Going to purchase a new MBP - Adobe users wanted

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by RiCEADDiCTBOY, Aug 15, 2009.

  1. RiCEADDiCTBOY macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #1
    I'm about to purchase a new 17 or 15 inch MBP. Maybe the 17 only because costing a little more. My debate with myself is if matte really is even relavent anymore. The reflection never really an issue as I rarely use it outside. I do a lot of graphic work and photo editing. The 13" unibody MacBook I owned was more a less a testing product for my interest in Apple laptops. Used them and the desktops but never owned. Here are some user and Arstechnia graphic designer comments on glossy vs matte screens:

    'very rich dark tones' sounds like a nine-year-old evaluating his school friend's painting. Yeah, the glossy screens have a broader tonal range exactly because the tones go more gradually to a deeper black. Any side-by-side calibration will show this; the first 'outline' of a '1', then a '2', and so on will show that most matte screens will show an outline at 3 or 4 at best; I've calibrated glossy Apple laptop and 24" desktop displays to with '2' of completely black '0'. the gradations are finer than 256 levels, obviously, but 'very rich dark tones' tell you nothing. Is the monitor properly calibrated, so that the tonal range ramps smoothly through mids to blacks accuartely? Are highlight details possible, are the ramps to white clean and accuarte? Are there color tints, hues, color distortions? Are the blacks 'washed out', or do they cleanly and smoothly drop into black, gradually and with no posterization or banding? THESE are questions to ask while yoy do a hardware calibration on either screen. Many, and I mean many, professional Photoshop instructors and photographers use glossy screens, from Scott Kelby to Dirck Halstead. They do because of the PRESENCE of 'very rich dark tones'on calibrated Apple MBP laptop displays, not washed-out matte dark tones; even on properly calibrated LCD displays, matte hasn't a chance in the 'very rich dark tone' department. Not by a mile. It's a matter of personal preference. But if you want to lose the possibility of reflections, you'll also lose the possibility of matching an Apple MBP glossy display's very rich dark tones' ;^)

    --------------------------------------

    First up is the person who tries to equate the differences to glossy versus matte paper stock. You simply can't do that. The mediums are just not comparable. One relies on reflective light to carry the image to your eyes, the other emits light. To put it another way, a printed CMYK image relies on subtractive color, while an image on an LCD uses additive color. It is an apples and oranges comparison.


    I suspect that the false comparison with the paper stock argument feeds another persistent myth, which is that glossy screens are not for professionals. Let's just leave aside the the fact that an image on a monitor will never entirely match an image printed on paper no matter what kind of screen you have, for a variety of reasons not least amongst them the differences between subtractive and additive color cited above. The simple fact of the matter is that a matte screen, far from a neutral view, is actually distorted when compared to a glossy screen. The matte coating that diffuses glare and reflections also works on the image on the screen, reducing contrast and saturation.

    In a properly light-controlled environment (without which there is zero point in talking about professional work), with all tech specs being equal, and with properly calibrated screens, a glossy LCD is going to outperform a matte one every time. This is particularly evident in the higher contrast a glossy screen provides, the deeper blacks are what give it the richer look people often comment on when first exposed to a glossy display. Like any consumer tech this can be abused and cranked up to impress people in stores, but no pro uses a screen the way it comes out of the box.
     
  2. dotcodotuk macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #2
    Which is all taken into account when your hardware calibration device sits on the screen and measures the output.

    This is a calibration test of a 17" MBP with the matte screen - the smaller the bars are, the more accurate the colours. The report shows the display to be 99% accurate when calibrated to sRGB.

    [​IMG]

    I find that hard to believe.

    A calibrated matte screen and a calibrated glossy screen are just about as accurate as each other. An uncalibrated screen, of either type, is way out in terms of luminance, white-point and colour-balance. Once calibrated the characteristics of the screens are changed in such a manner that it makes the glossy panel look like a mirror with a LCD behind it - mainly because the luminance has needed to be dramatically reduced.

