Yes, my 2010 27" iMac also has backlight bleed but it is well hidden by that horrible IPS glow.
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.
Is there any 5K iMac without backlight bleed?
- Thread starter Bleedlight
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, my 2010 27" iMac also has backlight bleed but it is well hidden by that horrible IPS glow.
I'd never really tested my 2010 iMac, but I had a quick look at it the other night out of interest. It was huge!
Each corner glows brightly from the edges, so much so that they almost meet in the middle like a cross! Ah well.
I have to admit, I have never noticed it in 4+ years of usage
I'd never really tested my 2010 iMac, but I had a quick look at it the other night out of interest. It was huge!
Each corner glows brightly from the edges, so much so that they almost meet in the middle like a cross! Ah well.
I have to admit, I have never noticed it in 4+ years of usage
Very interesting turn of events. Could it be that the retina screens have lower black levels, and that this is the reason the backlight bleed, which affects most (if not all) LCD screens, are more noticeable?
I remember the huge drama when the rMBP appeared. Now if we look at the black level:
It is notably lower than the previous MBA, MBP screens. The 2011 27'' iMac has a value of 0.47 according to Anandtech. Unfortunately we don't have the corresponding number for the retina iMac.
One thing that can be a bit annoying is uneven bleed and bright spots. Here there are variations, as we can see from the pictures, and everyone has to decide for himself whether the screen is good enough or not.
Just for the record, among all screens that I regularly used or use, the outstandingly worst one was my 2011 MBP (15'' high-res anti-glare). Not only does it have some bleed from the sides, but also there is a bright band about 1-3 cm from the bottom, which is highly discoloured, giving a yellow-red-ish shine on white backgrounds, and is very notable on darker backgrounds, even under regular light conditions. Still my mum, who uses the machine now, mentioned how much better look on that screen compared to the 2006 MBP she was using before (still running, these things really don't break).
Looking at older screens from 2005-2008 MBPs that still run in the family, most screens are OK but quite dull compared to modern retina screens.
I had the same problem with (4) machines from December 28, 2014 - February 10, 2015. The screen is completely unacceptable, especially if you are a graphics designer, video editor or gamer where you work with dark backgrounds. The screen bleed problem is very distracting to look at.
In my opinion, this system needs to be revisited by engineers. It's not right to put the customer through this hassle of exchanges, delays and inconveniences where these issues should have been noticed/fixed in pre-production by Apple Quality Control Engineers.
In my opinion, this system needs to be revisited by engineers. It's not right to put the customer through this hassle of exchanges, delays and inconveniences where these issues should have been noticed/fixed in pre-production by Apple Quality Control Engineers.
Last edited:
Did your seriously post this in 5 different threads, at the same time? Good grief...
FYI, I 100% disagree with the premise that the 5K iMac is not ready for resale. That said, I do think that some of its flaws make it not a smart purchase for a small demographic.
I see you found all 5 Retina iMac backlight bleed threads...
Edit: If you can't tolerate a little backlight bleed the Retina iMac obviously isn't for you. For most people however, it is perfectly fine, and it's certainly the best display I've ever seen.
Last edited:
For someone who works on graphics as a part of their living, it's not acceptable. Sure, I was a bit harsh by saying that it's not ready for resale, but that's because I have high expectations from Apple. I'm a huge Apple fan and own many Apple products. This screen bleed is very disappointing. I've had (2) iMacs before this (2006 Intel iMac) and a (Late 2011 iMac) where neither had this problem.
I can see that this screen bleed seems to be the norm for this iMac and the LG screen, which is unfortunate. Yes, the screen when looking at light colors, and mostly "everything else" on a day to day basis is mind blowing and beautiful, but when it comes time for me to work on graphics with dark backgrounds, this is a problem and should not be a problem, especially given the high price of this system.
I am not sure what I am going to do next. Live with it and accept another replacement "as is" with screen bleed or go with a non-retina display system so I can work more accurately on graphics and other multimedia projects.
I'm upset that I have to make this choice, this is Apple and they have always been known to cater to designers. To me, this system should have better light isolation.
