Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    118

    Default Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    Dear sifus of CS,

    Like to know what is your C & C with regards to using glossy and non-glossy displays for your photo editing. Just saw in Apple website that the Macbook Pro offers a display selection of High Resolution and also a Glossy option. What is your take? Like to hear some experience from you guys.

    I am using a Fujisu laptop at the moment. Non-glossy type. Planning an change as my laptop is too slow (3 years already) and I want to start processing photos in RAW format.

    Many thanks for your inputs.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    I'd suggest a matte/non-glossy screen if you're serious with your photography.

    Apple's glossy screen option tends to saturate images and throw you off if you correct color visually.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    Glossy looks nice

    Matte looks correct

    o.o Apple Macbook (not pros) only have glossy options, so I had to take a glossy one.. Given a choice, I'd prefer matte.
    Meow!

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    65

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    Matte screen overlays are available.
    Last edited by Snappa; 9th March 2008 at 09:12 PM.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    I had the same problem as you when choosing the screen for my Macbook Pro. I chose Matte and never regretted it.

    matte is usually targeted for editing pictures as it gives your a more 'correct' color output
    glossy is for viewing pleasure, that is watching movies or viewing pictures..

    thats what Macbooks are offers only glossy since, Apple doesnt really expect you to edit pictures on a 13" screen..
    Apple Cinema Displays are all matte (I think) because they are made serious users..

    hope this helps..

  6. #6

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    I prefer the matte finish, because the glossy's reflective surface give me a headache when I work in a brighter environment.
    By the way, if you shoot Nikon RAW, the Capture NX is not yet compatible with OS X Leopard. I have to use PS CS3 for the conversion. Not ideal.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    118

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    Many thanks for replies.

    I ended up with an iMac 24 inch as the performance for editing photo is so much better and comes with a wide screen that allows me to do my work at 1600 pixels wide.

    Didn't know that Leopard does not support Capture NX but I think it is no drama since I can boot in Windows and do my RAW editing from there.

    Can I know where to get the matt overlay? Otherwise I need to turn off all lights everytime I do editing work. And in a dark room during daytime.

    As for color profile, I guess I will use the calibration/profiling devices to get it right.

    Any further comments are highly appreciated.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    iMac 24" should be 1920x1200 instead of 1600 mah.
    Videographer @ A Merry Moment

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    65

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    Quote Originally Posted by LeeCH View Post
    Many thanks for replies.

    I ended up with an iMac 24 inch as the performance for editing photo is so much better and comes with a wide screen that allows me to do my work at 1600 pixels wide.

    Didn't know that Leopard does not support Capture NX but I think it is no drama since I can boot in Windows and do my RAW editing from there.

    Can I know where to get the matt overlay? Otherwise I need to turn off all lights ) I do editing work. And in a dark room during daytime.

    As for color profile, I guess I will use the calibration/profiling devices to get it right.

    Any further comments are highly appreciated.
    I have the same iMac and as kniveswood has pointed out, it should be 1920x1200. I saw the third party iMac 24" matte overlay at Epi at Wheelock Place. But I don't use one coz there's nothing bright/reflective behind me in my study room; just one ceiling fluorescent light and one table lamp by the side of my iMac. If your iMac is located in a similar environment, you will enjoy the sharper text and images on your glossy screen especially with your photos

    If you want colour accuracy, you buy a screen calibrator and not really either a matte or glossy screen Btw, if you want one, this entry-level and inexpensive calibrator looks good ColorVision Spyder2 Express

    For RAW conversion/editing on OSX, try one of these CS3, Lightroom or Aperture 2. All three automatically map out hot/stuck pixels during the conversion which I find very useful.

    Just my few cents

  10. #10

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    if there are pesky reflections, you could try to shield the screen from the light source with a screen shade... quite easy to DIY...

  11. #11

    Default Re: Glossy or Non-glossy display??

    I've found the 'glossy' machines have had to service (Mainly Dell XPS laptops) have annoying reflections of the room behind you in their screens. I assume the usual users of these machines just 'filter that out' of their view.

    Screens got a matt finish for a reason. It used to be a 'feature' in the early days 'matt finish non reflective'. Now various vendors have gone back to plain glass and are trying to call it a feature.

    We have a print of a painting in our lounge room - when it was first framed, they used ordinary glass. The reflections were detracting from the picture - we got it re-glazed in matt surface glass.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •