Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 61

Thread: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

  1. #1
    Senior Member bradhusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    2,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    53

    New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Did anybody notice that we're getting closer to 1:1 display for our digital photos? The new iMac has a 14.7 MP display.

    There won't be a standalone monitor that big for a while because the DisplayPort protocol doesn't yet support that kind of bandwidth.

    Interesting.
    Brad Husick

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    That'll be greater than 1:1 display for my E-1, E-5, L1, 10D, *ist DS, K10D, GXR, etc cameras!

    G

  3. #3
    Senior Member JMaher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sarasota
    Posts
    942
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Anyone have any idea if this monitor will cause any issues with Lightroom, etc. Thinking of buying one of the new iMacs but not if Lightroom will slow down, not scale well, etc. I am making the assumption that none of this is an issue but figured it would not hurt to ask.

    Jim

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    33
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    wonder what interface is driving it? Maybe 2x dp and the monitor joins it together

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by JMaher View Post
    Anyone have any idea if this monitor will cause any issues with Lightroom, etc. Thinking of buying one of the new iMacs but not if Lightroom will slow down, not scale well, etc. I am making the assumption that none of this is an issue but figured it would not hurt to ask.

    Jim
    Not seen one yet, but LR works very well on the Retina display MacBook Pro models. The underlying hardware and display for the iMac Retina should be just as transparent.

    G

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    I'm just pulling the trigger on a maxed out iMac 5K this Monday, and am dealing with some of these questions with my Mac Store Business specialist.

    The main question is regarding a second display. Previously, my order was the standard iMac with a Thunderbolt second display … but he stopped me, and said wait for this past week's announcements regarding the iMac and 5K.

    Then the thought was to hold off on the 2nd display to see if a 5K Retina version of that was also coming … which he investigated and sent me this info:

    Retina 5K iMac Will Not Act as External Display, Standalone Apple 5K Display Unlikely Soon - Mac Rumors

    Now I may just get something temporary for desktop holding, since I sure wouldn't be doing PP on that with a 27" 5K to work on.

    Still not sure what to do.

    Now my 15" MacBook Pro is going to look dowdy

    - Marc

  7. #7
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,790
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Diglloyd points out that this monitor can be profiled but not a true calibration...

    diglloyd - October 2014



    So if color space and dynamic range is important to you ... look elsewhere.

    Also no specs as to refresh rates for those interested in video ...

    However it is a nice upgrade for those interested in 4K video that will be coming but not the ideal solution for photographers or those who produce 4K.

    Bob

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by docmoore View Post
    Diglloyd points out that this monitor can be profiled but not a true calibration...

    diglloyd - October 2014



    So if color space and dynamic range is important to you ... look elsewhere.

    Also no specs as to refresh rates for those interested in video ...

    However it is a nice upgrade for those interested in 4K video that will be coming but not the ideal solution for photographers or those who produce 4K.

    Bob
    Thanks Bob. Interesting read.

    This looked pretty good to my eye, so I'm a bit confused: (click on pic)

    MacPerformanceGuide: How Much Resolution in a 5K Display?

    My iMac order is for a second station in Florida not my main work place here at home. So budget is a consideration.

    However, I've been working on an old Mac Pro with dual 30 cinema screens, so I suppose those have been faux calibrated all along anyway.

    Maybe I should price out the NECs and see what that adds up to with a Mac Pro. Doesn't seem like the 4K NECs are even available yet. Hmmm

    - Marc

  9. #9
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,790
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Marc,

    There are some amazing 4K monitors on the way...

    Presently Sharp Dell and Asus have some options....Eizo and NEC coming.

    Problem is driving them...short of a new Mac Pro the boards are upwards of $2000....

    The Dell is profile able ... give some thought to pixel size and menu items...almost anything less than 32 inches is unreadable...

    My vote will be for the Sharp or the NEC or the Eizo..as I have only one monitor and system I need to have a profiled solution.

    I lived with an Apple Cinema display for years...moved to a Dell which could be profiled and could not believe how much more information was available...mainly for me with the Leica Monochrome...could actually see differences that made my post process work...not resolution as much as dynamic range and subtle shades in the mid tones.

    I think it will be a long time before prices drop on the good 4K monitors ...

    Bob

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Regards the 5K display, much as having "newer, more, better, blah blah blah ..." sounds, I really don't see the point. It's not going to make my prints any better than they already are. It's not going to make the photos I post to the internet any sharper either. Yeah, it might make imaging on my image processing workstation a tiny bit sharper and clearer.

    But i have no problem with my existing Thunderbolt Display 27" and see no point to 5K displays. Most of the 4K video I've seen doesn't impress me either.

    Call me an old curmudgeon, but there's a limit to how many pixels actually make a difference which is an advantage...

    G

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Regards the 5K display, much as having "newer, more, better, blah blah blah ..." sounds, I really don't see the point. It's not going to make my prints any better than they already are. It's not going to make the photos I post to the internet any sharper either. Yeah, it might make imaging on my image processing workstation a tiny bit sharper and clearer.

    But i have no problem with my existing Thunderbolt Display 27" and see no point to 5K displays. Most of the 4K video I've seen doesn't impress me either.

    Call me an old curmudgeon, but there's a limit to how many pixels actually make a difference which is an advantage...

    G
    Tell me more … sounds a lot less expensive …

    Actually, way back when I made the dual 30" Mac Cinema decision it was as much for client presentations as for working acuity. Easier to sell a lot more work with them.

    I don't evaluate anything on the basis of web showing, but I do make prints all the time. So, I wonder why such a gain in screen resolution wouldn't be of some advantage in the editing attributes that Bob touts as showing up with his profitable monitors?

