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

Returning Hi-Res Antiglare

Jaimi said:
I recently had my eyes tested (20/20!). However, I'm over 40 so reading glasses are a must. You can still need glasses and have 20/20 vision.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with that.

What I was saying is that a preference for not reading very small print all day long, and the recognition that magnifying lenses will make it larger, does not necessarily mean that one needs glasses. It may mean that one simply has a preference for larger print even though one is perfectly able to read the smaller print. I fall into this category.

Ideally, we would not be locked into one specific size by the screen resolution, but with the Apple OS we are. Still my favorite OS but that is one thing I would really like to see changed.
 
polkunus said:
Can't you just...

Lower the resolution?

(I can't stand "anti glare" it makes my head dizzy and it makes the colour more dull for some odd reason.)
Click to expand...

Same here. Its the combination of the silver greyishness that somehow dims it and the fact that it looks like it has a less warm/indulging/sexy brightness and is more of a washed out brightness...
 
Can someone go more into detail about this.. my mbp will be arriving in 2 days and i didnt love the anti glare, but got it because it was recommended for photography, photoshop etc..

I liked the look of the hr glossy..

HELP!! :(
 
Dtp8513 said:
Can someone go more into detail about this.. my mbp will be arriving in 2 days and i didnt love the anti glare, but got it because it was recommended for photography, photoshop etc..

I liked the look of the hr glossy..

HELP!! :(
Click to expand...

You bought a display you didn't like? The colors are brighter, and the contrast is greater on the glossy display. Seems like that would be the one you would choose if you were into photography and photoshop.
 
^nope, colors are too saturated on that one, and wouldn't really be accurate enough for photography work. If you liked the glossy one better, you should have went with it, but know that your prints will look different from what you thought you had on the screen. ultimately I think you're better off with the AG
 
Yes, its lighter than the glossy, though probably by maybe a few ounces. The difference is minimal, but noticable.
 
Now that I think about it, based on my uses of my computer, I really do not have the need for an anti-glare display. I just really like the effect of the anti-glare and how it dosen't reflect anything. Even though the reflections don't really bother me with the standard res glossy, the luxury of going anywhere without having any reflections is really a good thing. Even though I do photoshop here and there as a hobby, as well as video editing as a hobby (and the anti-glare screen is good for that kind of thing), I'm not serious about it that I ABSOLUTELY have to have the anti-glare. If anything I can hook it up to an external monitor if I really have to have the anti-glare effect; I just so happen to have an extra external anti-glare monitor lying around in my apartment.

One thing that I did notice while reading through the forum is that many users who currently have the hi-res screens, had either 15 inch pre-unibody Macbook Pro's or laptops that had already had high resolution displays, and were able to adapt very quickly to the new 1680 x 1050 screens. People's eyes were already warmed up and attuned to get used to the hi-res screen. Meanwhile, I had a 14 inch HP DV4 with a 1280 x 800 screen, and making quite a leap with a 1680 x 1050. My eyes could not take it, and still can't take it now as I type this after having the laptop since Thursday. I guess me jumping to a 1440 x 900 will be a significant jump for me resolution wise as it is anyways.

And even if resolution independence is indeed coming in the next Lion OS (which we don't even know yet for sure) I rather be happy with my laptop full time, rather than keep a computer, let my eyes suffer till the summer, and then be happy. I would rather go for the former than the latter.

Someone has suggested to try glasses to help alleviate the eye strain issue, I never had the need to wear glasses, and I don't plan on starting now. If the anti-glare model is really going to be that big of an issue that I need to start wearing glasses, I would rather go for the standard res instead. I would rather let the laptop adapt to me over the years that I use it, not me adapt to the laptop. But that is a good suggestion though, didn't cross my mind that my eyes could be the issue. :p
 
My MBP has the LED backlit 1440 x 900 resolution matte display and it's crisp. :)

I prefer to read at a distance of 30 inches away with the fonts jacked up to size 18. :eek:
 
lurrego said:
^nope, colors are too saturated on that one, and wouldn't really be accurate enough for photography work. If you liked the glossy one better, you should have went with it, but know that your prints will look different from what you thought you had on the screen. ultimately I think you're better off with the AG
Click to expand...

