New 24" iMac instead of Mac Pro?

[JohnLund]

Thanks for the insight and comments everyone.

I would have liked to hear that it was perfect for producing quality photos but, as they say, you get what you pay for.

Perhaps if Apple reps are reading this, we can get that monitor upgraded by the time I lay my money down early next year.

Thanks again.

John

[PhilipKach]

Originally Posted by JohnLund

Perhaps if Apple reps are reading this, we can get that monitor upgraded by the time I lay my money down early next year.

Very doubtful.

For the target market of the 24" iMac, the current screen is an upgrade.

If you take 100 people and asked them to choose between a Matte screen and a Glossy screen, 90 of them will choose the Glossy. They like the "rich" colors and the deep blacks you get from the Glossy. It doesn't matter if the color is inaccurate as it just looks better to the average viewer. (Someone eluded to this earlier when they said DVDs look great on the iMac.)

It is like audio equipment. The average listener will almost always choose the setup in which the bass is over boosted. The sound engineer will pick the neutral setup.

While we "pros" want color accuracy in our equipment, we tend to push the saturation a small amount for our final prints to our customers. The Kodachrome effect.

Bottom line, the Glossy iMac is here to stay as it is what most people want.

Philip

[Jerry Skrocki]

Originally Posted by AndrewRodney

The other issue is the displays pretty much suck and, if LED, very difficult to calibrate and profile.

Andrew,

This is a little off topic but wanted to clarify an issue that was mentioned in your response.

I saw you mention this in another forum as well. Could you please describe how the LED backlit screen is more difficult to calibrate?
I am assuming that you are describing the MacBook Pro, since it's the only model Apple makes with the LED backlit display.

My experience with the LED backlit screen of the MacBook Pro is that it calibrates easily and more accurately than that of it's predecessor (cold cathode fluorescent backlit). A comparative evaluation by Rob Galbraith determined the same:

Rob Galbraith DPI: Evaluating the MacBook Pro 15 inch LED-backlit display

[Martin_Doudoroff]

Originally Posted by Jerry Skrocki

Andrew,

This is a little off topic but wanted to clarify an issue that was mentioned in your response.

I saw you mention this in another forum as well. Could you please describe how the LED backlit screen is more difficult to calibrate?

I'd very much like to understand this more, too.

[AndrewRodney]

Originally Posted by Jerry Skrocki

I saw you mention this in another forum as well. Could you please describe how the LED backlit screen is more difficult to calibrate?

In the case of all CCFL LCD's, the only physical adjustments we can make is back light intensity.

LED's use an illuminant that most Colorimeters are not built to measure accurately. A Spectrophotometer could do this but with Colorimeters, there are filter matrixes (that in theory can be updated) that make assumptions about the type of device being measured. That's why in many packages, you'll see the software ask you to pick if the device is a CRT or LCD (some even ask if you're calibrating a laptop).

A Colorimeter expecting a CCFL LCD that instead reads LED illuminant without the ability to select the correct matrix will produce really poor results.

[Jerry Skrocki]

Originally Posted by AndrewRodney

In the case of all CCFL LCD's, the only physical adjustments we can make is back light intensity.

LED's use an illuminant that most Colorimeters are not built to measure accurately. A Spectrophotometer could do this but with Colorimeters, there are filter matrixes (that in theory can be updated) that make assumptions about the type of device being measured. That's why in many packages, you'll see the software ask you to pick if the device is a CRT or LCD (some even ask if you're calibrating a laptop).

A Colorimeter expecting a CCFL LCD that instead reads LED illuminant without the ability to select the correct matrix will produce really poor results.

While I can see this being true of RGB LED backlighting arrays (using a series of individual red green and blue diodes) on systems like the Samsung XL line or the NEC 2180WG that you used for comparison in this article:

http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200602_neclcddisplay.pdf

The Apple MacBook Pro and MacBook Air use an all white LED array for backlighting. I don't see where measuring these white backlit LED screens would require any special filter matrix other than what is currently being used on CCF backlit displays.

Jerry

[AndrewRodney]

Originally Posted by Jerry Skrocki

The Apple MacBook Pro and MacBook Air use an all white LED array for backlighting. I don't see where measuring these white backlit LED screens would require any special filter matrix other than what is currently being used on CCF backlit displays.

Yes they have white LED's and no, white LED's and the Fluorescent lights that produce "white" light are not at all the same illuminant.

There's a totally different SPD seen in Fluorescent lights versus LED's and other light sources.

If you have a colorimeter, say an EyeOne Display and a Macbook with an LED screen, give it a try, then use a Spectrophotometer as I've done, you'll see a huge difference!