Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is glossy in the lead?

R

RustyMac

macrumors member
Original poster
Mar 21, 2007
76
0
I had posted this in someone's thread and thought it needed its own thread. I am a designer, fabricator and restorer. I always used matted or anti-glared screens when doing my work.

I have been noticing that the majority of displays that are being sold today are switching to glossy or glass. Even your modern televisions (LCD or Plasma) have shifted this way. Look at Samsung's televisions, the leader and manufacturer of LCDs, it seems that they started to switch to glossy.

It is interesting how everything has gone to glossy? Almost all of Apple's products have gone to glossy.

iMac = Glossy
24in Cinema Display = Glossy
iPhone = Glossy
iPod = Glossy
MacBook = Glossy
MacBook Pro 15.4 = Glossy

The only one that has a anti-glare option is the new 17" MacBook Pro and if you listen to what they said at Mac World 2009, "they provided this option for the people who will complain about a glossy screen." We all know that the anti-glared option is only offered in one of their computers now (17" MacBook). Is everything eventually going to go to a glossy screen? Well, look at the list above, everything else did!

Maybe glossy is a smarter choice? I know that blacks in a glossy screen stand out more and are richer compared to matted screens. I know that LCD can't perform blacks like the way Plasmas do. Is the glossy screen the solution for deeper colors? Can you sacrifice glare for deeper colors? I also heard that the 17" MBP will have a glass screen just like the 15.4" MBP but the glass will be treated to take the gloss out of it. Almost like etching the glass. Will this take away the clarity and sharpness of what is displayed?

Why has everything else has gone Glossy? And it is not just Apple products. There has to be a reason behind this.:confused:
 
this topic has really been done to death over the past year.

People have strong feelings, just like the Mac vs. PC question.

Glossy is great for TVs in dark rooms; matte is great for laptop computers likely to be outside, or in offices with many overhead lights.

If you want Apple to start offering matte options on their hardware, tell them (www.apple.com/feedback)
 
When the first macbooks came out with glossy screens i thought it was an awful move as the only time i had seen one was on a friends dell where they basically had a mirror for a screen and it was awful, but when they arrived they were a lot better than expected, now with my macbook pro and the extra brightness i rarely find any glare at all, only ever in a large black section, maybe the reason they are willing to convert the entire line to exclusively glossy is because they aren't bad these days! Well getting better every revision at least
 
RustyMac said:
Why has everything else has gone Glossy? And it is not just Apple products. There has to be a reason behind this.:confused:
Click to expand...

It's a massive international conspiracy called: ........Fashion

doh.jpg


I would just like to point out that for graphic design work you want the matte version, yes the blacks look deeper on glossy screens, but the colours arn't true or properly calibrated.
 
kastenbrust said:
I would just like to point out that for graphic design work you want the matte version, yes the blacks look deeper on glossy screens, but the colours arn't true or properly calibrated.
Click to expand...

..that is until you calibrate the screen. :D
 
Kronie said:
..that is until you calibrate the screen. :D
Click to expand...

Yeah but glossy screens still arn't accurate for graphic designing because they dont show true blacks.
Just search the forum, theres months worth of reading about it.
The only way to make the screens accurate would be to take off the stupid glossy coating.
I have a glossy one personally and like it, but i wouldnt use it for my design work.
 
i used all the new line of glossy laptops in the Apple store..and alot of my friends have macbooks and a few macbook air's and i use have used them outside, brightly lit office, dark room, everywhere. AND! i don't have a problem with it, i honestly think they almost look better..the only think i dislike about the new line is the trackpad >.<
 
kastenbrust said:
Yeah but glossy screens still arn't accurate for graphic designing because they dont show true blacks.
Just search the forum, theres months worth of reading about it.
The only way to make the screens accurate would be to take off the stupid glossy coating.
I have a glossy one personally and like it, but i wouldnt use it for my design work.
Click to expand...

Not true. A calibrated screen, is a calibrated screen, is a calibrated screen. There is leeway in the argument with regard to which is better for what final output is, ie paper prints, glossy finish, electronic distribution, traditional vs digital press, etc... No screen is has as wide a gamut as colors in real life, so you're always going to have to use some experience/knowledge and proofs for accurate work.

Studio monitors for audio work are the same way. There isn't a perfect pair that do the mixing work for you. A good ear can use crappy speakers, knowing what their deficiencies are and taking it into account.

The whole point of calibrating is for taking into individual screen inconsistencies, such as a red shift or general over-saturation from a glass outer layer.
 
What's ridiculous to me is that every time someone posts a new Matte vs Glossy thread, instead of just referring to the dozens of existing threads on the topic, people start the same arguments all over again! Nothing new is ever offered.... just a repeat of the exact same comments! The bottom line is that some prefer matte (for whatever reasons are important to them) and some prefer glossy (for whatever reasons are important to them). I doubt anyone is going to change their preference based on anything said in a forum. This topic has been beat to death!

