Matte screens are overrated, no?

[UltraNEO*]

Ahhhh, but you see - that's what it comes down to. Opinion and personal preference. Good for you that you enjoy looking at your own reflection in your computer screen. I personally would not buy one of the new MBP's unless I could get it with a matte screen. Not necessarily because of color accuracy (or lack thereof), but because that is my preference.

+1

 

[Timur]

Ahhhh, but you see - that's what it comes down to. Opinion and personal preference. Good for you that you enjoy looking at your own reflection in your computer screen. I personally would not buy one of the new MBP's unless I could get it with a matte screen. Not necessarily because of color accuracy (or lack thereof), but because that is my preference.

I absolutely agree that matte screens can be more convinient to use in bad lighting conditions, especially when you're outside with a Laptop. A glossy screen can easily overcome those inconviniences by turning up the brightness (do Macs come with enviromental light sensors?). But the black behind glass bezel will be problematic, because it will always reflect and thus distract, especially with moving objects being reflected.

Personally I prefer the solution of my semi-matte/glossy Viewsonic VP2330b over anything I have ever looked at (and I was writing Monitor reviews for some time, so I looked at alot). It is not as matte as to produce that sparkling color effect and outwashed looks/lack of sharpness (surface feels rather smooth), but also not as glossy as to act like a mirror whenever there's some light falling in from behind. I really wished most screens came with such an even balanced surface.

 

[Timur]

Which do you prefer?

 

[design-is]

As far as I know... (excellent explanation) ...

Thank you for putting that to bed once and for all As you said, matte are preferred for most print designers for the purpose of most accurately impersonating paper. In my experience anyway.

 

[Timur]

Thank you for putting that to bed once and for all As you said, matte are preferred for most print designers for the purpose of most accurately impersonating paper. In my experience anyway.

Thanks for the flowers!

I'm only spreading my half-wisdom around here. Many designers (which I am not) who know their tools likely know these things in much greater detail, especially the practical side.

Personally I will have to take a close look at the glossy screens and among other things base my decision to buy a new MBP or a refurbished one on the results. I'm a musician who's using the Laptop on stage. Unfortunately on many occassions there are spotlights coming directed from behind and above the stage setup while in a perfect world they should be directed at the stage from the front. Especially the black behind glass bezel can be problematic, but also using high brightness levels (and thus lighting parts of the stage/face you might not want to see that bright could pose a problem.

 

[iShater]

Wouldn't turn up the brightness simply drain your battery faster. Or is it expected that you will never unplug it the laptop.

 

[design-is]

Don't know if its in another thread, but got this pic from engadget:

These reflections put me off. I know its not turned on, but I don't want my partner using it as a mirror for doing her hair and makeup when its not being used as a computer...

 

[Timur]

I think you're spelling challenged. But then, thats just my opinion, and my opinion could be wrong... just like yours is.

Well, the brain is well capable of blending out the reflections and it gets alot of help from the eyes when doing so. That is simply because of the fact that reflections need to be focused behind the screen while the screen-image needs to be focused on the screen.

On the other hand this "work" can lead to both eye strain and brain strain aka getting tired sooner.

That is because:

- Everytime the reflection is moving (like someone passing by) your eyes/brain will recognize the movement, become distracted for a short time until they realize that the movement is "no danger" and then need to concentrate on the screen-image again.

- Blending distraction out is an "active process" on part of the brain. While the senses (eyes, ears, skin-nerves) easily adapt to the overal level of sensation (bright street light vs dark living room ambience, loud street noise vs quiet library) the brain still get's alot of informations that have to be filtered out. That can be quite exhausting by time.

- Many people tend to "stare down" the screen when trying hard to concentrate to onscreen informations vs reflections informations. Because of that they forget to regulary bat their eyelashes leading to dry and hurting eyes (feeling tired again).

- Most enviromental lightings are setup wrong. The ceiling lamps use to be in the center of the room while the screen is standing at a wall. There is more light coming from behind the user than coming from behind the screen. While you need to turn up the screen's brightness to compensate for reflections the contrast to the darker wall/surrounding gets bigger.

Everytime you turn your eyes from the screen to look at something in your room (like a piece of paper on your desk) your eyes have to adapt to the mostly darker lights (takes minutes). Everytime you turn your eyes back to the screen your eyes have to adapt to the brighter screen (takes seconds) while the surrounding of the screen is blended off into dark contrast again.

Geez, so much science coming up in this thread...

 

[Timur]

These reflections put me off. I know its not turned on, but I don't want my partner using it as a mirror for doing her hair and makeup when its not being used as a computer...

Again, which one do you prefer?

 

[RHD]

No. Matte screens are much better to work on all day and in various lighting conditions.

 

[design-is]

Again, which one do you prefer?

