Photographers, how is your glassy screen?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by megamouse, Oct 17, 2008.

  1. megamouse macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    #1
    Of course I would like test it myself but I am now on assignment on the Highlands, and the nearest Apple Store (Glasgow) is like 8 hours drive away.

    Anyway Apple Tele Sales agree to ship one to my temporary address, the question is, How bad is the reflection? How hard it is to calibrate the screen? Will a Spider be able to do the job as on the Matte Screen?



    P.S. Just before the trip, I sold my 4-week-old 2.4 Penryn MBP 72 hours before the introduction of the MBP, with numerically little lost, in that hope that Apple will introduce something better and cheaper. Now I regret it.


    Thanks for your genuine input.
     
  2. digitalfrog macrumors regular

    digitalfrog

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2007
    #2
    We have a few things in common.

    I'm a photographer too, I also sold my Early 2008 MPB just before they would anounce the new ones.

    I also was disapointed.

    I found an incredible deal on a brand new Early 2008 MPB (one level up from what I had) for less money than I sold mine second hand a week ago.

    I have not seen the screen myself but the odds I will like it as a photographer is close to null... I may be wrong... we'll see.

    There is NOTHING I do not like with the Early MBP. So why change ?
    Even today's CPU/Memory benchmarks show little to no improvement over the early MPB.
     
  3. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #3
    I guess I'd be most concerned with calibration - haven't seen one yet to see how far the glass is off the display.
     
  4. dinaluvsApple macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #4
    be patient, somebody will probably come out with a screen protector to reduce the gloss.
     
  5. bcaslis macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #5
    I photograph for fun, not for a living. But I've color calibrated the screen and it seems at least as good as the matte screens to me. I know some seem to go off the deep end on glossy screens, but color accuracy isn't any more of an issue than on the matte screen.

    I respect anyone's person opinion, but I just don't understand this "oh, the glare" reaction. Matte screen have glare also. They just diffuse the glare into a white blur instead of a sharp reflection. I much prefer the glossy in this choice. And outside there is no contest. A matte screen will turn into a white washout while a glossy will have some reflection points, but most of the screen is still perfectly visible.

    Just my 2 cents.
     
  6. tcphoto macrumors 6502a

    tcphoto

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Location:
    Madison, GA
    #6
    I am a freelance photographer and was nervous about the glossy display and lack of FW400. After two days, I am rather impressed with the display and will have to find an adapter to fit the FW800. I have edited a couple images and am satisfied with the results. Calibration? I just set it to the LCD profile and ran with it. I'll have to print an image and see the results.

    www.tcphoto.org
     
  7. allanibanez macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    #7
    I currently have a 3GHz single core pc with 1gb of ram. Photoshop works alright on it, but after a while of working with large images it just gives up. To perform a simple gradient on a layer mask i have a progress bar...that my friends is a sign that a new computer is needed.

    Anyway back to the point, my current PC monitor has always had fairly reliable accuracy with regard to colour, saturation and contrast, so my solution to the problem (if there even is one, my MBP doesn't get here for 2 and a half weeks) was to buy the adapter to connect it to my existing screen. For £15 I'm no worse off than I was but now have a far more power computer to use.

    Personally, anyone editing photographs to a professional level on a laptop screen needs their heads checking. And as for comparisons to the old MBP, I have seen a few comparison images and my god is the new screen more accurate in terms of white balance. The old MBP wasa bit of a lottery between getting either a yellow or blue tinted screen...the new screen is pure white.

    Personally, I can't wait to use it and from experience I know what saturation bumps my images generally require in post processing so I'm not worried in the slightest...and nor should you :)
     
  8. Jethryn Freyman macrumors 68020

    Jethryn Freyman

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    Location:
    Australia
    #8
    I've heard so many people say this, I think it's time I chipped in.

    People don't want to have to do this. They don't want to go sticking coverings over their nice new screens when a week ago they could have got a perfectly good matte display. Especially on a computer costing $3000+.
     
  9. bcaslis macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #9
    You don't need an adaptor for FW800. There are cables with a FW400 connector on one end and a FW800 connector on the other. FW800 is backwards compatible with FW400, you only need matching connectors. I've done this may times myself with multiple devices.
     
  10. Apple Corps macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #10
    Let me explain it to you very precisely. For me, I have the ability to "erase" the white blur from my vision - minimal distraction. The clear reflection from these mirror displays (as ifixit calls them) is very distracting to me - I have not been able to "erase" that clear reflection from my vision - major distraction. Perhaps one day the researchers will discover a difference among people's optical processing in this regard - who knows.

    I can rapidly see those 3 dimensional images that others take many minutes to finally pick up on.
     
  11. bcaslis macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #11
    I understand you very clearly. What bothers you doesn't bother me. I can see those clear reflections also but I can easily ignore them. The white glare from a matter bothers me much more. I see those 3D images very quickly also. I can just automatically block them out. The white glare however blocks the actual image underneath and bothers me much more.
     
  12. Apple Corps macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #12
    I really do believe that some image processing differences exists among people. The new notebooks look impressive - I went to the store so wanting to purchase one.

    There are some stick on anti glare shields - somehow that does not inspire confidence in me as a way to get around the glare issue. Also - my skill in applying one that large to a screen - probably no going to happen :eek: :eek:
     
  13. Timur macrumors 6502a

    Timur

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #13
    Unless you buy an HP 8730w with DreamColor screen most if not all laptop screens are pieces of sh*t compared to proper color-accurate desktop screens. You can have worse vs. worst, but you hardly get good. Does anyone here expect the new screen to be at least 8-bit at all?

    The most interesting question I have read here is wether the glass' thickness, or better to say diffraction characteristics, will allow proper calibration. Hopefully someone publishes callibration results anytime soon.

    Question is wether you are more worried about distraction or color? Any situation where enviromental light is reflected by the panel will affects it's color reproduction unless you can compensate with brightness or finding a better position. Matte sometimes causes you not to do the latter when you better should. Because of matte screens diffusion spreading reflected light over a larger area these screens are even more affected. Albeit but on the other hand they are affected more evenly.

    Apart from that matte screens always have less accurate colors because of their diffusing character also applying to the light emitted from the screen itself. You can easily see color twinkling (frequency modulation) happening when looking at large unicolor areas like the grey/light blue of this forum on many matte screens unless they are "semi"-matte/glossy and thus find a good balance in between.

    Many people working in Print prefere sand-paper surface of matte panels for its closer resemblance of printed paper (aka its "disadvantages" like lack of contrast and intensity). But if you are working for Internet or video applications you really want to use glossy. Not only because of the higher accuracy, but also because your target customers will mostly use glossy themselves.

    We had a detailed discussion about all that in this thread:

    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=581350

    Ask yourself which screen leaves more color-accurate screen estate (area) when reflecting a pointed light-source (indoor light)?

    [​IMG]

    Which screen let's you see more of the actual screen image instead of the panel surface when reflecting a strong diffuse light-source (outside daylight)?

    (the dust simulated the rough surface of a matte screen vs. the smooth surface of a glass screen)
    [​IMG]
     
  14. tcphoto macrumors 6502a

    tcphoto

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Location:
    Madison, GA
    #14
    I have far too many cables on hand and what is the cost of replacing them compared to one or two adapters?
     

Share This Page