Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MP 7,1 Pro Display XDR dirty screen effect
- Thread starter Simoner
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In the OP's case, it seems clear now that his problem is using a laptop wasn't capable of driving the display when he had it forced to the full resolution, as opposed to Apple's normal doubling scaling. That's not surprising, and it's not necessarily a defect of the display.
I have two nano versions and I have zero issues with them.
Today I tested it with 16in MBP and confirmed the banding was the GPU issue.
I read that lack of uniformity may be caused by the local dimming zones and that it’s especially visible on dark/grey backgrounds.
I don't know if I'm being nitpicky and should I get a replacement.
I read that lack of uniformity may be caused by the local dimming zones and that it’s especially visible on dark/grey backgrounds.
Is there a chance for you to take a photo of your display with 25%, 50% grey, like this?
I don't know if I'm being nitpicky and should I get a replacement.
Display uniformity can be measured objectively; you display a grid of grey patches and place a spectrophotometer on each zone to measure % variance from center.
DisplayCal is free and features a uniformity test (sample), so if you have an appropriate device you can just run the test yourself and have a stronger case for/against trying for a return.
DisplayCal is free and features a uniformity test (sample), so if you have an appropriate device you can just run the test yourself and have a stronger case for/against trying for a return.
Can you take a picture of your XDR displaying a solid 33 or 50% grey with an iPhone? Taking a picture greatly accentuated the uniformity issues on my display. Maybe like this we can see if there really is a difference between our XDRs and yours.
[automerge]1582583483[/automerge]
Mine looks similar and I suspect (?) this is as good as it gets with the XDR. Will see (and do measurments) when the replacement arrives.
I just saw this after I got home. Taking a picture is really not an ideal way to measure uniformity, as you introduce all kinds of issues from the camera, and how the image is processed. Typical phone camera jpegs tend to jack up mid-tone contrast for example, which will make any display variation look *way* worse than it would to the naked eye. That's no doubt what you were seeing. As @blackadde pointed out, it should be done with a proper software tool and hardware device.
If I do the Eizo test I can see some very mild pattern in the 50% gray image but I have to look for it to see it. I don't notice anything at all like that in my regular usage of the screen. I think it's easy to fall into a trap of over-analyzing any expensive purchase like this vs. just using it. When I first got my first XDR I did a little side-by-side analysis with my LG 27" 5K UltraFine, and I was pretty surprised to see how truly bad the blacks looked on the old LG compared to the XDR. Same with the grays--while there might be some very minor patterning visible at 50% gray, the LG showed some blotchiness and color shifts in the corners that was way worse. Before that I had never noticed, and that's kind of my point--overanalyzing will not necessarily reflect your real-world experience/use case.
I think it's pretty well-established that you aren't going to replace the extreme color fidelity and black/gray uniformity of one of the very expensive reference displays with the ProDisplay (and yes, Apple invited that on themselves, no need to re-beat that dead horse), but in my use so far, comparing it to my previous display, it's much better. I'm happy with that; others may not be, and that's a value decision each person has to make for themselves.
I haven't seen the nano and the regular XDR side-by-side but it seems like those that have all note that the nano seems to accentuate some of the patterned or "dirty display" look on the grays. I wonder if there's a patterning to the etch that causes this or if it's just a function of something like frequency interplay between the display and the etch pattern. Given that I hate glare, it might be best if I've not seen the two side by side or I might be that I would be as torn as @chfilm has been on which one to order.
Display uniformity is one of the first things to go when you're trying to build a display to a price - you have to toss panels left right & center as the QC restraints tighten in on you. The bigger the screen the worse it is. Extremely uniform panels are commensurately extremely expensive. Most consumers don't really care, anyways. It only really affects people who are dealing with color critical applications.
I know that Eizo/NEC/some other manufacturers implement quadrant-based panel uniformity fixes by adjusting the maximum contrast of the panels down a little to sacrifice brightness for uniformity. You can typically adjust this in the device's OSD. I'm not sure if Apple ended up going down that route, although maybe when they open up some calibration options you'll see a toggle exposed to deal with it.
I know that Eizo/NEC/some other manufacturers implement quadrant-based panel uniformity fixes by adjusting the maximum contrast of the panels down a little to sacrifice brightness for uniformity. You can typically adjust this in the device's OSD. I'm not sure if Apple ended up going down that route, although maybe when they open up some calibration options you'll see a toggle exposed to deal with it.