I can see that this screen bleed seems to be the norm for this iMac and the LG screen, which is unfortunate. Yes, the screen when looking at light colors, and mostly "everything else" on a day to day basis is mind blowing and beautiful, but when it comes time for me to work on graphics with dark backgrounds, this is a problem and should not be a problem, especially given the high price of this system.
I am not sure what I am going to do next. Live with it and accept another replacement "as is" with screen bleed or go with a non-retina display system so I can work more accurately on graphics and other multimedia projects.
I'm upset that I have to make this choice, this is Apple and they have always been known to cater to designers. To me, this system should have better light isolation.
Last edited:
Are you sure the 2011 didn't have any bleed? As mentioned earlier in this thread, backlight bleed on older models is hidden nicely by the severe off-axis IPS glow not present on the retina. At first I thought my 2010 didn't have any bleed but sure enough it was there when I looked closer.
Also, I don't see why you should expect IPS LCD panels from any manufacturer to be backlight bleed free. It's a side-effect of the technology, which is one of the reasons I'm going to be happy when the switch to OLED is made.
Personally I can't understand why Apple or indeed anyone else would choose an IPS panel for a consumer screen.
OK so they have a potentially wider colour gamut and colour consistency at acute viewing angle, but so what. The latter attribute is irrelevant since no-one looks at an iMac side on. And the colour gamut of a VA type panel (PVA / MVA or derivative) is perfectly acceptable for 99% of consumers, being able to accommodate the S-RGB colourspace without problem.
PVA / MVA / S-PVA etc have dramatically better black level, dramatically better uniformity and freedom from clouding and bleed and is an altogether better set of compromises for *most* people.
Colour-critical photographers and graphic designers would doubtless prefer IPS panels, but they are a small minority imho. And in any event, the Mac Pro is the solution for the Pro and semi-pro market, is it not. The iMac is a consumer device with the wrong panel in it and doubtless this whole thread would not exist had Apple had not used IPS panels which are reknowned for being **** poor for black level and bleed and uniformity.
OK so they have a potentially wider colour gamut and colour consistency at acute viewing angle, but so what. The latter attribute is irrelevant since no-one looks at an iMac side on. And the colour gamut of a VA type panel (PVA / MVA or derivative) is perfectly acceptable for 99% of consumers, being able to accommodate the S-RGB colourspace without problem.
PVA / MVA / S-PVA etc have dramatically better black level, dramatically better uniformity and freedom from clouding and bleed and is an altogether better set of compromises for *most* people.
Colour-critical photographers and graphic designers would doubtless prefer IPS panels, but they are a small minority imho. And in any event, the Mac Pro is the solution for the Pro and semi-pro market, is it not. The iMac is a consumer device with the wrong panel in it and doubtless this whole thread would not exist had Apple had not used IPS panels which are reknowned for being **** poor for black level and bleed and uniformity.
Last edited:
I do not agree... iMac is not only a consumer model. Nowaday, all graphic designers and photographers than I know work with PCs or iMacs. I haven't seen one 2013 Mac Pro with my own eyes... But I see a lot of iMacs, old MacPros and PCs in graphic design studios I am visiting and in photo studios that I know.
And the backlight bleeding and black level were really an issue on my 2007 iMac, but on my late 2013, black level is very good and the backlight bleed hardly noticeable.
I have a 24" TN at work, it is a nightmare, I'm very happy to have an IPS at home, and not only for photography: for watching movies and for the angle of view; 27" is quite big, with a non IPS screen, an image won't appear the same at the top or the bottom of the screen when you are sit infront of the screen...
TN is garbage. Of PVA/MVA/SPVA vs IPS vs TN, TN is the worst.
Cheap IPS panels have crap black level and uniformity compared to PVA/MVA etc. This is a fact.
And any professional graphic designer or artist or photographer who has to use an iMac is really suffering. You really need an EIZO Coloredge, NEC spectraview or better for colour critical work. The iMac screen is just not good enough.
Last edited:
As others have mentioned - all displays have backlight bleed, it is a matter of "how bad" on each individual display. It varies a bit within a range within a model (Retina iMac to Retina iMac; Thunderbolt Display to Thunderbolt Display,) and varies widely from model to model (Retina iMac to standard iMac to Thunderbolt Display, etc.)
