17" MacBookPro C2D Colour Banding Problem / LCD Quality Observations / OSX Users

[tarjan]

Let me repeat myself from another thread.

There are *NO WAY* as in *NONE* or *ZIP* *NADA* *NOT POSSIBLE* to get better screens in similar or better resolution into the macbook pros. I know you guys want to believe otherwise, but it is the truth. Today's *BEST* screens are 6bit+2 in the 15.4in and 17" 1440 up to 1920 resolutions.

If you think you can find a better screen, go search and post up a link to the specs. Remember to backtrack availaiblity to when the MBP began, so if you find a unit that will be released this spring, IT CANNOT BE IN YOUR LAPTOP TODAY. So quit saying apple put substandard stuff in your system, they didn't. What you are seeing is the standard variation in production quality and whatever you think, apple is still right up there with everyone else.

I have 4 laptops and the mbp is BY FAR the best. No, it isnt 8 bit, but it looks good and is fairly well color balanced. If for some reason your screen has major issues, call up apple and let them know. If it is bad, they will fix it. If it isn't, you may be getting confused in what a laptop is and its basic limitations. You CANNOT compare lcd in a laptop to an lcd with a big power supply plugged into the wall.

If you are doing real color work, get the heck off your laptop's screen. Plunk down the money, get proper IN ROOM lighting with the right color temp and a good CRI (or turn out the lights) and get a CRT. If you dont care about proper colors, continue using an LCD, but understand, unless you have 48 THOUSAND dollar lcd monitor with brighthouse tech or the new one of a kind led powered sony lcd with a 90+% color repro that doesnt exist in the public yet, you are ON THE WRONG TYPE OF MONITOR.

Wait for DLP LED gen two and I bet we will finally have a really nice full color palate display in decent sizes.

Maybe the rumors are right, and apple will replace the CCFL backlights with LEDs in the next MBP. That would be awesome, but I doubt it.

 

[iW00t]

So basically, what I'm getting from this thread is:

Being a Photographer, and having a good eye... Don't buy a Macbook Pro?

I've been saving/waiting for months to get one now, and then I came upon this thread :\ Now I'm a bit disappointed lol

Wait a few more months for the typical Apple Top Secret "if I tell you I will have to kill you" OLED Macbook Pros.

 

[PDE]

So basically, what I'm getting from this thread is:

Being a Photographer, and having a good eye... Don't buy a Macbook Pro?

I've been saving/waiting for months to get one now, and then I came upon this thread :\ Now I'm a bit disappointed lol

Unfortunately the answer to that has to be no, don't buy a macbook pro right now if you need a good display. The MBPs just don't have them.

 

[iW00t]

Unfortunately the answer to that has to be no, don't buy a macbook pro right now if you need a good display. The MBPs just don't have them.

If you are not buying, be sure to drop Steve a letter saying why too.

Lest he might just figure that everyone is happy with this standard of crap and you can get ready to unswitch...

 

[PDE]

Let me repeat myself from another thread.

There are *NO WAY* as in *NONE* or *ZIP* *NADA* *NOT POSSIBLE* to get better screens in similar or better resolution into the macbook pros. I know you guys want to believe otherwise, but it is the truth. Today's *BEST* screens are 6bit+2 in the 15.4in and 17" 1440 up to 1920 resolutions.

If you think you can find a better screen, go search and post up a link to the specs. Remember to backtrack availaiblity to when the MBP began, so if you find a unit that will be released this spring, IT CANNOT BE IN YOUR LAPTOP TODAY. So quit saying apple put substandard stuff in your system, they didn't. What you are seeing is the standard variation in production quality and whatever you think, apple is still right up there with everyone else.

I have 4 laptops and the mbp is BY FAR the best. No, it isnt 8 bit, but it looks good and is fairly well color balanced. If for some reason your screen has major issues, call up apple and let them know. If it is bad, they will fix it. If it isn't, you may be getting confused in what a laptop is and its basic limitations. You CANNOT compare lcd in a laptop to an lcd with a big power supply plugged into the wall.

If you are doing real color work, get the heck off your laptop's screen. Plunk down the money, get proper IN ROOM lighting with the right color temp and a good CRI (or turn out the lights) and get a CRT. If you dont care about proper colors, continue using an LCD, but understand, unless you have 48 THOUSAND dollar lcd monitor with brighthouse tech or the new one of a kind led powered sony lcd with a 90+% color repro that doesnt exist in the public yet, you are ON THE WRONG TYPE OF MONITOR.

Wait for DLP LED gen two and I bet we will finally have a really nice full color palate display in decent sizes.

Maybe the rumors are right, and apple will replace the CCFL backlights with LEDs in the next MBP. That would be awesome, but I doubt it.

I'm sorry, but I've seen significantly better LCDs in Sony and Thinkpad laptops: even illumination, GREAT viewing angles, pure whites, no grain. Even if they too were 6 bit, the were a hell of a lot nicer than the MBPs. I didn't check them for color, but they're not going to be worse than the MBPs.

 

[Leeds]

If you are doing real color work, get the heck off your laptop's screen. Plunk down the money, get proper IN ROOM lighting with the right color temp and a good CRI (or turn out the lights) and get a CRT. If you dont care about proper colors, continue using an LCD, but understand, unless you have 48 THOUSAND dollar lcd monitor with brighthouse tech or the new one of a kind led powered sony lcd with a 90+% color repro that doesnt exist in the public yet, you are ON THE WRONG TYPE OF MONITOR.

Now as much as I'd love a MacPro with a couple of Lacie monitors, I just don't have that kind of cash. I DO, however, have the cash for a Macbook Pro, and the idea behind me getting a Laptop for editing, is that I can do when I'm over at my g/f's place. I'm not sure that she'd appreciate me bringing over a giant desktop just so that I can edit for half an hour whilst she's in the shower. I do have another monitor that I'd be able to hook up to, but I'm just concerned about getting a good display that's portable.

So how bad are they actually? Is it going to look like a dog's breakfast if I have to use it to show clients a slideshow or something?

 

[PDE]

So how bad are they actually? Is it going to look like a dog's breakfast if I have to use it to show clients a slideshow or something?

No, they won't be that bad if you're showing a slide show to some clients. The main problem there will be that the viewing angles are pretty poor so unless they're sitting straight in front of the display there will be some color/brightness distortion. For color critical work, you'll want a much better display.

 

[oldwatery]

Let me repeat myself from another thread.

There are *NO WAY* as in *NONE* or *ZIP* *NADA* *NOT POSSIBLE* to get better screens in similar or better resolution into the macbook pros. I know you guys want to believe otherwise, but it is the truth. Today's *BEST* screens are 6bit+2 in the 15.4in and 17" 1440 up to 1920 resolutions.

If you think you can find a better screen, go search and post up a link to the specs. Remember to backtrack availaiblity to when the MBP began, so if you find a unit that will be released this spring, IT CANNOT BE IN YOUR LAPTOP TODAY. So quit saying apple put substandard stuff in your system, they didn't. What you are seeing is the standard variation in production quality and whatever you think, apple is still right up there with everyone else.

I have 4 laptops and the mbp is BY FAR the best. No, it isnt 8 bit, but it looks good and is fairly well color balanced. If for some reason your screen has major issues, call up apple and let them know. If it is bad, they will fix it. If it isn't, you may be getting confused in what a laptop is and its basic limitations. You CANNOT compare lcd in a laptop to an lcd with a big power supply plugged into the wall.

If you are doing real color work, get the heck off your laptop's screen. Plunk down the money, get proper IN ROOM lighting with the right color temp and a good CRI (or turn out the lights) and get a CRT. If you dont care about proper colors, continue using an LCD, but understand, unless you have 48 THOUSAND dollar lcd monitor with brighthouse tech or the new one of a kind led powered sony lcd with a 90+% color repro that doesnt exist in the public yet, you are ON THE WRONG TYPE OF MONITOR.

Wait for DLP LED gen two and I bet we will finally have a really nice full color palate display in decent sizes.

Maybe the rumors are right, and apple will replace the CCFL backlights with LEDs in the next MBP. That would be awesome, but I doubt it.

Speak for yourself mate.
I've been a graphics pro for 20 years and have used Apple computers of every kind.
I have owned 5 laptops by them and this is the only time I have had cause to complain.
Don't be telling me I have to use a desktop to get good color and even lighting. And don't tell me to quit saying Apple has used bad parts....it's my opinion and that is what these forums are for.
And as for production variations....on a $3000 machine there should be none.
There are many people around the world experiencing these problems.
I am glad that you are not one of us or that you are content with the quality.
Because some of us find this objectionable does not mean we are stupid or don't know what we're doing!
And by the way can you quit the BOLD TYPE stuff it's rude and dictatorial.

 

[Leeds]

So it IS possible to get a good one then? Sounds like a couple of guys have seen no banding and such?

 

[iW00t]

I'm sorry, but I've seen significantly better LCDs in Sony and Thinkpad laptops: even illumination, GREAT viewing angles, pure whites, no grain. Even if they too were 6 bit, the were a hell of a lot nicer than the MBPs. I didn't check them for color, but they're not going to be worse than the MBPs.

That is true.

But Macbook Pros are cheaper computers than Sonys and Thinkpads. Different league altogether

 

[oldwatery]

tarjan
I must apologize for my rude and hostile response to your post.
I have had 3 of these MPB's now and I am no closer to a resolution than when I started.
The last thing I needed to hear was that I am in some way responsible because I chose the wrong computer for the job.
I agree that for the ultimate color fidelity a laptop is not the right choice but that is not the point with these complaints.
I have turned out thousands of designs with my Apple laptops and been delighted every time with the experience and results.
This machine simply is not up to the task.
Uneven lighting, grain and banding are issues I have never encountered with Apple before...at least not to this glaring extent.
That's my point and I believe the point of other complainers
Once again ..... sorry mate.

 

[geehk]

I've read a few post suggesting that you have to use top end repro equipment for colour work. Well there is some truth to that and I do use this stuff professionally. The laptop is a way of continuing to work while travelling and to use as a portfolio device, sometimes to present to clients.

Other laptops now have superior displays, so it is possible to have a laptop with a grain free, non-banding display with good white balance (they used to make those - they were called Powerbooks!) Since the screen got brighter and they are making more units things seem to have gone down the pan quality-wise.

There might be a few good MBP displays out there by hunting but it's pot luck what you get in your box. Surely Apple should be more consistent with their quality by matching the spec of all their displays and ramping up production respecting their quality comittment. I see no excuse for retrograde LCDs when other manufacturers demonstrate better results. With Apple you used to pay a little extra for quality - I'd like Apple to buy some LED X-Bright displays from Sony and charge a bit more for this MBP option before they get too immersed in the iPhone $$$

I'm happy for those that are satisfied with their purchase - personally I'm still not buying until the quality improves and I get 'support for millions of colours' as advertised or an explanation of what this actually means. An answer to the banding issue would be a start!

 

[oldwatery]

I've read a few post suggesting that you have to use top end repro equipment for colour work. Well there is some truth to that and I do use this stuff professionally. The laptop is a way of continuing to work while travelling and to use as a portfolio device, sometimes to present to clients.

Other laptops now have superior displays, so it is possible to have a laptop with a grain free, non-banding display with good white balance (they used to make those - they were called Powerbooks!) Since the screen got brighter and they are making more units things seem to have gone down the pan quality-wise.

There might be a few good MBP displays out there by hunting but it's pot luck what you get in your box. Surely Apple should be more consistent with their quality by matching the spec of all their displays and ramping up production respecting their quality comittment. I see no excuse for retrograde LCDs when other manufacturers demonstrate better results. With Apple you used to pay a little extra for quality - I'd like Apple to buy some LED X-Bright displays from Sony and charge a bit more for this MBP option before they get too immersed in the iPhone $$$

I'm happy for those that are satisfied with their purchase - personally I'm still not buying until the quality improves and I get 'support for millions of colours' as advertised or an explanation of what this actually means. An answer to the banding issue would be a start!

