Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

LucidLethargy

macrumors newbie
Jun 19, 2012
4
0
San Diego, CA
This thread absolutely reeks of ignorance. As a visual professional I can say with absolute certainty that Matte has FAR less glare and is much easier to see in bright environments. Furthermore, there are so many people upset by this there are various online petitions informing Apple of this grave mistake (such as here: http://macmatte.wordpress.com/ .)

More than anything, I will tell the viewers of this forum what I tell all ignorant Apple fanboys (please note I am NOT calling all Apple consumers ignorant, in fact I own over $20,000 in Apple electronics so that would be self-degrading - I am targeting those who believe Apple never makes mistakes with this comment, instead.) and that is to actually COMPARE the screens in person. I am not sure if this is satisfactory in-store, but in the least grab a friend with a matte screen and place your glossy computer next to it in different practical environments you plan to work in - if you don't like the results take that thing back and take advantage of Apple's amazing customer support and return policy.

Studies show glossy screens as not only harder on the eyes for prolonged periods, but also as demonstrated above the glare is a lot more frustrating. Some of the images from the opposition (those who argue glossy screens are better for glare) are showing heavy, direct lighting on screens (it's photographic lighting on photographic stands, so it is very much so meant to be both bright and directional despite the attached softboxes.) It's true that if you have a giant blinding light pointed at the screens then the glossy would likely appear better in an image - in real life, however, it would not only be terrible in both situations, but it would blind you as a reflection would be reflecting most of that light right into your face (on the matte screen you would just see a washed out screen.) Here we hit the real problem with glossy screens... You see all the TINY lights and SLIGHT amounts of glare behind you in your screen, and they are reflected directly back into your eyes. This is present even in the latest retina screen, and it will drive you nuts. It's not always so bad if you have only overhead lighting, however in situations like this you will notice the screen turns into a mirror. You will see everything behind you when you refocus your eyes. Generally you can focus them only on the screen, but when that sucker goes black you will be in for some serious eye strain. I use a program called Red Cine-X (professional film program for RED Cinema cameras) as well as final cut pro, and both are absolutely infuriating to work with in this environment due to the black or gray nature of their GUI.

So word to the wise: TRY THESE OUT BEFORE BUYING THEM and you will find everything I am writing to be absolutely dead on. I am a photographer, film maker, and web designer - so I stare at computers all day long and I pay express attention to colors and visuals. Glossy can be your best friend in a dark room with it's rich colors, but any time you're not in a dark room (MOST of the time for most of us) you will find yourself with an inferior product if the screen is glossy.
 

flipnap

macrumors 6502
May 1, 2012
339
0
whatever. you should stop telling people they are wrapped in ignorance . mundane, redundant, boring, overexposed, overuse of "fanboy", fear, buyers remorse, too many views of "lost boys" whatever.. chill out. guess what? im home from octoberfest in münich and im drunk and your post is poo. go home.. read 'lord of the flies' , try to remember why you read 'lord of the flies', listen to acdc (not highway to hell' try 'night prowler' or maybe 'sink the pink' them move on to something by "the cramps".. go call someone who love you and misses you because we aint curing cancer here.. were just talking about macs.. life. love. smile.. laughter sounds the same no matter where you are in the world. lighten up.
 

Benbikeman

macrumors 6502a
May 17, 2011
616
1
London, England
Glossy can be your best friend in a dark room with it's rich colors, but any time you're not in a dark room (MOST of the time for most of us) you will find yourself with an inferior product if the screen is glossy.

A 'visual professional' arranges their office so that they have no sources of light reflecting on the screen. In which case reflections are not an issue but the muddy colours of the matte screen are.
 

Mojo1

macrumors 65816
Jul 26, 2011
1,244
21
A 'visual professional' arranges their office so that they have no sources of light reflecting on the screen. In which case reflections are not an issue but the muddy colours of the matte screen are.

