iPhone 7's 'Best LCD Display Ever' Marks 'Major Upgrade Over iPhone 6'

[69Mustang]

Not wanting to walk in to any arguments here, I thought I'd note that Phil Schiller on stage mentioned that the camera captures in wider colour than could be shown on the projector in the hall; he said that they look even more amazing on the iPhone's screen.

Wider colours are important, whether you're a professional photographer or not. I'm the kind of person who likes to notice the natural beauty in the world (it helps that I live in a very green city with lots of parks and lakes). Anyway, I often feel like I'm seeing an amazing scene but when I take a photo it doesn't look nearly as impressive at it was at the time. Lots of the reason for that is that the colours are not correct - the deep, swirling purply-red of the sunset, the screaming yellow leaves of a tree, etc. Those are the things that strike me IRL, and really they are what I want to capture as much as the objects in the scene.

I'm not a professional by any stretch, but I think lots of people have the same feeling. And better colour reproducing in that case gets a big thumbs-up from me!

No worries mate. There's no argument to walk into. The wider color gamut wasn't my issue. I understand the benefits. It's just the way citysnaps was representing the benefits... and his OCD repetitiveness regarding being a photographer. That photo you mentioned, it must have been a 4K photo. Afaik, below 4K the iPhone chooses sRGB instead of the wider DCI-P3 color gamut.

I'm not a professional either. I do have decent kit, but it's easier to let citysnaps maintain his opinions instead of providing evidence that contradicts his "all my info comes from the internet" theory.

 

[WhiteHawk]

Guess I'm not listening to anything they have to say from now on as my iPhone 7 display is garbage compared to my iPhone 6.

 

[frifra]

This supposedly fixes it.

That tweak made me think about that:

 

[AppleScruff1]

But but but SAMSUNG! Galaxy!!!!!

......

When Displaymate said the Galaxy had the best display some here declared they were biased.

 

[xmonkey]

Guess I'm not listening to anything they have to say from now on as my iPhone 7 display is garbage compared to my iPhone 6.

What's wrong with it (just curious)?

 

[techwhiz]

All parts that go into Apple products must meet minimum specifications defined by Apple. They only accept the best / most reliable while meeting a balance with cost and profit. The much-discussed situation of 5400 RPM hard drives placed into recent Macs is an example of where they did sacrifice performance without sacrificing reliability in order to meet target profit margins.

So while Apple may get screens from a third-party, you can be assured that they have not been purchased blindly ("oh, you have displays? Okay, we'll take a million!"). No... each part goes through rigorous testing first.

For a very comprehensive overview of work that Apple does directly on display technology, go here:
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/displays-lcdtouch/

They do a lot of work that contributes directly and indirectly to finished products, and the industry as a whole.

I'm an engineer for more than 20 years in the semiconductor industry.
I fully understand the process for OEM technology.
What I was pointing out was that Apple didn't design nor manufacture the display.
They use a display that someone else builds. That means the display technology is available to others and not exclusive to Apple. Just like the camera modules. They might write custom firmware but the module is not designed or manufactured by Apple.

Nothing wrong with that but Apple does not deserve the credit for the "best display".

 

[dannys1]

Interesting choice of words there. Who determines what is and isn't "perfect"? Seems more like a subjective point of view to me. Not to take away from the stunning display that they're touting, but I think essentially calling it perfect is a bit much.

I believe they mean in terms of reaching the colour accuracy measurements.

 

[AndyDiamond]

i was in store playing with the new iphone 7's. I have an iphone 6 plus and honestly i didn't see a massive improvement.

If any of you are on the fence upgrading do yourself a favor and visit the store.

The iphone 7 doesn't feel that much newer than the 2 year old iphone 6.

Kind of agree there -
I was at the Apple store today - took a couple of pics with my iPhone 6 Plus and the demo iPhone 7 Plus. AirDropped the iPhone 7 Plus pics to my phone while I was in the store. Opened both in Photoshop and put them side-by-side.
I tried to capture each image with the same exposure (not a controlled test at all) and both were shot in HDR using the Apple camera app.
iPhone 7 Plus images appear clearer (sharper) with a wide color gamut but of course they were also 12MP so the 6 Plus' 8MP images looked smaller.

However I noticed the awful image 'smearing' is still present in the iPhone 7 Plus image.
This seems to be the result of jpeg image compression or noise reduction (especially in low light) and you can see it clearly when you zoom in.
That is something I hate about my iPhone 6 Plus images.
I did not get a chance to shoot RAW - none of the demo iPhones had a camera app that could shoot RAW installed and the Apple camera does not support RAW shooting. Maybe this will make a difference as far as image quality goes (or not - maybe we'll end up with really noisy images!).

The zoom lens is quite fun, especially in video where you can manually zoom in between the 1x and 2x optical lenses - it was very smooth and could be very useful. I tried it in 1080p mode @30fps and it was very good. Would image 60fps would be even smoother.