Well said!
I've got number 4 coming soon

 

[Outside75]

Just found this on Dpreview. Quite interesting:

I use the screens of both my MacBook Pro and 20" Cinema display together at the same time. I also use the Huey. I recently discovered a photo (while working on my laptop away from my Cinema display) that showed ugly banding in a blue shirt shot under artificial light.

Back on my Cinema display, none of this banding was visible. I have since tried using the Cinema display alone, calibrated it alone: no banding. Same for the MBP screen, calibrated it alone: banding is there.

I then created a gradient in Illustrator running from RGB (0,0,0) to (0,19,159), at about 80% there was a noticeable step on my MBP screen but not on my Cinema display. The best representation of it I could get was a screenshot that I then converted into grayscale (since the screenshot itself looked fine on the Cinema display), here it is:

After a couple of new calibration rounds, the gradient now looks fine on both screens and only a pure blue gradient, going to (0,0,~200), shows a step at about 95% on both screens (pure green or red gradients do not show a step, maybe blue is where the Huey sensor fails). The original photo still has bad banding on my MBP and no problems on my Cinema screen.

If I use the Apple-supplied screen profile, I see no banding in the photo on the MBP screen. If I look at the photo in a non-CM capable app (like Camino or Firefox) on the MBP there is no banding. Therefore I am pretty sure, the culprit is the screen calibration done by the Huey on my MBP.

Please check it here: CLICK ME

 

[manu chao]

After reading this thread, I would add that it is very well possible that the Apple-supplied profile is much more tuned to cover-up the 6-bit-ness than the profile the Huey is producing. Moreover, the fact that the problem only (or mainly) shows up in CM-ed applications (i.e. not Firefox) makes sense because non-CM apps simply hand over the RGB values to the graphic card, which can then spread them evenly over the 6 bit and apply dithering. The profile created by the Huey tries to convert the RGB values of the image (which might be defined in the sRGB space) into RGB values that when fed to the video card most closely match the colours defined in the sRGB space. Add to this that the Huey, which uses not the most advanced software and sensor technology as it is an absolute entry model, might not have been designed for 6 bit screens and only takes a handful of colour samples for each colour.

Remember, you will most likely only see the problem using a CM-ed app (Safari, Preview but not Firefox) and having calibrated your screen (and maybe more expensive calibration devices do not show the problem as succinctly as the Huey). Using the Apple-supplied screen profile will not show the problem for me.

To give you an idea how annoying this issue can be in real life, I can tell that I spent numerous hours to 'fix' that photo trying out several raw converters and discussing the issue online (with people who could not see the problem since they had better screens) until I realized that it was only my screen.

P.S.: Just checked in Safari, for one reason or another, problem is not visible there consistently, but it is in Preview, Photoshop, Aperture ...

 

[CmdrLaForge]

OK. If that's the case maybe others can test it on their new 15" or 17" C2D machines on various software - I don't have one now. I made some 17" size (1680x1050) test charts in Photoshop - they are JPEG's at 100% Quality to save bandwidth should be OK - look V smooth on this Gateway LCD.

Full Size Version Here

Full Size Version Here

Hi guys,

very interesting thread. Maybe a stupid question - if I look at those pictures on my LCD - how to judge now the quality of my LCD ?

 

[iW00t]

Hi guys,

very interesting thread. Maybe a stupid question - if I look at those pictures on my LCD - how to judge now the quality of my LCD ?

Chances are yours is also affected.

If you don't know how to look for it why bother to learn how to see it? It is like inducing additional misery into your life for no reason. Not like Apple acknowledges this problem even...

 

[PDE]

Chances are yours is also affected.

If you don't know how to look for it why bother to learn how to see it? It is like inducing additional misery into your life for no reason. Not like Apple acknowledges this problem even...

Yeah, chances are you're affected - sorry. PLEASE, don't look for it though! If you haven't noticed any problems, just be happy and enjoy your computer! Follow iwoot's advice!

