Nano-texture glass looks perpetually dirty

[collin_]

I've heard really good things about the nano-texture glass, so I went with it. But my Studio Display XDR with nano-texture just got here and it looks sort of like the entire display is covered in fingerprints. I assumed it was residue from Apple's protective sticker sheet thing, but no amount of wiping with their special cleaning cloth is removing it. It's all over the display -- uniform. Looks sort of like there's oil all over it, but in a matte way (if that makes sense). I wasn't expecting the nano-texture to make it look so jarringly wrong.

Is this what it looks like to you guys, too?

 

[Aleco]

The Studio Display’s glass is one of the few things that actually sets it apart from any other monitor, so paying extra to etch it and lose that clarity just sounds wrong to me. I get the point of nano-texture on something like a MacBook Pro or iPad Pro where you’re dealing with sunlight, but on a stationary monitor it feels redundant.

The XDR already gets insanely bright, so it’s hard to imagine a setup where reflections are such a problem that it’s worth giving up some sharpness and contrast.

I’m pretty sure what you’re seeing is normal with the nano-texture when it’s doing its job.

 

[taphil]

Yes, to many eyes, it looks like grease smeared over the entire display and is the reason why we go with glossy screens only.

 

[Vincent Hanna]

We have a nano texture ASD in our very bright main room and absolutely love it. Zero glare or reflections that would make a glossy screen unusable in this setting with high windows on both sides.

And it’s not a coating, it’s micro abrasions in the glass itself that diffuse and scatter light.

 

[Pezimak]

I just got my new 2026 Studio Display at the weekend and I went for nano texture, and I do not regret it. Yes it is a tiny bit fuzzy, if you look with your nose to the glass you can see it looks rough. But it is fantastic for reducing reflections and glare! I sit next to a window, and text is much easier on my eyes too. I did try them out in the Apple Store and on the glossy screen the text was a bit too punchy for me, but I replaced a matte screen anyway. Glossy is good, but their is a reason almost every office environment uses mattes screens.

When the light is dim or dark I also use my table lamp and this nano texture should help a lot to block it reflecting off the screen. I am growing to like my new monitor very much.

 

[Dark-Signature]

We have a nano texture ASD in our very bright main room and absolutely love it. Zero glare or reflections that would make a glossy screen unusable in this setting with high windows on both sides.

And it’s not a coating, it’s micro abrasions in the glass itself that diffuse and scatter light.

Tastes really do vary. Apple’s Nanotexture is arguably one of the “best” matte coatings for monitors. I had the chance to compare the Apple Pro Display XDR side-by-side in both glossy and Nanotexture finishes, and the Nanotexture left me with the distinct impression that it was of significantly lower quality when compared to the glossy version. The matte coatings from other monitor manufacturers are even worse by comparison.

If you have a good spot for a glossy monitor, you’ll simply get the best-quality image by far, and there’s no getting around that.

 

[collin_]

I ended up returning it and getting a non-nano texture model. The nano texture looked really bad to me regardless of the ambient lighting, and I could see it everywhere on the display all the time unless an area was black or very close to black. The whole display looked smudged and kind of reddish. I'm still a little confused about this because none of the reviewers mentioned it. I thought nano-texture was basically a luxury add-on that reduced glare and was otherwise imperceptible. It is very perceptible, and not in a good way.

 

[BSDnostalgia]

Is this what it looks like to you guys, too?

Thank you for raising this issue. I tend to prefer matte myself, but, it is interesting to hear how people feel about the new-ish nano-texture style.

 

[jr5x]

The glossy XDR has much better sharpness and blacks. But I can’t use it in my office. There’s a window behind the me and overhead office lighting, and on my MacBook Pro 16 (glossy) that sits next to my XDR, I’m constantly fighting through glare to see my work. Same thing in the Apple Store when looking at the glossy XDR. They’re only usable to me in very controlled lighting. Otherwise, the nano glass version (or another matte monitor) is by far the better choice.

 

[Dark-Signature]

The glossy XDR has much better sharpness and blacks. But I can’t use it in my office. There’s a window behind the me and overhead office lighting, and on my MacBook Pro 16 (glossy) that sits next to my XDR, I’m constantly fighting through glare to see my work. Same thing in the Apple Store when looking at the glossy XDR. They’re only usable to me in very controlled lighting. Otherwise, the nano glass version (or another matte monitor) is by far the better choice.

