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.
Matte vs Gloss for photography and graphic design?
- Thread starter sarawr
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Just one of many, many, many, many, many, many threads on this topic, found by searching the forum with MRoogle:
Whats better for photo editing, matte or glossy?
Whats better for photo editing, matte or glossy?
This topic comes up weekly.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/896633/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/911303/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/884177/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/901919/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1004895/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/924606/
Long story short, it's personal preference. You're going to calibrate your monitor anyways, so it's just a matter of whether you think reflection will be a big deal or not. "Worth" is not a quantitative quality, so I don't know how you expect people to answer that.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/896633/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/911303/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/884177/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/901919/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1004895/
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/924606/
Long story short, it's personal preference. You're going to calibrate your monitor anyways, so it's just a matter of whether you think reflection will be a big deal or not. "Worth" is not a quantitative quality, so I don't know how you expect people to answer that.
I went for the anti glare and I dont think I would get another MBP without it. Yes it doesnt look as good as the glossy but at least I can use it without moving my head to awkward angles to see what I'm trying to do on the screen 
Is it worth it? Perhaps, but Apple do charge a lot for not much....
Is it worth it? Perhaps, but Apple do charge a lot for not much....
A
autacraft
Guest
Matte is your friend, trust me, you'll be completely blown away!
I cant believe Apple even fit their portables with gloss when they have this screen available, its waaaaaaay way superior, point blank!
Well worth the extra and you'll never ever go back to gloss once youve tried it
oh, by the way, I'm a graphic designer/photographer!
Good Luck!
I cant believe Apple even fit their portables with gloss when they have this screen available, its waaaaaaay way superior, point blank!
Well worth the extra and you'll never ever go back to gloss once youve tried it
oh, by the way, I'm a graphic designer/photographer!
Good Luck!
1) Matt is *never* and has *never* been more "true" color, but it resembles printed paper and projected screens better. In fact glossy is more "true" color because it doesn't mess with the lightwaves as much as matt (aka *rough*) displays/surfaces.
Furthermore the room reflections on matt surfaces resemble random "white noise" more than the explicit reflections on glossy ones. So if you cannot control your enviromental reflections matt may offer less color "pollution" from outside lightsources.
2) If your target is mostly home-screens (aka mostly glossy displays nowadays) and glossy photo-prints then you better go glossy. If your target is printed media and cinema (or matt photos) then better go matt.
3) BUT, keep in mind your own working conditions, too. The "matt" finish on Macbooks isn't very matt anyway, in fact it's a very good balance between matt and glossy. The "old" matt finishes of many computer screens of the past is horrible, especially if you are looking at large patches of uniform colors and while moving your head/eyes only slightly (rainbow/twinkling effect).
Having worked with both I like the matt finish on the Macbooks better, especially because you cannot turn the laptops as bright as the Imacs to compensate for reflections. The main problem of Apple's design is *not* the glossy display, but the glas plate they put on to it. It's this stupid glass that causes most of the reflections while the glossy display underneath works quite well (glossy = it's treated to somewhat handle reflections).
Furthermore the room reflections on matt surfaces resemble random "white noise" more than the explicit reflections on glossy ones. So if you cannot control your enviromental reflections matt may offer less color "pollution" from outside lightsources.
2) If your target is mostly home-screens (aka mostly glossy displays nowadays) and glossy photo-prints then you better go glossy. If your target is printed media and cinema (or matt photos) then better go matt.
3) BUT, keep in mind your own working conditions, too. The "matt" finish on Macbooks isn't very matt anyway, in fact it's a very good balance between matt and glossy. The "old" matt finishes of many computer screens of the past is horrible, especially if you are looking at large patches of uniform colors and while moving your head/eyes only slightly (rainbow/twinkling effect).
Having worked with both I like the matt finish on the Macbooks better, especially because you cannot turn the laptops as bright as the Imacs to compensate for reflections. The main problem of Apple's design is *not* the glossy display, but the glas plate they put on to it. It's this stupid glass that causes most of the reflections while the glossy display underneath works quite well (glossy = it's treated to somewhat handle reflections).
Some might even argue that a TN screen would not offer the truest colors. What ever you select, consider spending some effort calibrating.
Go to the Apple Store or resellers store. Look at the screens and see which you prefer. I do graphics and photography. And since I see things different and prefer my screen to look a certain way... I went to the Apple store, played with Adobe Suites (PS, IL, etc) and any other Graphics and photography software on their computers. And picked the one that fit my needs. 
Go to the store - open finder - click on Adobe Folder - play
Go to the store - open finder - click on Adobe Folder - play