 

[willie5]

Sorry for posting elsewhere on this subject earlier. I just found this thread. Reading though these posts I can tell you the following about my experiences in March - May 2007.

I'm a graphic designer with over 25 years experience in computer graphics. I have a Macbook Pro 17" 2.33 GHz bought in March 2007.

My 17" has the same gradient problems, horrible banding and limited color gamut, though no graininess mentioned in this thread.

The store I bought it from hasn't found a single 17" 2.33 GHz that doesn't have this problem!!! They do have one older model 17" 2.0 GHz that has a perfect screen, no banding, beautiful gradients which is really weird considering the earlier posts made here. The only new Pro 15" model I checked seemed to be excellent with no problems whatsoever. The store having not noticed this before asked about it from the local Apple representative, who claimed they have had no inquiries about this problem before. A few weeks later they received the next revision with newer LCD's, with no change.

Checking the manufacturing date it seems my machine was made sometime in January 2007. Still the screen's manufacturer info is the same as what has been stated here as problematic, manufacturer 00000610, model 00009C62.

In contrast, my good old bronze keyboard G3 (though not very good in color reliability) showes absolutely no problems with gradients.

Now if some idiot thinks this problem has no consequence and we should just accept it, try this:

Open the Photoshop color selector and in the default black to red color scale try to pick a color in the mid to upper range. How can I select color when all the color shades look the same, never mind reliable!

Apologies to anyone who feels offended by my rant and sorry for the bad language, but this is plain bull**** from Apple and for a $3000 top of the line model at that! I'm really bloody mad having learned to expect more from Apple during the 20 years I've been a dedicated Apple customer, and cannot settle for less than a decent LCD screen for their supposedly best laptop. Anybody claiming anything else is a fool and doesn't qualify to comment on this subject. Even if 6 bit is the best thing available for laptops, someone please explain to me why my good old G3 screen doesn't have a problem? It wasn't even Apple's top of the line model back then. Suddenly all 17" models have quality problems? Come on!

So I'm not going to settle for anything other than waiting for Apple's new LED backlight models and hope for the best. I'm not taking any chances with the current models. i hope they'll revise the 17" first.

If I knew how to contact Steve Jobs I would!

 

[piwi]

Sorry for posting elsewhere on this subject earlier. I just found this thread. Reading though these posts I can tell you the following about my experiences in March - May 2007.

I'm a graphic designer with over 25 years experience in computer graphics. I have a Macbook Pro 17" 2.33 GHz bought in March 2007.

My 17" has the same gradient problems, horrible banding and limited color gamut, though no graininess mentioned in this thread.

The store I bought it from hasn't found a single 17" 2.33 GHz that doesn't have this problem!!! They do have one older model 17" 2.0 GHz that has a perfect screen, no banding, beautiful gradients which is really weird considering the earlier posts made here. The only new Pro 15" model I checked seemed to be excellent with no problems whatsoever. The store having not noticed this before asked about it from the local Apple representative, who claimed they have had no inquiries about this problem before. A few weeks later they received the next revision with newer LCD's, with no change.

Checking the manufacturing date it seems my machine was made sometime in January 2007. Still the screen's manufacturer info is the same as what has been stated here as problematic, manufacturer 00000610, model 00009C62.

In contrast, my good old bronze keyboard G3 (though not very good in color reliability) showes absolutely no problems with gradients.

Now if some idiot thinks this problem has no consequence and we should just accept it, try this:

Open the Photoshop color selector and in the default black to red color scale try to pick a color in the mid to upper range. How can I select color when all the color shades look the same, never mind reliable!

Apologies to anyone who feels offended by my rant and sorry for the bad language, but this is plain bull**** from Apple and for a $3000 top of the line model at that! I'm really bloody mad having learned to expect more from Apple during the 20 years I've been a dedicated Apple customer, and cannot settle for less than a decent LCD screen for their supposedly best laptop. Anybody claiming anything else is a fool and doesn't qualify to comment on this subject. Even if 6 bit is the best thing available for laptops, someone please explain to me why my good old G3 screen doesn't have a problem? It wasn't even Apple's top of the line model back then. Suddenly all 17" models have quality problems? Come on!