Everyone will tell you that having a bright light source behind you (like a window with the sun streaming in) or even in front of you is the worst-case scenario when setting up a monitor. You should always (!) position your monitor or workstation at an angle of about 90 degrees to a window.

 

[jr5x]

Everyone will tell you that having a bright light source behind you (like a window with the sun streaming in) or even in front of you is the worst-case scenario when setting up a monitor. You should always (!) position your monitor or workstation at an angle of about 90 degrees to a window.

This is absolutely the correct advice, and I’ve done it this way for my whole career, until the last year. My current office has a built-in desk setup that I can’t move. This office has the location and other features we need, and we couldn’t find better.

So it’s the nano glass for me, which eliminates the glare fantastically, at the high cost of taking away some of the best aspects of the XDR. Note that my experience is with significant light falling onto the screen. I suspect it’s closer to the glossy version when the lighting conditions are better, based on my iPad Pro nano which is amazing to look at.

 

[Brettka7]

I ended up returning it and getting a non-nano texture model. The nano texture looked really bad to me regardless of the ambient lighting, and I could see it everywhere on the display all the time unless an area was black or very close to black. The whole display looked smudged and kind of reddish. I'm still a little confused about this because none of the reviewers mentioned it. I thought nano-texture was basically a luxury add-on that reduced glare and was otherwise imperceptible. It is very perceptible, and not in a good way.

I 100% agree. I can’t believe people have zero issue with the nano-texture look on these expensive displays. It makes everything feel blurry. My eyes focus on the glass instead of the display itself.

 

[kepler20b]

I 100% agree. I can’t believe people have zero issue with the nano-texture look on these expensive displays. It makes everything feel blurry. My eyes focus on the glass instead of the display itself.

Ive written about this before

nano texture is an upsell because the majority of professional grade work won't prefer nano texture. it defeats the purpose of the picture quality and the 5k/ppi.

 

[Matt2012]

I've found using distilled water on a clean, damp microfibre cloth to clean nano works best. Be sure to dry off with a dry microfibre straight away. Also use on a cold screen when its not been used for a while.

 

[Zubba]

Ive written about this before

nano texture is an upsell because the majority of professional grade work won't prefer nano texture. it defeats the purpose of the picture quality and the 5k/ppi.

As a semi-professional enthusiast it’s actually the opposite. Professionals are using reference monitors (like $20k Sony’s), but those Photo/Video editors that do use ASDs largely prefer NT primarily for viewing uniformity in studio environments, and because the glossy displays tend to “over present” the contrast levels most people will view on.

I don’t think there’s any question that glossy “presents” better when you can avoid reflections, but as a content creator I much prefer the NT, because I don’t want to spend $20k on an industry spec reference monitor, and because I know once I bring an image to a specific level on a NT-ASD it will look how I want it to on 99% of panels that would view it, whereas the glossy made images can often not look vibrant/contrasty enough on those same panels.

 

[collin_]

Okay... I'm even more confused now about why this wasn't mentioned by reviewers because you can see the nano-texture's issue even in pictures. 🧐 We're talking 200 kB JPGs. I was just reading this Verge article and noticed that. The effect its etched glass creates looks almost identical to image noise.

I outlined the area in which it's visible in these images. This is pretty much exactly what it looks like in person, except you see it everywhere and it's more pronounced. Can you guys see it too, or is it just me?

 

[rnb2]

I think we used to call this the "screen door effect" with early matte displays. I'm sure that the nanotexture option is better than most implementations, but I'm glad that I went for the glossy panel for exactly this reason.

 

[Zubba]

Okay... I'm even more confused now about why this wasn't mentioned by reviewers because you can see the nano-texture's issue even in pictures. 🧐 We're talking 200 kB JPGs. I was just reading this Verge article and noticed that. The effect its etched glass creates looks almost identical to image noise.

I outlined the area in which it's visible in these images. This is pretty much exactly what it looks like in person, except you see it everywhere and it's more pronounced. Can you guys see it too, or is it just me?