If the colors are "muddy" when viewing a matte display then there is something wrong with the display or its calibration.
 

Benbikeman

macrumors 6502a
May 17, 2011
616
1
London, England
If the colors are "muddy" when viewing a matte display then there is something wrong with the display or its calibration.

No, it's simply in the nature of matte screens: the coating reduces the black point and the colour saturation. There's no way around that.
 

Mojo1

macrumors 65816
Jul 26, 2011
1,244
21
No, it's simply in the nature of matte screens: the coating reduces the black point and the colour saturation. There's no way around that.

Describing images viewed on a matte display as being "muddy" is hyperbole. Many people prefer the deeper colors of glossy displays but that doesn't make them ideal for accurate image editing.

More info about selecting a display for image editing:

http://www.imagescience.com.au/kb/questions/120/Monitors+For+High+Quality+Imaging+Work#PanelSurface

An Excerpt:

"Matte, NOT GLOSS! Good quality LCD screens must have a matte surface, not a shiny, reflective gloss coating. Gloss is bad in every way - it increases contrast (which we don't want, see above) - and it dramatically increases the reflectively characteristics of the screen, which is again very bad.

High quality screens all have very matte surfaces that minimise reflections and allow for a very pleasing, natural display. Very high quality screens have lens grade coatings on them for extremely high quality display, and this gives images on these screens a wonderfully natural, three dimensional quality."

There is more information in the article regarding the advantages of quality matte displays over glossy monitors.
 

nitromac

macrumors 6502
Jul 29, 2012
282
13
US
Actually, glare is a significantly worse problem on matte displays compared with glossy displays. Glossy displays typically manage to avoid glare altogether, but do so at the cost of having hard specular reflections rather than diffused reflections.

With a matte screen, any bright light source that hits the display, affects the entire display. With a glossy screen, only the small area that is reflecting the light source is affected.

Matte screen coatings are an additional layer on top of the LCD glass, that also adds speckling/grain to the image and reduces sharpness of the display.

697x0x.jpg
8hnz1z.jpg


Notice how the matte LCD (left) is significantly more affected by reflections than the glossy one, and contrast over the entire display is reduced significantly.


Without being bonded to the glass, as you have with the iPhone and Sony's Televisions, having a sheet of glass over the display as you had with previous MacBook Pro models, was a big problem, as it introduced double reflections that reduce contrast and clarity of the display. (though it offered good protection and made them easy to clean)

Not putting anything over the LCD glass with the Retina MacBook Pro, is better for image quality.


What I'd much rather see next year instead of a matte option, would be a "high resolution" 3360×2100 retina display. (4× 1680×1050, rather than 1440×900)

The standard 1440×900 "retina" resolution just doesn't offer enough workspace for me, and there's a noticeable reduction in image quality when using the scaled 1680×1050 or 1920×1200 resolutions.

The difference in contrast between the TVs doesn't depend on whether it's matte or glossy. It might factor in, but not as much as it shows. You are comparing two different TVs. One might have brighter backlighting. Other might naturally have less contrast. That comparison is pointless.

It's hilarious how everyone is downvoting the OP for stating his opinion. The majority of those are probably retina owners. Obvious case of purchase justification.

And for the majority of folks, gloss is fine and might actually look a bit nicer because it almost enhances the contrast & colors, which makes for a more enjoyable viewing experience.
However, for professional work, gloss is ****. It does NOT provide the most accurate/flat color reproduction or contrast.
 

Benbikeman

macrumors 6502a
May 17, 2011
616
1
London, England
"Matte, NOT GLOSS! Good quality LCD screens must have a matte surface, not a shiny, reflective gloss coating. Gloss is bad in every way - it increases contrast (which we don't want, see above) - and it dramatically increases the reflectively characteristics of the screen, which is again very bad.

High quality screens all have very matte surfaces that minimise reflections and allow for a very pleasing, natural display.

The very language used tells you this is some random stranger's opinion rather than anything based on objective data or industry practice.