Current count: 137 threads, 2,841 comments, 253,050 views
:rolleyes:
 
kastenbrust said:
I have a glossy one personally and like it, but i wouldnt use it for my design work.
Click to expand...

Really? You bought a $3,000 MBP and don't use it for design work? Kind of an expensive tool for surfing the net.

Personally I think a glossy screen can be calibrated just fine. Yes blacks can be a little off but the other colors are OK.

Hopefully, anyone doing any real design work is using a calibrated second monitor, at least for the color correction.
 
Kronie said:
Really? You bought a $3,000 MBP and don't use it for design work? Kind of an expensive tool for surfing the net.

Personally I think a glossy screen can be calibrated just fine. Yes blacks can be a little off but the other colors are OK.

Hopefully, anyone doing any real design work is using a calibrated second monitor, at least for the color correction.
Click to expand...

I bought a MacBook Air and would never use it for photo editing. I only download the pictures onto it in the field if needed and maybe check the focus. (I really wish they would offer a matte option)
 
Kronie said:
Really? You bought a $3,000 MBP and don't use it for design work? Kind of an expensive tool for surfing the net.

Personally I think a glossy screen can be calibrated just fine. Yes blacks can be a little off but the other colors are OK.

Hopefully, anyone doing any real design work is using a calibrated second monitor, at least for the color correction.
Click to expand...

Who said i use it for surfing the net? Just because someone doesn't do design work on it means they surf the net?!?! haha how narrow minded is that.

I use it for coding and advanced flash work, which i have to do on the move, which requires me to have a powerful x64 compatable CPU, over 4GB of RAM and a large screen

Not all of us have a second calibrated monitor on the plane and train.
 
RustyMac said:
I had posted this in someone's thread and thought it needed its own thread. I am a designer, fabricator and restorer. I always used matted or anti-glared screens when doing my work.

I have been noticing that the majority of displays that are being sold today are switching to glossy or glass. Even your modern televisions (LCD or Plasma) have shifted this way. [...]
Click to expand...
There are several considerations.

There are manufacturers still producing matte: Lenovo, Dell, Toshiba. May be others, I don't know.

There is glossy and glossy. The MBA has an antiglare coating. The MB is glossy but acceptable. The problem with the Unibody is not the glossiness, but the total absence of anything preventing reflections.

Glossy or matte does not affect only designers, but everyone. I have never seen a screen as reflective as the MBP. The problem, at least in my case, are not the reflections from light sources. But *from me*: when the room I am in is bright, I see myself and all of the objects aroung me, including their colors. With glossy TV you need to take into account light sources only, because you're far enough to prevent you from reflecting in the screen.

At least in Italy, the greater part of LCD or Plasma TV are still matte. When there's a glossy finish there is (almost) always a antiglare coating. Like the one on my lenses. The only screen with glass without coating I have ever seen is on my grandpa's TV, bought more than 20 years ago.

thistle
 
lordthistle said:
There is glossy and glossy. The MBA has an antiglare coating. The MB is glossy but acceptable. The problem with the Unibody is not the glossiness, but the total absence of anything preventing reflections.
Click to expand...

couldnt agree more with you amico!
i didnt get the 15" unibody macbook just because of its reflective screen when it came out. i simply waited for them to acknowledge their mistake.
now im getting the 17" matte..
 
kastenbrust said:
Who said i use it for surfing the net? Just because someone doesn't do design work on it means they surf the net?!?!
Click to expand...

Actually you said:

I have a glossy one personally and like it, but i wouldnt use it for my design work.
Click to expand...

Which only made me wonder what you do "you're design work" on if NOT the MBP. I'm not trying to give you a hard time, I'm just curious.
 
just sounds like alot of people claiming to be a designer whining about something that really isnt all that big of a deal or have no idea that they should calibrate their display. sure most of the new design is more as a fashion piece. BUT with the new LED displays and the glass coating, they have a much richer view of colors, im using a new MBP with my 30" and even when there is light both of them get glare on the screen but theyre not insanely bad as people are claiming them to be.

i work in heavy litted areas for print design, and i use alot of darks, greys, blacks with added reds and white text overtop dark images and backgrounds.
they print the same way they display on the screen, they look rich and vibrant in print as well as in the display.

i guess it depends on your work, but really i havent really seen a huge issue with the color accuracy of the MB, MBPs...most color comparisons are used on higher resolution monitors anyway. but then again that could be subjective to what people do aswell....
 
ggjstudios said:
What's ridiculous to me is that every time someone posts a new Matte vs Glossy thread, instead of just referring to the dozens of existing threads on the topic, people start the same arguments all over again! Nothing new is ever offered.... just a repeat of the exact same comments!
Click to expand...