Overall though, from what I can see, the difference in the shots is hardly earthshaking, quality-wise. There is an improvement but.....

I'd need to to way more testing out on the street etc.

Trying hard to justify upgrading to the 7 Plus but when it comes to shelling out cash for something that seems half-baked it's tough...

 

[xmonkey]

It gets dismissed so much because it isn't as large a benefit as it seems at first. In order for it to be a big power win, you need a display which is:

- Mostly black
- Most of the time
- With tiny amounts of useful content appearing sporadically

There may be some kiosk and bedside-clock applications where that makes sense, but your phone is usually either locked in your pocket or being actively used. You don't often leave it with the screen off for long periods of time where it's important to see the occasional small amount of content. It's just not a big deal.

If you want truly meaningful always-on display, have a look at e-paper.

Which is precisely what can make it useful for notifications. The original Moto X used this advantage of OLED to great effect and had what I consider to be the best notification system on a smartphone. Not everyone leaves their phones in their pockets, either. When I'm at work it's face-up on my desk 99% of the time I'm there.

There are definite benefits to this aspect of OLED and I don't think it should be so easily dismissed. If you've used a phone that took advantage of it with a well-designed notification system I think you'd have to agree.

 

[Macinva]

But... but... so many people said it was the 6SS and not worth an update?

Can't wait for the seas of incredulity when the iPhone 7S is announced next year. I honestly can't wait.

Those same people that said that are most likely either using their new 7 or waiting for it to be delivered. People complain to hear themselves complain I think. Mine is coming tomorrow, can't wait!

 

[Steve686]

Hope you can see it with your display. It's called OLED burn in.

I think Apple may have been looking to contract an LED screen manufacturer?
Hope they do and have any burn in issues worked out because I do,love the S7 AMOLED.

 

[69Mustang]

No. In my first post, which you rebutted with snark and anger, I never brought up DCI-P3. Nice try.

You're right. You didn't bring it up in your first post. You brought it up in your 2nd post.
Genuinely curious, why do you keep mentioning anger? It's not Bettlejuice. It won't appear if you repeatedly say it.

"I also asked if you had any relevant info, but in your haste to label me angry you must have missed that."

And I provided relevant info comparing Adobe RGB and P3, the tradeoffs, and the fact that both having wide color gamuts, they were both good. Guess you missed that.

No I didn't miss that. I actually responded to that portion of your quote explaining I wasn't asking which was better. Maybe you missed that.

Speaking of missing things...

So do you have anything relevant regarding the benefit of DCI-P3 on iPhone photography? I'm asking... for a friend.

^^That was my question to you. To be fair, I did ask more that one question. You may have missed the one above.

While you're getting up to speed finding stuff on google, you might want to look up ad hominem.

I just did look it up: (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. I also looked up disingenuous. As in, it's pretty disingenuous to state your repeated claims regarding my supposed "internet knowledge" aren't an ad hominem attack. You ignore my replies and instead you imply I lack practical knowledge of photography therefore my opinion carries less wieght. That sir, is ad hominem. Well, according to my google search it's ad hominem.

When evaluating information, I'll always stick to putting much greater weight on information from people with direct relevant experience in the field over those whose sole experience on a subject is looking stuff up on google (that's not an attack on your character, btw - it's about how I choose to evaluate and weigh information). Especially when it comes to photography. So many people out there with loads of google "facts" and opinions, but with no work to show to demonstrate competency. Not surprised.

And you know I have no practical knowledge of photography... how is that?

 

[BootsWalking]

This could be said of any monitoring device, the output of a color printing press or microphone...

The reasons it matters to professionals are several. One is confidence in one's tools (and one's work). It's generally better to know you have gear that exceeds, rather than matches, the gear used by the average end user. If your goal is, "the best possible," "good enough" may not be a fruitful frame of mind. Another is cumulative errors/degradation/inaccuracy. Individual inaccuracies may be imperceptible, but the cumulative effect may not be. And, of course, "imperceptible" to the average beholder can be glaringly obvious to those who spend their days doing it.

Sure, there's also the placebo effect, Emperor's New Clothes and all that, but Apple tends to focus on features that users can detect, rather than numbers on spec sheets.

Yeah, there's always a point of diminishing returns (or overkill), but we're talking about under-$1,000 products here, not $100,000 speaker systems.

I understand but again, the color errors we're speaking of for these classes of display (iPhone 7 and Samsung OLED) are beyond the threshold of human perception and are significantly better than consumer-grade devices. As for the individual vs cumulative errors, those are accounted for in the color error summary metric - in fact two devices with the same metric may have errors at different parts of the gamut, so one has to look at the color wedge to know where the measured color errors are for a given device.