I would never dream of photo-editing on a matte-coated screen.
 

Beta Particle

macrumors 6502a
Jun 25, 2012
527
5
The difference in contrast between the TVs doesn't depend on whether it's matte or glossy. It might factor in, but not as much as it shows. You are comparing two different TVs. One might have brighter backlighting. Other might naturally have less contrast. That comparison is pointless.
I am not talking about the display's contrast, I am talking about real-world in-room contrast, which is very different from the panel spec. (that only applies in a dark room)

Glossy panels retain significantly more contrast than matte panels in bright lighting conditions. This is a measurable fact.

And for the majority of folks, gloss is fine and might actually look a bit nicer because it almost enhances the contrast & colors, which makes for a more enjoyable viewing experience.
However, for professional work, gloss is ****. It does NOT provide the most accurate/flat color reproduction or contrast.
This is entirely false. Matte panels diffuse light throughout the surface of the display which lowers accuracy compared to gloss panels.


As I posted earlier in this topic, look at this image:
zDa8n.jpg


On the left is a Philips LCD using their "moth eye" coating. This is the most advanced, least reflective matte coating commercially available on any display to date, far better than Apple's matte LCDs.

On the right is Sony's gorilla glass covered, optically bonded, anti-reflect coated LCD—arguably one of the best "glossy" displays available today. (actually, the HX920 is a generation old, the current model is the HX950)

Which one is showing the most impact from reflections? While reflections are distinct on the Sony, they are significantly smaller, and have much less impact on the contrast of the panel. On the Philips, reflections are lighter, and cover large areas of the screen due to the diffused matte surface, and that area has a green tint.

Assuming you have proper depth perception, your brain should be able to filter out most of the reflections on the Sony panel, and being a glossy panel, it is usually possible to position it in such a way that avoids most/all reflections. With a matte panel, you lose contrast in a bright room no matter where you position it.


This thread absolutely reeks of ignorance. As a visual professional I can say with absolute certainty that Matte has FAR less glare and is much easier to see in bright environments.
Please learn the difference between Glare, and Specular Reflections. Matte panels are significantly more affected by glare than glossy panels are.

Please also look at Anandtech's direct comparisons between the Retina MacBook Pro, an older generation Glass-fronted MacBook Pro, and a matte MacBook Pro. The Retina MacBook Pro easily wins for having the highest contrast and least glare.

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/15133475/


Studies show glossy screens as not only harder on the eyes for prolonged periods, but also as demonstrated above the glare is a lot more frustrating.
Please cite sources for this.

I use a program called Red Cine-X (professional film program for RED Cinema cameras) as well as final cut pro, and both are absolutely infuriating to work with in this environment due to the black or gray nature of their GUI.
If you are doing film grading, I would hope that you are, at the very least, using a monitor hood, and you should be doing so in a controlled lighting environment.

The best and most expensive grading monitors available today all have glossy coatings rather than matte. Why do you think that is?

If you are still looking for matte displays rather than modern "glossy" displays, you have not been keeping up to date with modern display technology. It is outdated thinking.
 

Ledgem

macrumors 68020
Jan 18, 2008
2,034
924
Hawaii, USA
A 'visual professional' arranges their office so that they have no sources of light reflecting on the screen. In which case reflections are not an issue but the muddy colours of the matte screen are.
I'm not a "visual professional" but out of curiosity, how do you do this? I have my lights to my sides and my window is behind my computer screen, so no sources of light are hitting the screen directly. However, I am quite fair-skinned, and I can see myself reflected on the screen quite easily. It's especially noticeable when light from the window becomes bright and/or when black is displayed on my screen.

I haven't tried it, but I wouldn't be surprised if I could still see myself if I turned off all of my lights and used the computer at night - the light from the screen would probably be sufficient to cause that reflection.