I just saw this after I got home. Taking a picture is really not an ideal way to measure uniformity, as you introduce all kinds of issues from the camera, and how the image is processed. Typical phone camera jpegs tend to jack up mid-tone contrast for example, which will make any display variation look *way* worse than it would to the naked eye. That's no doubt what you were seeing. As @blackadde pointed out, it should be done with a proper software tool and hardware device.
If I do the Eizo test I can see some very mild pattern in the 50% gray image but I have to look for it to see it. I don't notice anything at all like that in my regular usage of the screen. I think it's easy to fall into a trap of over-analyzing any expensive purchase like this vs. just using it. When I first got my first XDR I did a little side-by-side analysis with my LG 27" 5K UltraFine, and I was pretty surprised to see how truly bad the blacks looked on the old LG compared to the XDR. Same with the grays--while there might be some very minor patterning visible at 50% gray, the LG showed some blotchiness and color shifts in the corners that was way worse. Before that I had never noticed, and that's kind of my point--overanalyzing will not necessarily reflect your real-world experience/use case.
I think it's pretty well-established that you aren't going to replace the extreme color fidelity and black/gray uniformity of one of the very expensive reference displays with the ProDisplay (and yes, Apple invited that on themselves, no need to re-beat that dead horse), but in my use so far, comparing it to my previous display, it's much better. I'm happy with that; others may not be, and that's a value decision each person has to make for themselves.
I haven't seen the nano and the regular XDR side-by-side but it seems like those that have all note that the nano seems to accentuate some of the patterned or "dirty display" look on the grays. I wonder if there's a patterning to the etch that causes this or if it's just a function of something like frequency interplay between the display and the etch pattern. Given that I hate glare, it might be best if I've not seen the two side by side or I might be that I would be as torn as @chfilm has been on which one to order.
Actually my XDR shows two different problems. The first is a very global non-uniformity in the upper right corner. I measured this with my x-Rite 1Display colorimeter (see: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/xdr-displays-uniformity.2220317/post-28200238)
Because of this defect, Apple is in process of replacing my XDR and sending the XDR with the problem to their headquarter in Cork Ireland to review the unit for quality control. I have yet to receive information about the replacement process as described a few posts before. Replacement is unfortunately not possible in advance despite having purchased Apple Care+
The second issue is the in this thread described very fine non-uniformity (pattern like likely because of FALD) which can't be measured with my colorimeter because the colorimeters' lens isn't focused enough.
This issue is NOT only of cosmetic nature and is not a case of over-analizing an expensive purchase. This effect is very noticeable and irritating when doing retouching in Photoshop. The effect is especcialy noticeable when panning zoomed in images. As this is one of my main purposes for this display this is rather unfortunate as my previous NEC PA (with hardware calibration) display was able to correct panel uniformities (while lowering max brightness and therefore contrast ratio as a side effect of uniformity control). I can imagine that this effect is only an issue in certain applications with static images. Video workflows are likely not affected by this.
I'm fully aware that an iPhone image greatly accentuates the effect, this was only to illustrate what we're talking about.
@simonnelli Sorry, I didn't meant to offend in any way or imply that you were overanalyzing, I was aware of your other issue. It does appear that your display has a problem and that may actually make the normally more subtle FALD pattern look worse.
I find it both surprising and annoying that Apple had more than 6 months before the XDR shipped to get things like calibration in place. They still are listing it as available in a future release of MacOS, and I can't see any indications of it in my beta version of 10.15.4.
Question: What profile are you using when you see this in Photoshop? Can you post a photo of what it looks like when you're editing? I can see a slight pattern pretty much only when I'm on the 50% gray EIZO screen; in regular use I just never see it. I do a ton of photo editing in Lightroom and there's such a huge range of color and dynamic range that any screen variation is just completely lost.
I find it both surprising and annoying that Apple had more than 6 months before the XDR shipped to get things like calibration in place. They still are listing it as available in a future release of MacOS, and I can't see any indications of it in my beta version of 10.15.4.
Question: What profile are you using when you see this in Photoshop? Can you post a photo of what it looks like when you're editing? I can see a slight pattern pretty much only when I'm on the 50% gray EIZO screen; in regular use I just never see it. I do a ton of photo editing in Lightroom and there's such a huge range of color and dynamic range that any screen variation is just completely lost.
I have to believe the issue is with his XDR. None of my editors report such issues with our monitor.