    Ultimately it's personal choice, but anyone expecting their glossy screen to look like it did when they removed it from the packaging and switched it on for the first time is in for a shock. I trialled one for 14-days and couldn't find a single place where I could use it without being constantly distracted by the glare and reflections. In comparison the matte screen is excellent, everywhere.

    Well, at least there's one thing I'll agree on with you.
     
  3. grayskyz macrumors regular

    grayskyz

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #3
    These conversations are always interesting to me as a creative professional. I honestly don't know many people who attempt to use their laptop screens as a proofing device. As a photographer, I need something "closely calibrated" as opposed to 100% perfect. That's what EIZO and Lacie monitors are for. Get a spyder pro and like you said, control your environment and pony up for a real monitor and you're set.

    For my set up, I ditched the 15" 2.0GHZ got a 13" 2.53 MBP w/ a 250 and 500 GB drive. I'm waiting for the price to come down and then I'll get 8GM of RAM and I'll have the light, go anywhere system I always wanted.

    That's my 2¢!
    C.
     
  4. RiCEADDiCTBOY thread starter macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #4
    and how has the glossy screen impacted you (if at all) in your day to day work?
     
  5. grayskyz macrumors regular

    grayskyz

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #5
    I don't see much difference. The matte screen has some glare as well. Turning up the brightness occasionally when there is some glare eliminates a lot of it. The brighter the screen the less glare. So far I'm enjoying the screen, seems much nicer than my old one but, I'm guessing that it has a lot to do with the LED and the wider range of color.


    C.
     
  6. RiCEADDiCTBOY thread starter macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #6
    do you ever miss not having an express card slot? the reason i can't go with the 13" mbp is simply the lack of a dedicated gpu. i enjoyed my 13" mb but, i'm now opting for the higher priced 15" mbp...but, for like a 100 bucks more or so is the 17" mbp...then i'd be giving up portability. apple has me doing u-turns with each decision i try to set myself on...:mad:
     
  7. grayskyz macrumors regular

    grayskyz

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #7
    I had an awesome remote from speck (they don't make it anymore) that I used in my express slot. It was a slim remote for front row. That's the only thing I ever had in the express slot. The only other thing I would have used it for was a SD card reader which I never got around to buying. So, now I traded one for the other. The funny thing about the dedicated GPU for me was that I assisted for a photographer (I still assist, stupid economy) that had a 17" that I always put into discreet GPU mode to save on battery. Again, I'm mostly a specialty case because I travel and battery is a concern. Other things (not big things) to consider are accessories specific to sizes, Bags, cases, etc. And the weight isn't that much of a difference it seems but, carry a keyboard, trackball, spare drive, emergency boot drive, memory cards, readers, a camera gear and you'll start to figure out what you can leave behind. If you are always going to work off the screen, go 17". What kind of specific work do you do?

    C.
     
  8. RiCEADDiCTBOY thread starter macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #8
    i'm not going to always work off the screen. in fact at home i prefer to use an external monitor. the only true reason for me is to be afraid that from time to time i might need that express card slot...

    i primarily work with adobe illustrator and fireworks. i also do photography and interested in getting more involved with dj (for personal use and fun) / music.

    i honestly would probably be happier with the 15" just that small bit of insecurity about the express card slot and if matte would be the best route for me. i used the glossy and didn't mind it, but i wanted to hear from others who've been on both sides of the apple fence. the reason why is that i can get the apple laptops tax free, but with no matte option. so if i wanted a matte screen i would have to pay extra and taxes.
     
  9. grayskyz macrumors regular

    grayskyz

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #9
    I'm trying to think what you'd use the express slot for. Where are only a few things with the appropriate mac drivers that you could use. I know for video some of those vr boxes and such require the use of an express slot. I'm not familiar with DJ or sound equipment either. Anyway, matte screen vs. gloss will always be a debate with no right answer, only what's right for you. good luck!

    C.
     

Share This Page