I feel that the colors of the glossy display appear nicer than my old matte-screen Macbook Pro, but the reflections are a big pain. Usually I can ignore them well enough, thankfully... I'm heartened to see the photo comparisons which show that the retina screen is apparently improved over the standard glossy screens.
 

Benbikeman

macrumors 6502a
May 17, 2011
616
1
London, England
I'm not a "visual professional" but out of curiosity, how do you do this? I have my lights to my sides and my window is behind my computer screen, so no sources of light are hitting the screen directly. However, I am quite fair-skinned, and I can see myself reflected on the screen quite easily.

When it's in use? I have no light sources behind me in my office, and can't see myself reflected in mine when it's being used.
 

Mojo1

macrumors 65816
Jul 26, 2011
1,244
21
The very language used tells you this is some random stranger's opinion rather than anything based on objective data or industry practice.

Too bad you didn't bother to read the article; you might have learned something! Image Science actually has a long track record providing professional equipment and services to photographers. There is a lot of good info at that link but you would need to take the time to read it vs. dismissing it because it doesn't agree with your opinion...

As far as industry practice goes, all the high-end LCD monitors intended for color-critical image editing made by Eizo and NEC have matte displays. Glossy isn't even an option. If glossy panels were ideal for image editing, one would expect the top companies to be using them in their best displays.

TFT Central is a good website to learn about the differences between LCD monitors; it has excellent reviews too. TFT Central has an entire article about glossy and anti-glare LCD coatings that includes this paragraph:

"AG coating has long been the choice for nearly all professional-grade displays as well, helping to avoid issues with reflections and external light sources which are vital for colour critical work. In addition it should be noted that AG coating is less susceptible to dust, grease and dirt marks which can become an issue on reflective glossy coating alternatives."

http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/content/panel_coating.htm
http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/

I would never dream of photo-editing on a matte-coated screen.

Just some random stranger's opinion...
 
Last edited:

Ledgem

macrumors 68020
Jan 18, 2008
2,034
924
Hawaii, USA
When it's in use? I have no light sources behind me in my office, and can't see myself reflected in mine when it's being used.
Yep, when it's in use. The brightness is set on auto-adjust and is a bit above half-way power most of the time. I can usually ignore it (especially when light colors are being displayed) but it's a bit of an annoyance... maybe the only solution is that I need to get more sun and become more tan :p
 

Benbikeman

macrumors 6502a
May 17, 2011
616
1
London, England
As far as industry practice goes, all the high-end LCD monitors intended for color-critical image editing made by Eizo and NEC have matte displays.

You have clearly never used an Eizo monitor if you think they bear any resemblence to the AG coating we're discussing here. ;)

Anyway, life's too short, so I shall try to remember this lesson:

duty_calls.png


----------

maybe the only solution is that I need to get more sun and become more tan :p

Sounds like a reasonable excuse for a holiday. :)
 

Mojo1

macrumors 65816
Jul 26, 2011
1,244
21
You have clearly never used an Eizo monitor if you think they bear any resemblence to the AG coating we're discussing here. ;)

Again, if you had bothered to read the TFT article on anti-glare coatings you would know that it compared the differences between anti-glare coatings. Eizo, NEC and Apple LCDs use different coatings. Some coatings are very granular while others are smoother in appearance. Whether a particular AG coating agrees with you or not is a matter of personal taste.

Like you said, life is too short to waste on wannabe wedding photographers that are a Dime A Dozen now that DSLRs can be used as glorified Polaroid cameras. You should consider ditching the attitude because if you plan on having a long photographic career that already-know-it-all stance isn't going to serve you very well in the long-run... ;)
 

AirThis

macrumors 6502a
Mar 6, 2012
518
14
Personally, I don't care what arguments people come up with. My eyes prefer matte in mixed lighting conditions. But for my workshop, I prefer glossy. If others prefer glossy all the time, well it's their choice. We live in a democracy. They buy what suits their eyes and I buy what suits mine. It's as simple as that.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.