But go Apple and your new iPad!
/
/
/
Not to flame you, but since it is not possible to show all the glories of the new iPad's screen on people's monitors, it would be advisable for YOU to go visit an Apple Store or Best Buy to take a look at it yourself. We can't do that for you.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B176 Safari/7534.48.3)
It's funny thinking back on all of the people who authoritatively scoffed at the idea of a retina display on the new iPad.
I wonder if the new iPhone will get the quad core chip or whether they'll opt for more battery life. I hope the improve the battery life in the next iPhones.
It's funny thinking back on all of the people who authoritatively scoffed at the idea of a retina display on the new iPad.
I wonder if the new iPhone will get the quad core chip or whether they'll opt for more battery life. I hope the improve the battery life in the next iPhones.
Just from my experience of owning the high-res 15" and 13" MacBook Air, I found elements to be a bit on the small side for comfortable use. Sure, I could easily read it, and it wasn't that it lacked sharpness, it was just too small, and would increase your chances of straining your eyes.
2880x1800 would be a nice size. Elements remaining the same size on the 15", but fonts appearing much sharper (along with optimised images).
3360x2100 might appear one day, but elements would be same size as they are on the 1680x1050 15" panel, and even though sharper like print, not the most comfortable to read off for long periods.
I've always believed you should get screen real-estate by inches, not by pixels.