To be honest, I don't usually work in the dark, and would rather not have either of the [URL="https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/6422820/]first 2[/URL]. But out of the 3 above... I think I prefer the 2 that are more defused on the laptops. But I couldn't stand any for very long...

 

[Red-red]

I have always thought to a certain extent that Matte screens are not "all" they are cracked up to be and specially in out door environments they always seemed just as useable as a Glossy screen but for different reasons.

I remember looking about 2 years back at the MBP in a shop and I was distinctly unimpressed by the matte screen compared to the MB gloss next to it.

Also glass seems to me anyway, even better than the usual gloss coating that some get. My iphone for example is perfectly useable all the time and I don't have the brightness anywhere near full.

Both as good as each other imo and most just don't like change or like to jump on the bandwagon.

 

[Timur]

To be honest, I don't usually work in the dark, and would rather not have either of the [URL="https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/6422820/]first 2[/URL]. But out of the 3 above... I think I prefer the 2 that are more defused on the laptops. But I couldn't stand any for very long...

The darkness was necessary to emphasize the effect.

Take another look at how much screen estate on the second picture (two laptops) is lost due to the diffusion of light on all screens. You might agree that the reflection on all are too bright, but while the laptops diffuse the light all over the place (especially the left one) and thus affect the whole screen area the semi-matte/glossy one diffused only over a restricted area thus leaving the rest of the screen useable without restrictions.

The first picture compares the semi-matte/glossy 23" screen (left) to a 24" glossy screen (right). See how of an area much even on the semi-matte/glossy screen is affected compared to the glossy one.

Now let's talk about black levels and dark grey colors:

The more light is reflected/diffused from the panel the worse (brighter) the black levels appear, the more light is "swallowed" aka not reflected from the panel the better (darker) the black levels appear. To be fair, black levels and dark grey appearance also alot affected by panel technology, contrast and gamma, reflections just add to it.

 

[Dan 7.1]

ever play your gameboy in the sun and cursed every deity because you couldn't ****ing see anything?

yeah. Matte > Gloss.

 

[Timur]

ever play your gameboy in the sun and cursed every deity because you couldn't ****ing see anything?

yeah. Matte > Gloss.

Curse your Gameboy for not providing more backlight power then, it's still the best possible solution against direct sunlight!

 

[Dan 7.1]

Curse your Gameboy for not providing more backlight power then, it's still the best possible solution against direct sunlight!

True, but the ability to see myself in the reflection of the display does not help matters. and even indoors, i don't want to have the glare of the room's lighting shining back on me when using the machine. its just obnoxious.

 

[tofudc5]

I have use a Eizo 21" matte screen with the reflection hood.
I use the Spyder3Pro for colour calibration on the screen every 3 months.

From experience I have used this calibration hardware/software on other screen types, and the results speaks for themselves.
matte screen > glossy screens

i don't know the exact technical algorithms and what not behind the calibration process and the results I have been getting, but i just know it works better on a matte screen.

i guess from a print design point of view, I just need to know that what I have calibrated on screen is as close as it will be when it goes to printing the final product (magazine/brochure/flyer etc)....and glossy screens just doesn't give me that confidence.

 

[thespyglass]

Anti-Glare 'Film' Options

Speaking of anti-glare - as somebody was - does anyone have any experience with the notebooks versions of anti-glare screens as manufactured by the likes of PowerSupport etc.?

Even if I liked glossy screens I think I'd be tempted to try out some kind of protective film to protect the glass.

Well, the brain is well capable of blending out the reflections and it gets alot of help from the eyes when doing so. That is simply because of the fact that reflections need to be focused behind the screen while the screen-image needs to be focused on the screen.

On the other hand this "work" can lead to both eye strain and brain strain aka getting tired sooner.

That is because:

- Everytime the reflection is moving (like someone passing by) your eyes/brain will recognize the movement, become distracted for a short time until they realize that the movement is "no danger" and then need to concentrate on the screen-image again.

- Blending distraction out is an "active process" on part of the brain. While the senses (eyes, ears, skin-nerves) easily adapt to the overal level of sensation (bright street light vs dark living room ambience, loud street noise vs quiet library) the brain still get's alot of informations that have to be filtered out. That can be quite exhausting by time.

- Many people tend to "stare down" the screen when trying hard to concentrate to onscreen informations vs reflections informations. Because of that they forget to regulary bat their eyelashes leading to dry and hurting eyes (feeling tired again).

- Most enviromental lightings are setup wrong. The ceiling lamps use to be in the center of the room while the screen is standing at a wall. There is more light coming from behind the user than coming from behind the screen. While you need to turn up the screen's brightness to compensate for reflections the contrast to the darker wall/surrounding gets bigger.

Everytime you turn your eyes from the screen to look at something in your room (like a piece of paper on your desk) your eyes have to adapt to the mostly darker lights (takes minutes). Everytime you turn your eyes back to the screen your eyes have to adapt to the brighter screen (takes seconds) while the surrounding of the screen is blended off into dark contrast again.