But you always post the exact same comment rather than ignore the thread. :confused:

This is a help forum. Questions are repeated. If it really makes you so frustrated, then for your own sanity, perhaps you're posting in the wrong forum.

InLikeALion said:
The whole point of calibrating is for taking into individual screen inconsistencies, such as a red shift or general over-saturation from a glass outer layer.
Click to expand...

I just wanted to say that you're right. ;)

Perhaps he's referring to software screen calibrators, rather than hardware. I don't know.

Anyway, no screen is perfectly calibrated in every work environment, so I think the entire idea of calibrating a laptop screen and using it in different lighting makes the entire calibration argument a bit pointless. Calibrate a desktop LCD in your office, where you can make the lighting around you more consistent than if you were outside.

Otherwise, you're calibrating for one environmental condition only, but not others. Once you sit outside on a cloudy day (lots of blue light), or under an umbrella at an outdoor cafe/restaurant, or in an office with fluorescent lighting, you get slightly different results (which kind of defeats the idea of colour calibration anyway).
 
Anyway, no screen is perfectly calibrated in every work environment, so I think the entire idea of calibrating a laptop screen and using it in different lighting makes the entire calibration argument a bit pointless. Calibrate a desktop LCD in your office, where you can make the lighting around you more consistent than if you were outside.

Otherwise, you're calibrating for one environmental condition only, but not others. Once you sit outside on a cloudy day (lots of blue light), or under an umbrella at an outdoor cafe/restaurant, or in an office with fluorescent lighting, you get slightly different results (which kind of defeats the idea of colour calibration anyway).[/QUOTE]

Those are really good points that seem to get neglected in the glossy vs matte arguments. Ideally You'd have an EyeOne with you at all locations, and calibration would take a few seconds. Maybe someday.
 
Runt888 said:
http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/lenovo_thinkpad_w700/
Click to expand...

I thought of that Lenovo as I wrote my previous post. I would love if Apple started truly pursuing professional, functional innovation, and not just innovation in form. The problem with the Lenovo is that the calibration is still a gimmick. First, it uses Huey pro, which isn't exactly the cream of the calibration crop. Second, and more importantly, read this quote:

LAPTOPMAG.COM said:
For users who require a consistent and reliable degree of color accuracy, the W700 contains a built-in color-calibration device. Using a small sensor embedded in the keyboard deck and Pantone’s huey Pro color-control software, the device scans the screen while the lid is closed and sounds three tones when the calibration process is complete. We calibrated the screen in just under a minute and immediately noticed a marked improvement. Colors appeared much bolder and the panel displayed much deeper black levels than before the calibration.
Click to expand...

It calibrates the screen with the laptop closed, which means the local lighting effect on the screen isn't being taken into account while calibrating. This basically defeats the purpose of calibrating laptop screens, for the reasons Abstract noted above. So for now, this is a marketing gimmick more than a practical on-the-go tool.
 
Yes, it's pretty much pointless on a Lenovo as well because you need to close the lid. I guess the colour would always be perfect if you work in a dark room, and there's absolutely no ambient lighting. It's not when you turn on the light or open the blinds, go outdoors, etc.

Saying that, if you always use it at home, the actual calibration of the MacBook's screen is easier and more accurate now that all the screens are LED-backlit, since the LED doesn't require a warm-up time period.

Calibrating your screen is also useless if you never print your work. For example, photos you only see on your computer screen in iPhoto, and photos shown on websites. ;)



About "Glossy VS Matte", the problem with uncalibrated glossy screens is that if they're always showing oversaturated colours and higher contrast, then you're editing blind. If you edit the colour saturation and contrast so that it looks just right on your glossy screen, the colour will look undersaturated on a typical matte screen (calibrated or uncalibrated), or glossy calibrated screen, or in print. Perhaps that perfect contrast on your screen will result in a "flat" image when printed.
 
The whole point of a laptop is portable computing. You know, where you use your computer in places other than your office/room? like outside, on buses, trains, planes, airports, train stations etc. Places where you don't have control over the lighting conditions.

Using a glossy screen with reflections all over it sucks.

It should be a matte screen.

Simple really.
 
mac-menace, you're exactly right; calibration isn't the issue at all (no LCD screen shows very accurate color regardless of finish)
 
Tank you Mac-menace. This is exactly how I think. Whenever I use my laptop at a desk I ALWAYS connect it to a large external monitor and have the laptop in clamshell mode. In this case I want the footprint as small as possible, of course.

Then I use my laptop on the move for 3-4 hours a day. On trains. Planes. In my lap in a sofa. Outdoors. So I want the laptop to be light and mobile. I seldom have the opportunity to control the ambient lighting here and I'm very distracted by any reflections in the screen. Of course I'm never going to buy a glossy screen. And "color accuracy" is not the prime reason for that.

(I'm still at 12" PB. That last laptop made by Apple that combines (1) portable (2) powerful and (3) matte screen.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back