It's light scattering. It's the price you pay for the non-reflectivity, and the increased ability to stay uniform in a wider range of lighting situations. As a photographer it doesn't look anything like noise to me, but it does present somewhat grainy under certain conditions/backgrounds (bright/white); it's most noticeable on a white webpage, or a sunny sky like you've outlined.

IMO it mostly disappears on most images, and in dark mode.

Creatives concerned with image uniformity across multiple screens, or those in stuck with lighting environments that they can't perfectly control will be significantly better off with the NT.

If you can't get over it, get the glossy... just be prepared to never be able to unsee reflections. If you can situate the display in a windowless/light controlled room glossy is definitely the way to go for 90% of people.

 

[Mindfighter]

If you can't get over it, get the glossy... just be prepared to never be able to unsee reflections. If you can situate the display in a windowless/light controlled room glossy is definitely the way to go for 90% of people.

Have a glossy Studio Display 2022 currently and am awaiting delivery of a NT. I chose the glossy when comparing glossy and nano in-store but glossy definitely has its bag of issues, EVERYTHING reflects in the shiny glass surface.

 

[collin_]

For what it's worth, I use my glossy one in a 110-square foot room with six 1,600-lumen lamps in it that are set to ~4,300K during most of the day and have never had any issues with reflections. In terms of artificial lighting that's definitely near the extreme end. I do use it at maximum brightness with auto-brightness disabled though. The room has a window, but sunlight comes in through a curtain.

Idk. I guess if you have it in a room that gets lots of direct sunlight, then glare could be an issue, but I wouldn't recommend putting a display in the path of direct sunlight to begin with, if you can avoid it. The display definitely doesn't reflect bright white spots of light at me like what's shown in the Verge article from my prior post, or any glare that I notice unless it's off or displaying black or near-black content over a wide area, in which case yeah I can see my silhouette in it -- but that's the case even if it's extremely dark in the room.

 

[BSDnostalgia]

Idk. I guess if you have it in a room that gets lots of direct sunlight, then glare could be an issue, but I wouldn't recommend putting a display in the path of direct sunlight to begin with, if you can avoid it.

But, that is the whole point. Many people can't avoid it, at least sometimes. For them (us), matte works better.

 

[Macintosh101]

Can anyone who has the Studio Display XDR comment on whether the nano texture display is improved over the NT on the previous Studio Display (2022) model?

On another note, I read somewhere that the nanotexture finish on the MacBook Pro and iPad Pro are made via chemical etching process, whereas apparently on the studio display the etching is done by machines, which might be why they seem different.

 

[Zubba]

Can anyone who has the Studio Display XDR comment on whether the nano texture display is improved over the NT on the previous Studio Display (2022) model?

On another note, I read somewhere that the nanotexture finish on the MacBook Pro and iPad Pro are made via chemical etching process, whereas apparently on the studio display the etching is done by machines, which might be why they seem different.

Appears to be the same to me. There is a difference between the MBP/IPP and ASD display texture for sure; I don't know if it's a chemical vs. mechanical etch as rumored, but there definitely is a subtle difference. IMO the difference doesn't translate to a different experience, or level of clarity/contrast/sharpness, and has more to do with the fact people are comparing different panels to each other.

A friend of mine was trying to compare his iPad Pro M4 NT to my new ASD XDR NT like that would tell him something... of course the tandem oled is going to look better than the miniLED... it'd also probably burn in within a year if used as a standard working display.

 

[Mindfighter]

So glad I went with the NT. When I bought the ASD2022 after I compared in-store and went with glossy due to perceived clarity reading text. It's been a pain, reflections-galore which offsets the clarity. (if you have a dark room without any windows then I assume it might have an edge) So this time I went with the nano and it's absolutely gorgeous, any introduced "fuzziness" is minimal and for me FAR preferable to looking into a "mirror" all day. 🤓

 

[Lodano]

I hated the nano texture standard ASD so much. This thing made the monitor look like 1080p instead of 5K.

Thank God I sold it for the glossy version.

I don't understand why people would not change their environment (space, curtains) instead of going for the NT. But to each their own...

Edit : For those talking about reflections : Don't trust the ones you see in the Apple Store because there is a TON of light. I didn't notice any at home.