If you went from a particularly good one to a particularly bad one, either model-to-model (upgrading from a standard iMac to Retina iMac,) or even within model (Thunderbolt Display at work to Thunderbolt Display at home,) the difference can seem huge; where to someone else looking at the 'bad' display, they might not even notice because they're used to a just-as-bad one of their own.
And if you tweak the exposure curves, of course you'll see it more. What matters is how noticeable it is to you. If you happen to notice it at lower-levels than someone else, then it's worth bringing up with the vendor (Apple, in this case,) to see about getting a replacement. But someone else might not notice it at all. And if someone else has one that's better, and is fine to them, cranking up the exposure curves on a photo to go "SEE! YOURS HAS IT TOO!" doesn't do anything.
If you went from a particularly good one to a particularly bad one, either model-to-model (upgrading from a standard iMac to Retina iMac,) or even within model (Thunderbolt Display at work to Thunderbolt Display at home,) the difference can seem huge; where to someone else looking at the 'bad' display, they might not even notice because they're used to a just-as-bad one of their own.
And if you tweak the exposure curves, of course you'll see it more. What matters is how noticeable it is to you. If you happen to notice it at lower-levels than someone else, then it's worth bringing up with the vendor (Apple, in this case,) to see about getting a replacement. But someone else might not notice it at all. And if someone else has one that's better, and is fine to them, cranking up the exposure curves on a photo to go "SEE! YOURS HAS IT TOO!" doesn't do anything.
A photo is entirely meaningless without a measurable point of reference. Auto-exposure on the camera will dig until it has enough light to produce a viewable image. Manual settings (and post-processing settings) can be manipulated for any effect desired.
Here's what you can do:
1. Turn off System Preferences > Displays > Automatically adjust brightness
2. Select "Solid Gray Light" from System Preferences > Desktop & Screen Saver > Desktop, then select Apple > Solid Colors > Solid Gray Light (this is equivalent to the "gray card" used as an exposure reference by professional photographers).
3. Remove all windows and apps from the desktop
4. Set room lighting to as dark as possible, and then don't change it for the remainder of the test
5. Set screen brightness to a "comfortable" level, and then don't change it (you must do this after adjusting the room lighting).
6. Take a photo of that using your camera's auto-exposure mode
7. Make a note of the aperture and shutter speed settings for that image
8. Place the camera in manual exposure mode, and duplicate those exposure settings
9. Place the Mac in Sleep mode
10. Take a photo
11. Post both images, exactly as they came from the camera
That gives us a point of reference, albeit still imperfect. This test assumes that the sensitivity of the imaging sensor will be sufficient to capture any usable image when the screen and room are dark and the camera's exposure is set to the gray screen setting (say, 1/500th of a second at f8). Both film and imaging sensors go "non-linear" at both the upper and lower extremes of their sensitivity.
Further, the human eye adjusts to the ambient light, just like a camera set to auto-exposure, so the brightness one would perceive of a nearly-dark screen in a darkened room will not be represented in the side-by-side comparison.
The point here is not to capture the perceived effect - it's to produce a test with a measurable point of reference. If we're lucky, the imaging sensor is adequately sensitive to fairly capture the difference between the two images.
There's nothing wrong with adding a third shot to the test, made under the same lighting conditions, where the exposure is adjusted so that it represents how the light leakage is perceived by you. But it's not enough to provide only that image.
Backlight bleed an inherent issue with LCD/LED panels. The larger the panel size the more you will notice it, on a small phone screen the issue isn't really apparent but once you get to 27" and above ALL LCD panels have backlight bleed to some extent. My Sony 55" LED and my 2012 27" iMac have it and it drives me nuts so affordable OLED cant come quick enough imo.
Last edited:
Chances are you'll be waiting for version III and the switch to OLED for the backlight bleed to be fixed.
Sleep mode switches the backlight off, so the above method will not work. You need to display a full screen black image - jpeg or whatever.
I think maybe you misread that. The screen off is a reference point compared to the screen on.
The first part of the exercise (with the grey screen) is proposed as a way of properly setting a sensible reference point. It's a sensible suggestion.
The black screen part is the test. Only it won't work as proposed because the screen saver turns the backlight off.