Matte or glossy display for photo editing?

[wpoupore]

Which is better?

[mcmanamey]

My personal preference is matte. Not just for photo editing, but for everything. There

certainly are not the glare issues w/ matte. I do not like having to look through my own face

to see what i'm working on. And, since I do a lot of presentations on this computer in

public, for potential clients, I don't want to make it any harder for them to see, either.

[JDMvW]

All of my monitors are matte, and it does have advantages, but when I set up my daughter's new Mac with the glossy display it was beautiful with deep blacks and no problems with reflections that I noticed.

[mountainvisions]

Personally, I cannot stand LCDs for editing.

 

Calibrated or not they just don't have the contrast range of a CRT.

 

So I still use a CRT. Eventually I'll shell out for a Dell Ultrasharp LCD (which for all you Mac logo fans is the same, as in exactly the same as a Apple Cinema Display, minus the Apple logo and the price tag).

 

However, with a little luck I will be able to continue to use my Apple Studio Display 21 long enough that the new OLED displays (developed by Kodak in the 1980s) will be cheap enough to upgrade to.

 

OLED has 1,000,000:1 contrast ratios, doesn't have a backlight, and is super energy effecient. It's been used in cell phones, and some Kodak digital cameras for some time but it's now "main stream" with Sony's new OLED TV's which after me raving about OLED for 5 years+ it seems now the public will understand my mad rantings.

[mountainvisions]

Oh wait, back on topic.

 

I was getting at the fact I hate any LCD but while I think the glossy looks sharper and has richer blacks, I think the glare offsets it and so I prefer matte. Oddly, my newest laptop is glossy but thats just because it was the only choice in the 14.1in model we got. Sadly the 12.1in wasn't yet avail as 14.1 is still too damn big for using on the road!