In before people telling you that the older MacBook Pros were calibrated "too cool" and your new one is correct. Whether or not that's true the best test would be to bring it in to an Apple store and set it next to another Retina MacBook Pro and take a picture. It will then be obvious that your display is yellow. [Merch on the Apple support forums.]
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.
Yellow tint on Haswell rMBP 15"
- Thread starter zOlid
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In before people telling you that the older MacBook Pros were calibrated "too cool" and your new one is correct. Whether or not that's true the best test would be to bring it in to an Apple store and set it next to another Retina MacBook Pro and take a picture. It will then be obvious that your display is yellow. [Merch on the Apple support forums.]
I went and compared my screen to the display model. My RMBP is on the left, display is on the right. Seems like a fairly noticeable difference to me - do you think I can do better on an exchange?
Well I'm stumped because I expected a more noticeable difference like mine below. I actually think the store unit on the right seems yellow. It's up to you at this point. Does the Apple logo on the top cover glow pink or pure white? I strongly suspect that a pink Apple logo is related to a yellow-tinted display.
You have to decide if you're happy with it. The yellow displays also look bad on their own; they look muddy and not clear. Does yours look clear when you're using it? If you're happy with it maybe you should keep it. Or maybe the store unit was also yellow. Yours looked yellow compared to your older Mac. I'm really not sure. See how the other Mac in the picture has a pink Apple logo? That unit is yellow tinted for sure. Maybe the store unit on the right also had a pink Apple logo and yellow tint. Maybe you need to compare it to another unit.
Interesting. Yes, my apple logo appears to have tints of pink when I look at it. My screen is not unclear; it seems perfectly clear, it just seems yellow to me when I look at it, compared to the screen I am used to working on. I looked at a few of the units at the store and they were all about the same as the photo I pasted above. I might try a different store (I'm in Manhattan so I have a few options) and compare; if it's not a noticeable difference, I might keep it. Does anyone know if Apple will let you open up the exchange unit in store and look at it? I'd hate to get an exchange, take it home and have it be worse than what I got rid of.
People need to make distinctions between yellow tint pervading the whole screen and a yellow tint affecting only a part of the screen.
If it's the whole screen I think you could calibrate it out using a Spyder4
If it's the whole screen I think you could calibrate it out using a Spyder4
No you can't. I have both a yellow-tinted display and a Spyder4Elite. You can't get your whites to look reasonably white. You can make them blue or purple or pink but far from white.
Well got a replacement for mine... It is a LG screen with yellow hue bottom half and pink tint top half.
So far 5/5 have had this defect... Might just have to accept that there are no good screens
So far 5/5 have had this defect... Might just have to accept that there are no good screens
Last edited:
This is interesting, from the pictures your display looks only slightly warm, so it should be possible to calibrate.
If you get different results with each calibration, something is wrong. Are you changing the target values between calibrations? What target values have you set in the Spyder software? Did you use the default values?
What are the white point, gamma and deviations (delta E) the Spyder4 software reports with the default profile? What are the values in the calibration report you get after the calibration is finished?
Have you tried using the Spyder software's Studio Match?
OK, well I'm telling you I can't calibrate it. I've gone through 3 yellow tinted displays after a first white display. I can't calibrate the display. When I say I can't calibrate the display I mean I can change the colours around by playing around with the settings in Spyder4 but nothing is as it should be: the whites are not white; the blacks are not blacks; it all looks cloudy and muddy and no where near as clear and high contrast as the first display I had that got replaced. Yes I can reduce the yellow by replacing the yellowy whites with purply whites or pinkish whites or bluish whites but I can't get white whites. I don't have the patience to go through ever single setting in the Spyder4 software. I've tried calibration several times at several different white points. I bought this computer so that I can do my work as an iOS developer. I don't have the patience to figure out why it can't show colours properly. I shouldn't even have to calibrate it at all. I shouldn't even have to buy a colour calibrator. These displays cannot show colours properly.
I purchased an X-rite i1Display Pro colorimeter after Christmas to calibrate my LG retina display in my current 15' Late 2013 MacBook Pro Retina. Here's the uniformity test results. While I didn't have a way to test the displays from the previous replacements I know the others were a lot worse. Production week Q for those that want to know.
OK, where are you looking for that? There are some values after you calibrate like percentage of RGB, and there's an analysis mode where you can test uniformity and colour accuracy and other parameters. Which are you asking about?
The i1 Display Pro is a fine choice, it has a reputation of being very stable and having very little production variances.
The display seems quite uniform for a laptop display. Do you see the colder left bottom corner with bare eyes? That's the only deviation that stands out. Otherwise the differences seem minor, and shouldn't affect even demanding usage.
If the display looks good now, it's good
Any would do. The analysis should produce something similar to what N3ILA posted above, but I am not familiar with the current version of Spyder software, so can't tell you exactly what to do. The software should have an easy to use wizard mode that will tell you what steps to take, and what is being measured.
What N3ILA posted shows the luminance and white point uniformity, but looking at delta E values also would give a bit more information.
Are you familiar with the meanings of the values? Edit: if you do any measurements, you might want to use the original profile, not one of the profiles you created.
Last edited:
You are basically correct. I've pointed out before that the means of calibration available on the majority of displays is somewhat archaic in its methodology, and it doesn't really grant you any kind of low level adjustment. If something is significantly off from day 1, it is not going to get any better.