Not true... its accurate. The blacks more accurate especially. Its just a bias for people who have hate towards anything that strikes them as style over function.

The glossy screen is beautiful but has potential for glare and the anti-res is uglier but has an extra mostly arbitrary function of helping you that one day in your life when you went outside and sat at the park and the sun was at the wrong angle (never happens)

So people take that as a war cry.

Glossy looks better as a beautiful design principle and has better blacks and more indulgent colors, more eye candy.

That makes some people mad, apparently causing them to spread aggressive propaganda that is biased and not critically sound.
 
Jaimi said:
Seems like that would be the one you would choose if you were into photography and photoshop.
Click to expand...

No! Those brighter colors are totally 100% artificial. If you're into photography, you're wanting to match the image on the screen to what's going to show up in prints and glossy pretty much kills that ability.

Anti-glare provides more accurate colors. Glossy provides more vivid colors.
 
I didn't read the entire thread but I do understand the problem with hi-res screen. When I first started looking at Mac, over a year ago, I looked at the 17" and my eyes would screen in pain so that model was removed from consideration. the 15" was perfect but I couldn't wait for the refresh so I picked up a 27" iMac and 13 MBP for travel. The 27" was just pure pain so I lowered the resolution which worked but was not not ideal. I eventually sold both in Nov and have the regular 15" now and wonderful 26" NEC monitor for photography which is non-glossy and has a pixel density of 89 ppi and it very easy on my eyes - I took a big loss but my eyes thanked me. I looked at the hi-res 15" and immediately knew it was not for me, nor is the 13" MBA.

I don't mind Apple offering hi-resolution models, and do think they should offer these but it is important to also offer regular resolution for all their models as well. At the moment they only do with with 13" MB and MBP, and 15" MBP. The iMac is unusable for me and they really should offer a 3rd model like a 24" 16:10 ration with 1920 x 1200. My NEC is 1920 x 1200 at 25.6" and is just wonderful
 
Derango said:
No! Those brighter colors are totally 100% artificial. If you're into photography, you're wanting to match the image on the screen to what's going to show up in prints and glossy pretty much kills that ability.

Anti-glare provides more accurate colors. Glossy provides more vivid colors.
Click to expand...

Different brains have different levels of immersion. When one looks at a screen, he is not necessarily focusing in the same way and absorbing the same experience. Different peoples' minds work differently.

I noticed a pattern over the years. Uptight analytical types prefer the cold un-pretty functionalism of anti-glare while more artistic imaginative types like more of an indulging experience. We are all looking at these screens from different eyes. If you like math, get the anti-glare, if you like art, get the glossy.

Thats a more realistic way to put this old debate in context it seems.

Neither one is "more accurate" than the other. People keep making analogies to sound-engineering studio monitors alluding to the idea that uglier is more correct or true to the translation. With sound monitors this is true that raw accuracy translates better but this is not the same dynamic over here in the screen world.

Heres my question... what if you print something on glossy paper? Which viewing experience is more correct? (lol)

At the end of the day, blacks look better and truer on the glossy. Neither one is a more accurate representation of what will come out of the printer than the other. They both function the same.

To say a glossy is unusable for photography is ridiculous.

Photographers, like Bike Riding Enthusiasts, have very anti-mainstream cult-like mentalities about certain things all stemming from hatred/insecurity.

Championing anti-glare and trashing glossy is one such illogical bias lacking in sound reasoning and critical thinking..

...just sayin :)
 
Just as another perspective -

I bought my anti-glare 15" MBP, without having ever seen one in person. However, I like working on my deck, and I have a lot of late afternoon sun coming through my windows, so I knew the glossy would not be ideal.

I was a title concerned after making the purchase. I like the black outline on the glossy's so much more, and the colours look great.