No worries, I wasn't offended. I'll try to record a video of the effect tomorrow as it is best noticeable when panning around an image with smooth gradients like studio stills, portraits on smooth backdrops or skies. It is less or even not at all noticeable on very 'busy' images.
I retouch the images on XDRs Photography profile which sets the display to D65, gamma 2.2, P3, 160 nits. AFAIK the effect is noticeable in all profiles but I can check tomorrow.
[automerge]1582667376[/automerge]
Let's hope so, will surely report when I get the replacement if there is any improvement. Apple informed me that it could take even longer because of the Corona outbreak.
I’m also seeing this. I can clearly see this in this video ( 1:00 sky test) when panning.
I even notice it when scrolling thought websites with white background. I think it's worse for video. I noticed it first when I was editing video with lots of landscapes. I watched mentioned video on a couple of displays including Eizo, iMac Pro and Macbook and it was the most noticable on the XDR.
Any update on your replacement? I'm wondering if I should just exchange mine (I ordered through Amazon so it would be fairly easy).
Last edited:
According to Apple I should receive the replacement next Monday. Will report if the replacement shows any improvement over the one I have here.
So, I just received the XDR Nano replacement.
Inspecting it visually:
The results: Worse than I expected (by looking at it), but the differences patterns shouldn't affect my retouching as I always measure with the eyedropper in Photoshop when doing exact corrections.
I really expected more from such a expensive display but maybe this is as good as it gets with todays tech. Unfortunately I don't have a comparable NEC or EIZO at hand to compare measurements. My NEC PA271 from 2012 wouldn't be a fair comparison I think.
(The attached file is the report from DisplayCal in HTML-Format. Can be opened in any browser)
Inspecting it visually:
- Dirty screen effect: Improved but there
- Vertical lines on right side: Improved
- FALD-Pattern on uniform grey: Visible but expected
- Vignetting because of Nano: Visible but expected
The results: Worse than I expected (by looking at it), but the differences patterns shouldn't affect my retouching as I always measure with the eyedropper in Photoshop when doing exact corrections.
I really expected more from such a expensive display but maybe this is as good as it gets with todays tech. Unfortunately I don't have a comparable NEC or EIZO at hand to compare measurements. My NEC PA271 from 2012 wouldn't be a fair comparison I think.
(The attached file is the report from DisplayCal in HTML-Format. Can be opened in any browser)
It's a version-1 consumer-tech-level device, in an expensive case.
This is why people complain about not having something between the Mac Mini and Mac Pro, without a built-in display. Apple displays just aren't that good.
Unfortunately you are right from a Pro standpoint. Comparing Apple Displays (especially their Laptop displays) to other consumer products, they are actually quite nice with decent factory calibration.
From the XDR I expeced EIZO-like quality. Apple promised outstanding performance and I (naively) believed their claims.
What I really like about the display is its unbelievable nano finish, easy switching of canned profiles, good calibration out of the box and the 6k-resolution. You won't easily find this resolution on other displays compatible to Macs.
The case is also very nice, but I'd prefer better uniformity over it
Yup unfortunately both of my XDR's have that "dirty screen" effect on white backgrounds. I've just accepted it and learned to deal with it, but I've come to expect Apple screens give you great resolution and pretty good color calibration on these XDR's (both of mine match perfectly out of the box which is nice) but the banding or "dirty screen effect" is just like I've come to expect of any other Apple display.
It's way better than any other consumer grade display - but I would hardly consider this "pro level"; though honestly I don't have a more expensive monitor to test against.
It's way better than any other consumer grade display - but I would hardly consider this "pro level"; though honestly I don't have a more expensive monitor to test against.
Dirty screen effect is almost completely due to slight imperfections in the diffusing layer and the stacking of that layer, which evens out the light from the individual LED’s into an consistently lit layer of light. In addition to better manufacturing processes, pickier QC can improve this at an obvious increase in cost as you have to discard the panels that don’t meet the standard. One might argue that the price of the XDR should justify better panels, but there are a lot of ways in which the XDR was marketed that don’t necessarily line up with reality.
Exactly how mine looked. I was going to try exchanging mine, but after I bought a 2nd display and it looked almost identical to the 1st ... sadly, that's just what you get with the XDR. They really should've looked into making an OLED screen at this point in my opinion but perhaps this is as good as you get for $5 grand?? Don't know. Disappointing but again still the best screen I've owned to date honestly by a good margin.