It depends how bad. Note the comment above. If you have a good unit, calibration will help somewhat when it comes to drift as displays are inherently unstable devices.
Be careful how much you trust those. There are different validation targets, and you have to consider the actual accuracy of the measurement device on average against what it is measuring. Also i1 pro is a spectrophotometer. The i1 display pro is a fairly modern colorimeter design. Also his results don't seem that bad.
I think what is important to note is the "significantly off" -part. Many of the pictures I've seen here might not show significant yellowing, but some do. Then again, the pictures are not really reliable either, which is why it would bee good to get at least some measurements.
IMHO it would be beneficial to know what the variety of white points with factory profiles actually is, and what kind of results people get with calibration. Having at least some measurements with fairly contemporary colorimeters might tell a bit more than pictures or descriptions.
You are correct, I was referring to the i1 Display Pro, not the I1 Pro. Corrected that one.
Last edited:
They do but there is still some sample variation. I thought of setting up something to correlate data in terms of measured specs using X software and colorimeter against a specified validation target. Things like varied exposures and auto-white balance interfere with the use of photos quite a bit, as does what people sometimes consider to be a neutral reference. As I mentioned these things can still shift over time, so I think it is a good idea to prioritize uniformity to a degree. Ideally the native white point would measure somewhere near D65. It is possible to look up how the system describes the display in terms of white point and gamma per channel via the default profile. It's just not that useful in trying to determine accuracy.
I only mentioned it because at one point the only way to get a good calibration/profile out of an LED backlit screen was via the use of a spectrophotometer (such as the i1 pro), as the older colorimeters weren't designed for that range. Most of the prior colorimeter generation was designed during the late CRT era with minor tweaks here and there.
No I'm not familiar with the meanings of the values. Why would I be the familiar with the values? This is the first time I've ever had to buy colour calibrator. I've been using 200-dollar Acer LCD displays without feeling a need to calibrate them because they just looked fine out of the box. But now because Apple sells defective products I need to learn how to use a colour calibrator in a futile attempt to fix Apple's terrible products when all I want to do is do my programming work and not become an expert in colour theory. I'm either going to buy an external Dell monitor to connect to this Mac or buy a Dell XPS 15 to replace this Mac because there's no other solution. I can't look at this screen anymore.
I agree that uniformity would be better to focus on, especially it being something that can't be fixed. Heavy, but still uniform tint is a different and separate issue. What I've noticed is, that uniformity issues and tint are quite often getting mixed in threads concerning the issue. It would be good to make a clear distinction between the two, and this is where the measurements along with some good photographs could come in handy.
I posted an example of some of the issues in photographing the displays earlier, all input and comments are welcome.
Well, the good thing, or bad depending how you look at it, about older colorimeters is, that the manufacturers tend to not support legacy products on current OS's, so that automatically weeds out some really aged units
Unless one uses Agryll, but that's a different story.
You've been agonizing over this for such a long time, and a properly done calibration could possibly fix your issue. Knowing a bit about the terms involved might be a good idea, if color reproduction is important to you.
Moving to XPS 15 might be a good choice, but be warned: there are reports of tint and uniformity issues with Dell's IGZO panels in notebookreview.com forums.
IPS displays, be they a-Si or IGZO, tend to exhibit these issues in varying degree. The same goes for external IPS screens. I've experienced this first hand by going through many HP LP2475w exchanges, and having followed some similar cases with Dell displays from close by.
Last edited:
I kind of wish Apple would license whatever method Eizo uses. It eats a small amount of contrast ratio, but that is a trivial concern compared to strong uniformity and the right gamma.
Interesting, I didn't know there was anything more complicated involved, I thought the difference was mostly just the accuracy of the LUT and where it resides. I'll have to look into this a bit further, happen to have any related links?
NEC has something similar. They refer to it as colorcomp. I don't like their implementation anywhere near as much, even if I think they're an excellent value at US pricing. I've owned one of the 24" ones myself, and I've used several others. The difference is extremely noticeable, and Apple is always talking up their screens. I wonder if they have tried to license anything like that, as the variation and uniformity issues of lcd panels are part of the nature of the technology. Hand wringing about quality control doesn't really change the core issue, whereas this addresses it and patches it with extremely tolerable side effects (slightly lower effective contrast ratio). They also warm up pretty fast, not as fast as they claim, but still fast. They're really expensive, yet they come up with some of the most interesting technology for their displays. It would make for a really phenomenal notebook or tablet display.
http://www.eizo.com/global/products/coloredge/cg276/
Does Apple flag you for too many exchanges?
I think this one is my fifth or sixth...but it also has a pink tint at the top and a very noticeable yellow tint towards the bottom.
I'm tempted to exchange this one but also tempted to just keep it and deal with it, as there are no acceptable displays in the rMBPs right now.
I think this one is my fifth or sixth...but it also has a pink tint at the top and a very noticeable yellow tint towards the bottom.
I'm tempted to exchange this one but also tempted to just keep it and deal with it, as there are no acceptable displays in the rMBPs right now.
Yes but depending on the circumstance they just get a manager to put in a code on their little thingy. I don't think they will say anything about it unless you just buying and returning a lot of stuff. I had to go through several iPads to get a good one and a manager had to put in their code every time.