But after getting the anti-glare, I couldn't be more happy. The silver honestly looks awesome, and I actually prefer it over my friend's identical (but w/glossy) display. And the colours are super vibrant and sharp, not nearly washed out like I feared.

I'm very very surprised to hear people find it hard on their eyes, as I personally find it so easy and relaxing to look at. It may simply be the resolution size, but I can't imagine the anti-glare itself would be a contributing factor.
 
Last edited:
I initially was a hard-headed glossy type person all the way, until I tinkered with my friend's same configuration 15" MBP as mine, with the exception of AG.

In my personal opinion, the colors on the AG were more vibrant and richer, while the glossy just popped at you. In addition, he could take his computer outside and use it and while glare was still a small issue, my computer was near impossible to use under a sunny day.

After messing with his computer, I determined that AG is the only way that I will ever choose from this point on.

For me, I converted and haven't looked back. You don't see too many AG models out there, well here in Kansas City at least.

For every 20 MBP's or so, I would say that 2% of them are Antiglare, if even that. In fact, the only AG screens I've actually seen are Derek (AbjectEvolution here), my other friends, and the one at the apple store.

Other then that, I don't see them too often. It also adds to that exclusive factor. I hope you find glossy to suit your needs.
 
Bobby Corwen said:
I noticed a pattern over the years. Uptight analytical types prefer the cold un-pretty functionalism of anti-glare while more artistic imaginative types like more of an indulging experience. We are all looking at these screens from different eyes. If you like math, get the anti-glare, if you like art, get the glossy.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. I use a glossy display on my old Macbook unibody and an anti-glare ACD to my Mac Pro. For photowork, and I do a lot of it, I definitely prefer the ACD. I guess I am an up-tight analytical creative type.

Neither one is "more accurate" than the other.
Click to expand...

I believe this is correct. Both glossy and anti-glare screens can be properly calibrated.

It all comes down to personal preference about how you wish a (presumably properly calibrated) screen to present an image, video etc.
 
Who are all these people taking out shiny MacBooks outside and using them outdoors?

90% of all computing happens in bed or at a table in your home!

The place that glossy really shines (in the dark) is the place and times you will almost always use it!

?

If you use it 90% inside or in the dark at the end of the day and after work, and the glossy is superior in those conditions.... why would you get something that is only superior outdoors?

Why get something that is better outdoors when most of you will primarily use it indoors at 10 o clock at night when you are getting ready to go to sleep?

I dont get it...

Nobody can tell me that the glossy doesn't have more contrast because that is a fact. It has better colors and feels better. So assuming that that is established as a fact, the next step in the logical chain is that you are giving up that superiority for what? What are you downgrading your experience (ever so slightly) for!???

"...Um...so I can use it outside..."

BUT YOU HARDLY EVER USE IT OUTSIDE!
 
Last edited:
Bobby Corwen said:
90% of all computing happens in bed or at a table in your home!
Click to expand...

93% of statistics are made up

Seriously though, I got lots of businesses in tower blocks around me here in London and you're telling me they're not using computers in them?

Don't make up figures to make your point pack an extra punch!
 
Locodice said:
93% of statistics are made up

Seriously though, I got lots of businesses in tower blocks around me here in London and you're telling me they're not using computers in them?

Don't make up figures to make your point pack an extra punch!
Click to expand...

Cool! never heard that joke before...

(maybe once in 2002)

But seriously though, I have been in the apple store and saw both side by side. The Anti-Glare was so washed out it made me depressed. I hope all those London folk aren't suicidal using those things, if they are using them in those tall London towers that are a perfect survey sample-pool representations for the whole world. -Much better than me throwing out a general percentage for the purpose of conveying/communicating a concept.
 
The whole AG vs Glossy argument is totally pointless because its all subjective. What I can say though is that my AG does not appear washed out and when working with images, the colours and contrasts are at least not exaggerated. Also, AG screens are generally more versatile in different lighting environments and not just the outdoors.
 
computer vision syndrome google it. You might think your eyes are fine but might be worth getting it checked out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back