So I'm not going to settle for anything other than waiting for Apple's new LED backlight models and hope for the best. I'm not taking any chances with the current models. i hope they'll revise the 17" first.

If I knew how to contact Steve Jobs I would!

Join the club!

I sent a letter to Steve Jobs about this very issue... It appears that MBP screens are acutally 6 bits capable of displaying only 262,000 colors and not millions as advertised

See www.colorblindmac.com for more info... We hope we will get decent screens on our MBP!!!

Mind you, I think the LED screens will be exactly the same because it seems that there is no LCD screen on the market to display the resolution Apple offers in 15 or 17". My guess would be that the gradients will be as bad on the new screens as they are now

 

[PDE]

I'm certainly no expert on LCDs but I've begun to think that the reason we see many of the problems we see is that the current crop of Apple displays are so bright. I looked at my Pismo G3 and the screen looks perfectly uniform. If I look very closely, however, I notice that there is a very very faint strip at the bottom - it's almost not visible but it's there. But if the display were 4X brighter like the macbook pros, I'm sure it would very visible and who knows if the rest of the display would be unevenly illuminated too. Grain is something very new to the 15" displays - it didn't used to exist on the older ones, but then they were half as bright. Most PC laptops don't show grain, but when tested they are also not as bright (check out notebookcheck.com for more measurements of actual display brightness and illumination distribution). Perhaps the 'grain' has to do with the brightness going through the anti-reflective coating somehow? Or a combination of the resolution, brightness and coating?

In any case, I'm wondering the LED displays will also show 'grain'....

 

[willie5]

I would switch screens with my brothers 12" G4 Powerbook any day. I don't see such a great difference in the screen brightness to warrant an excuse for banding and graininess. And I'm a graphic designer so I can guarantee you that I would notice a meaningful difference. And certainly the gamut problem is not due to screen brightness.

In fact I don't even care what the reason is. For $3000 I expect that there is no noticable problem and that's that! I would be ready to pay $200 more (if I had to) just for a proper quality LCD screen for all I care (not that I'm a big spender, I am price conscious), but that's how important it is in my job. But lugging an external screen around is NOT an option.

If the screens they use in the laptops don't live up to the marketing hype (32bit millions of colors) they should say so and not lie about it! Considering that this thread has been around for almost a year makes me even more frustrated!

I'd really like to find Steve's email address so I can send him a flaming rant about the subject!

 

[PDE]

I would switch screens with my brothers 12" G4 Powerbook any day. I don't see such a great difference in the screen brightness to warrant an excuse for banding and graininess. And I'm a graphic designer so I can guarantee you that I would notice a meaningful difference. And certainly the gamut problem is not due to screen brightness.

In fact I don't even care what the reason is. For $3000 I expect that there is no noticable problem and that's that! I would be ready to pay $200 more (if I had to) just for a proper quality LCD screen for all I care (not that I'm a big spender, I am price conscious), but that's how important it is in my job. But lugging an external screen around is NOT an option.

If the screens they use in the laptops don't live up to the marketing hype (32bit millions of colors) they should say so and not lie about it! Considering that this thread has been around for almost a year makes me even more frustrated!

I'd really like to find Steve's email address so I can send him a flaming rant about the subject!

I agree - I'd prefer a dimmer display that doesn't show the problems of the MBP. The truth is though that none of the LCDs in laptops thus far have ever been more than 6 bit - even gthe old ones that seemed better. I would love to have my old powerbook G4 1.67 low resolution display on a macbook pro.

Anyway, Steve Jobs' address is sjobs@apple.com. That's worked for me.

 

[willie5]

I'm wondering how Apple is going to sell us the real 32bit screens when they hopefully some day (year) materialize... 64bit color?

 

[thisonechance]

I still don't understand how only a few have the issue with gradients. My girlfriends and former roommates c2d's look perfect, I check both myself. It makes me think it's more a software issue or batch of panels.