 

[Soni Sanjay]

At arm's lenght, it doesn't matter if it has 1440p or 1080p, everything above 280-300 dpi looks the same.

Yeah, the apologist in action...

 

[citysnaps]

You're right. You didn't bring it up in your first post. You brought it up in your 2nd post.
Genuinely curious, why do you keep mentioning anger? It's not Bettlejuice. It won't appear if you repeatedly say it.


No I didn't miss that. I actually responded to that portion of your quote explaining I wasn't asking which was better. Maybe you missed that.

Speaking of missing things...

^^That was my question to you. To be fair, I did ask more that one question. You may have missed the one above.


I just did look it up: (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. I also looked up disingenuous. As in, it's pretty disingenuous to state your repeated claims regarding my supposed "internet knowledge" aren't an ad hominem attack. You ignore my replies and instead you imply I lack practical knowledge of photography therefore my opinion carries less wieght. That sir, is ad hominem. Well, according to my google search it's ad hominem.

And you know I have no practical knowledge of photography... how is that?

"So do you have anything relevant regarding the benefit of DCI-P3 on iPhone photography? I'm asking... for a friend."

And the comments I made regarding Adobe RGB vs P3 are relevant. Differences in color space regarding Adobe's blues/greens vs P3's reds/yellows, the fact that both are considered wide color gamuts. And both are similarly wide and substantially larger than sRGB. Don't know what else I can offer. Oh yeah. And my conjecture Apple may have chosen that space based upon future camera strategy weighing video over stills.

"I just did look it up: (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining"

Calling someone an idiot, stupid, referring to reading comprehension, etc would be ad hominem.

Again, with respect to people offering advice and commenting, it's my choice giving more weight towards comments from those with relevant first hand experience over those that don't. The fact that you fall into the latter category isn't a dig at you, it's just where you happen to be. Calling that an ad hominem attack is just silly and very disingenuous.

"Genuinely curious, why do you keep mentioning anger?"

Go back to your first post and look at your comments and back-handed insults. Where does that come from? You're irritated that I preference some posts with, "Speaking as a photographer....," in order to provide context with what matters to me.

What's weird, was my point that you first commented on didn't have that, but rather said, "Unless you're a photographer who cares a lot about color and accuracy when editing photographs. If you're not very fussy, then it probably doesn't matter as much." Why? Because someone said the color accuracy differences between the Note and iPhone didn't have any real world applicability.

If you're not a photographer who's fussy, not a big deal. If you are, then it is.

My comment "Unless you're a photographer who cares a lot about color and accuracy when editing photographs." was appropriate and didn't refer to me, though it certainly applies.

 

[lordofthereef]

You can easily see the screen effect on the watch. See the pics at:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/watch-display-pixels-pentile.1894701/#post-21502967

Because of the way the watch is used it doesn't bother me as much.

I do own a Galaxy Tab S 8.4 which I bought because of the supposedly amazing 359 dpi display. It has the same issue with a sort of gritty opalescent look when showing white backgrounds. The new 9.7 ipad has a much better overall display to my eyes with a much sharper fine resolution on things such as small text. If you wanted to look at the math behind sub pixels for each pixel then the actual DPI of the Tab S 8.4 is pretty much the same as the ipad.

I'm just one of those people who are sensitive to Amoled I suppose. And then there is the whole flickering issue.

I think this can be summed up as a sensitivity issue.

While the pics are clear, to my naked eye, I see none of that when the watch is directly in front of me. So, I guess either I am really not sensitive to this, or you are much more than average, or a little of both.

FWIW I have seen what you speak of on other larger screens (obviously not tested them all).

 

[NavyDude065]

Yellow Screen Fix:
Here's a fix for you who have a yellowish display or some other unlikeable Color.
IOS 10, not sure if it's in older IOS versions.

Settings > Accessibility > Display Accommodations > Color Filters
Turn On
Select Color Tint and
Adjust Intensity & Hue to get the desired color.
Have fun.

 

[leechers]

Missing my CRT display... Best colour reproduction out there

 

[PBRsg]

Good!

Means it doesn't have burn in problems.

When I upgrade next year, my iPhone 5S will have lasted me four years. I am not interested in OLED if it has burn in problems.

 

[Ceviche Lover]

Yellow Screen Fix:
Here's a fix for you who have a yellowish display or some other unlikeable Color.
IOS 10, not sure if it's in older IOS versions.

Settings > Accessibility > Display Accommodations > Color Filters
Turn On
Select Color Tint and
Adjust Intensity & Hue to get the desired color.
Have fun.

For the 483754959934th time, this is NOT a fix. This also lowers the brightness level as well.

 

[Tech198]

but it's not OLED

Note yet...

And all of this sill won't make me upgrade...

(I'm a tough nut to crack)

 

[Keirasplace]

Okay okay, all very nice, but how does it stack up against an OLED? This is what consumers want to know.