Geez, so much science coming up in this thread...

Yay, science! Seriously, thanks for this reply.

In addition, I'd be interested to see some stats on whether people on the dyslexia spectrum, for example, are more comfortable with matte or glossy. (My suspicion is that they'd be more likely to go with the former, though perhaps turning the contrast down would help with glossy?) Or some short-sight/long-sight comparisons.

(I'm being serious, I genuinely find this interesting!)

 

[sushi]

Ahhhh, but you see - that's what it comes down to. Opinion and personal preference.

Completely agree.

Good for you that you enjoy looking at your own reflection in your computer screen.

I have aviator eyes and find glossy tiring to my eyes as well as distracting.

With a Matte screen I can program and do other work for hours on end without my eyes feeling tired. With a glossy screen, I only last about 20-30 minutes before I have a headache. That is why I prefer a Matte display.

I personally would not buy one of the new MBP's unless I could get it with a matte screen. Not necessarily because of color accuracy (or lack thereof), but because that is my preference.

Agree.

And I already politely sent Apple feedback on this issue. I would recommend that all of those who prefer a Matte screen option do the same.

<Snip a whole bunch of good info.>

Thanks for the science lesson.

 

[tofudc5]

The reason why "print" professionals prefer matte is that it resembles paper's "inaccuracies" like lack of contrast and color intensity more than glossy screens do.

well, that logic doesn't entirely make sense either...
what if I am to print on gloss stock? does that mean it's better to work on a "glossy" screen?

 

[design-is]

I'd be interested to see some stats on whether people on the dyslexia spectrum, for example, are more comfortable with matte or glossy.

For my (limited) knowledge I think using a coloured film has a larger effect on screen usability than the matte or gloss options. But I have forgotten a lot of the research I once did into that.

well, that logic doesn't entirely make sense either...
what if I am to print on gloss stock? does that mean it's better to work on a "glossy" screen?

No. Matte screens do a better job of emulating paper. It goes back to the whole 'screens emit light, paper reflects light' thing and matte just gets closer to the truth no matter what paper stock you use.

 

[Timur]

Speaking of anti-glare - as somebody was - does anyone have any experience with the notebooks versions of anti-glare screens as manufactured by the likes of PowerSupport etc.?

I answered that in another thread:

The special Antiglare film not only reduces the utlraviolet radiation emitted from the monitor by 70%, reducing the burden on your eyes but controls the deterioration of your liquid crystal monitor by blocking out ultraviolet light and protects it from scratching and dirt.

Can anyone explain this please. If it reduces the ultraviolet radiation emitted from the monitor to "reduce the burden on your eyes" how can it be "blocking out ultraviolet light" from the liquid crystals?

The first part of that nonsense suggests that UV comes from inside the liquid crystals, so they are obviously less in danger of outsight UV than of inside UV anyway. The second part suggest that external UV light is blocked away from the crystals which effectively means it is reflected back to your "burndened" eyes unless there is some special filter that turns UV light into smaller frequencies (resulting in a color teinted image).

Some marketing people really lost it.

In addition, I'd be interested to see some stats on whether people on the dyslexia spectrum, for example, are more comfortable with matte or glossy. (My suspicion is that they'd be more likely to go with the former, though perhaps turning the contrast down would help with glossy?) Or some short-sight/long-sight comparisons.

(I'm being serious, I genuinely find this interesting!)

That would most likely be subject for "real" scientific research. I doubt anyone here (including me) can give any educated informations on that. But the notion is interesting, yes.

 

[Timur]

well, that logic doesn't entirely make sense either...
what if I am to print on gloss stock? does that mean it's better to work on a "glossy" screen?

If that gloss stock appear more like a glossy screen than a matte screen and you want to know as much as possible what it looks like before printing then Yes!

Screen display and Print display can never perfectly match each other, they are based on different physical models (substractive reflective vs additive self-luminous). The only reason why the print business putting making a great deal of effort into screen calibration, screen accessoirs, screen color gamut etc. is to save money.

All that stuff is still cheaper than going back and forth with doing test-prints while often coming close enough. By time an experienced designer know the differences between his screen and his prefered printer/print studio and compensates for them.

 

[thespyglass]

[Re. PowerSupport anti-glare films.]

The first part of that nonsense suggests that UV comes from inside the liquid crystals, so they are obviously less in danger of outsight UV than of inside UV anyway. The second part suggest that external UV light is blocked away from the crystals which effectively means it is reflected back to your "burndened" eyes unless there is some special filter that turns UV light into smaller frequencies (resulting in a color teinted image).

Some marketing people really lost it.

Haha, thank you

 

[Timur]

Haha, thank you

That doesn't mean it wont work for reducing reflections, just that UV bit sounds alot like nonsense.