MacBook Display is killing me. Are Cinema displays the solution?

<p>Good morning. <br>

I bought a MacBook Pro a little over a year ago and have lived with this issue since. The display is far too "sensitive" when it comes to contrast and dynamic range. The whites completely blow out when they shouldn't and the blacks are very black when they should be shades of grey. There are no subtlties on this screen.<br>

My work is mostly in black and white, and frankly, I'm very frustrated. <br>

I understand that laptop monitors suck, generally, and I need an external display. My question is to those who own or have used a 20" Apple cinema display...<br>

Is the cinema worth buying? Will I still have issues with contrast? Should I just pull out my old CRT and use it? Do I need to mortgage my house to get an Eizo if i want an LCD screen that will please me? <br>

Thanks for any info you can give me. <br>

..Robert</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Pardon the perhaps-obvious question...<br>

Do you have a monitor calibration device and have you used it?<br>

Rick</p>

<p>For the life of me I can't find any way to adjust the monitor, which is a source of my frustration. I have a Spyder calibration device, but unless I can actually make changes it doesn't do me much good.<br>

However, it is very possible that I'm missing something ridiculously obvious...</p>

 

<p>Odd. I was able to profile the monitor on my Powerbook G4 reasonably well with the iOne unit. Is it possible that you just need to reduce the brightness a bit? You'll never get whites in a print that look like the backlit of a fully lit LCD.<br>

If I were still using a laptop for my main photographic computer I would likely attach an external monitor and use the laptop monitor to hold palettes, at least when working at my desk. The Apple external monitors are, indeed, excellent - though they are pricey. You could save some money by getting a high quality third party monitor.<br>

Finally, if you are comparing the image on your monitor to prints... despite the value of profiling to get the colors right, they are never going to literally look the same. It is in the nature of rear-illuminated screen images vs. pigment images on paper under artificial light. So, perfection is not a possibility here.<br>

Dan</p>

<p>In library, utilities, there are some color sync or color calibration controls. </p>

<p>Photoshop also has some. My Macs are not handy right now, or I would give better direction rather than tellin you to use the search. </p>

<p> There is an application called "Shades" which will enable you to decrease screen brightness.</p>

<p>On a Mac, to adjust a monitor, including laptop...<br>

go to System Preferences / Display / Color / Calibrate / check Expert Mode / click Continue till the end... and save...<br>

of course it's more precise with a monitor calibration tool...</p>

<p>A good monitor calibration utility, like the Eye One Display 2 ("i1 Display 2" now) and its accompanying Eye-One Match 3 application software, does the calibration adjustments for you. You set up the calibration targets ... for a MacBook Pro, I would use 110 luminance, 1.8 gamma and 5500K white point ... and use the software to set the brightness. Then it does the rest of the adjustment for you and creates a monitor profile to match. </p>

<p>If you buy a Cinema Display 20 or 23" (the latter is a better display), you do the same thing. Of course, the ACD will be a better display than a laptop display, in every possible way. </p>

<p>Godfrey</p>

<p>Thanks, all. I was missing the "ExpertMode" checkbox. I've done some fiddling, and improved it a bit, but will have to get a good display regardless. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Do you have the glossy screen, or the non-gloss screen?</p>

<p>I purchased the most recent, non-gloss, version of the MacBook Pro, before Apple changed the design. (Missed the design changes by about three weeks, thank goodness.) I've been quite pleased with the calibration. I ended up with a luminance of 104 cd/m2, minimum of 0.2 cd/m2, a 2.2 gamma, and a native white point of 6700K. </p>

<p>The calibration is good enough, that I feel comfortable using this system for first-round color correction. Thereafter, I review images on my LaCie CRT.</p>

<p>If it were me, I wouldn't get an ACD. Only 8-bit lookup table and 8-bit Gamma correction, and no ability to individually adjust R,G, and B. Although the LaCie 320 is probably a good machine, I've sworn off the LaCie's. Had three LaCie products, and have had problems with all of them. For example, the red gun is weak on my CRT. It can still calibrate OK, but with a shortened lifespan. Very disappointing. </p>

<p>That leaves a Mitsubishi high end, color graphics and an Eizo. My next one will likely be an Eizo machine, probably the CG222W with 12-bit lookup, 16-bit internal processing, and I think a 12-bit gamma correction. Also offers a color gamut of 92% Adobe RGB 98. It's expensive, but not in the stratosphere like other Eizo models.</p>