It's much more accurate, less reflective, seemingly has a higher effective contrast, and if its very bright has less chance to burn in (or just wear out). So, seems generally so.
OLED had a gamut advantage that this thing has caught and OLED still has a better theoretical black point. That's only really meaningful if its pretty dark and since the Iphone screen is less reflective, you're losing your black anyway when there is light around.
OLED has a power advantage on a dark background but most content is not dark (the UI could be dark).
[doublepost=1474329718][/doublepost]

For the 483754959934th time, this is NOT a fix. This also lowers the brightness level as well.

Return or exchange the phone and quit whining, see I got the perfect fix.

 

[Krevnik]

No worries mate. There's no argument to walk into. The wider color gamut wasn't my issue. I understand the benefits. It's just the way citysnaps was representing the benefits... and his OCD repetitiveness regarding being a photographer. That photo you mentioned, it must have been a 4K photo. Afaik, below 4K the iPhone chooses sRGB instead of the wider DCI-P3 color gamut.

I'm not really sure what pixel count has to do with gamut. Considering the rear camera exceeds "4K" resolution on the iPhone 7, I don't know how you get "below 4K" from the sensor unless you crop, which would be after the gamut is figured out for the JPEG. The gamut and resolution are separate issues, but every shot from the 7 should be using DCI-P3 as the color space. If you shoot RAW with something like Lightroom Mobile, you should be able to output to Adobe RGB as well from the RAW on your desktop or laptop.

Why does Apple use DCI-P3 instead of Adobe RGB for the gamut? I really don't know. While each were setup for different purposes, they cover a lot of the same ground. DCI-P3 will handle reds slightly better, and Adobe RGB will handle greens slightly better. But both are kinda pointless if the colors represented are out of gamut for the display. And so if Apple can only pick one for their device, either one is actually pretty good. And aligning their photos' gamut to the display ensures you take advantage of the colors available, and don't wind up with squashed out-of-gamut colors in parts of it that look muted. The only thing I can think of is that by aligning to P3 they sacrifice some green gamut in exchange for matching a video color space that more of their customers can benefit from (not just one brand of content creators). Sucks if you are a photographer that doesn't care about video, but I suspect video is a bigger piece of the Apple creative market at the moment, considering Aperture was the first against the wall.

A good comparison between P3 and Adobe RGB as it applies to the iMac (and the iPhone 7 / iPad Pro 9.7 too) is here: http://www.astramael.com

 

[69Mustang]

"So do you have anything relevant regarding the benefit of DCI-P3 on iPhone photography? I'm asking... for a friend."

And the comments I made regarding Adobe RGB vs P3 are relevant. Differences in color space regarding Adobe's blues/greens vs P3's reds/yellows, the fact that both are considered wide color gamuts. And both are similarly wide and substantially larger than sRGB. Don't know what else I can offer. Oh yeah. And my conjecture Apple may have chosen that space based upon future camera strategy weighing video over stills.

"I just did look it up: (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining"

Calling someone an idiot, stupid, referring to reading comprehension, etc would be ad hominem.

Again, with respect to people offering advice and commenting, it's my choice giving more weight towards comments from those with relevant first hand experience over those that don't. The fact that you fall into the latter category isn't a dig at you, it's just where you happen to be. Calling that an ad hominem attack is just silly and very disingenuous.

"Genuinely curious, why do you keep mentioning anger?"

Go back to your first post and look at your comments and back-handed insults. Where does that come from? You're irritated that I preference some posts with, "Speaking as a photographer....," in order to provide context with what matters to me.

What's weird, was my point that you first commented on didn't have that, but rather said, "Unless you're a photographer who cares a lot about color and accuracy when editing photographs. If you're not very fussy, then it probably doesn't matter as much." Why? Because someone said the color accuracy differences between the Note and iPhone didn't have any real world applicability.

If you're not a photographer who's fussy, not a big deal. If you are, then it is.

My comment "Unless you're a photographer who cares a lot about color and accuracy when editing photographs." was appropriate and didn't refer to me, though it certainly applies.

Let's just agree to disagree. Neither of us seems to be convinced by the others argument. No biggie

 

[Taz Mangus]

Meanwhile Displaymate class the Note 7 as having the best display ever fitted to ANY mobile device including the iPhone 7.
Such a shame early reports indicate OLED screens will only be for the special edition giant phone slab Apple will launch next year.
I think LCD has had its day now.

DisplayMate said the iPhone 7 has "the most color accurate display" that it has ever measured, adding that the smartphone's display is "very likely considerably better than any mobile display, monitor, TV, or UHD TV" that consumers have. In technical terms, the iPhone 7 has a "Just Noticeable Color Difference" (JNCD) rating of 1.1, which is the best result of any smartphone it has ever tested.

Maybe you missed that part.