    Frankly, I've paid no attention to this stuff for a long time and now feel like a dummy.

    BTW, what's the difference between all the HD4K TV screens and these 4K computer monitors just coming out? Lack of Calibration? Different rendering characteristics? Pixel structure?

    Right now I was thinking of a new 5K iMac and temporarily using a larger TV as a secondary screen to make presentations on, and to use as a holding area while I do PP on the iMac screen. Then get a 4K computer monitor that can be profiled later when (and if) it is doable.

    The room this is all going in is totally dark, so I was also considering that a Plasma would be good there … since I need a TV in the room anyway.

    Way to much info to digest … nothing ever seems to just fall together easily.

    - Marc

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    523
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    I'm with the curmudgeon on this

    Sounds great, but I dislike spending too much time looking at monitors and as long as mine offers a pleasant enough viewing experience and allows me to make the prints I want, I am happy. This additional resolution may be nice to have, but monitors are already darned good and sufficient IMO.

    And... despite all the technophiles who believe a perfect match between monitor and print is the panacea, I regard draft/test printing as inevitable, necessary and in fact desirable. You make better prints by looking your prints, not your monitor. Just as it is easier for most people to make numerical adjustments to their darkroom printing (time and contrast), I find it the same in the digital darkroom, so what the monitor actually shows is not terribly important. Relating inputs to outputs is.

    I'll probably replace my existing iMac in five to seven years, a year or two after my now four year old Macbook Air

  13. #13
    Subscriber and Workshop Member MGrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,575
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    4

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    As with the retina display on laptops, don't judge the new iMac until you've seen it. I made all the same arguments why the extra resolution would be wasted on the Macbook Pro. Those lasted about 30 seconds after seeing the screen.

    If you're really committed to avoiding a retina display, I strongly advise not seeing one.

    Best,

    Matt (who is trying to forget how good a big Eizo monitor looks)

  14. #14
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,790
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    This review of the monitor Apple sells with the new MacPro may be of interest:

    Review: Sharp's 32" 4K display is a high-performance workhorse made for Apple's Mac Pro


    Bob

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by MGrayson View Post
    As with the retina display on laptops, don't judge the new iMac until you've seen it. I made all the same arguments why the extra resolution would be wasted on the Macbook Pro. Those lasted about 30 seconds after seeing the screen.

    If you're really committed to avoiding a retina display, I strongly advise not seeing one. ...
    Um, my statement is made from the perspective of having both MacBook Air 13" and MacBook Pro 13" Retina displays in front of me. The Retina is a mite bit sharper to my eye, but not really enough to make me jump up and down, and the prints I make from either of the same image look identical. (I need the MBP Retina to obtain screen shots for my documentation efforts with enough pixel resolution, which is why I have it. I like lugging the MacBook Air around a lot more... !)

    G

  16. #16
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by docmoore View Post
    This review of the monitor Apple sells with the new MacPro may be of interest:

    Review: Sharp's 32" 4K display is a high-performance workhorse made for Apple's Mac Pro


    Bob
    This potentially solves an issue for me Bob.

    From now on I will be split between two working locations. One location is getting all new computer gear and the other will need all new soon because my current home MacPro is no longer upgradable, and the 30" cinema screens are just about finished anyway (one recently died).

    As an alternative, I am going to explore getting a maxed out MBP Retina to carry back and forth, and two of these screens … one in each location.

    - Marc

  17. #17
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,790
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    This potentially solves an issue for me Bob.

    From now on I will be split between two working locations. One location is getting all new computer gear and the other will need all new soon because my current home MacPro is no longer upgradable, and the 30" cinema screens are just about finished anyway (one recently died).

    As an alternative, I am going to explore getting a maxed out MBP Retina to carry back and forth, and two of these screens … one in each location.

    - Marc
    I think that is wise as it will give you consistency through the duplication of screens...now the issue is light within each location.

    The MBP is much more affordable than a maxed MacPro at this point...though I still prefer a full-size keyboard.

    Bob

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by docmoore View Post
    I think that is wise as it will give you consistency through the duplication of screens...now the issue is light within each location.

    The MBP is much more affordable than a maxed MacPro at this point...though I still prefer a full-size keyboard.

    Bob
    Both rooms are light tight. So any ambient is fully duplicatable. I tend to use desktop OttLites for additional lighting needs, so using those will be very consistent.

    I'll explore this option with the Mac Business specialists today.

    I know the MBP won't provide the same level of core computing power, but with a SS drive and 32 gigs of RAM, it'll be faster than what I have now I think.

    The drawback is exactly what you mention …no full sized keyboard.

    - Marc

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    k-hawinkler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The "Land of Enchantment"
    Posts
    3,296
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Why not add a keyboard at each location?
    With best regards, K-H.

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by k-hawinkler View Post
    Why not add a keyboard at each location?
    Exactly. I use a full size wired keyboard and a wireless trackpad at both home and office. When I'm doing work for the office, it just plugs into my display which carries all the other wired connections.

    G

  21. #21
    Senior Member bradhusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    2,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    53

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    What I have found with my Mac Pro is the blade drive (SSD) is SO much faster than any SSD in the MacBook Pro. It makes a difference in Lightroom and Photoshop. I am getting more than 1000 MB/sec performance.

    I use an NEC monitor as my main display and a Dell 4K display as a secondary. They calibrate very nicely and match very close to each other.
    Brad Husick
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #22
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    I use NEC wide gamut monitors. They profile just about perfectly and I bought high DR cameras and I want to see all of it. Plus if your printing in my case my monitor is exactly what my printer Epson 7900 prints out. I rarely ever need to make a second print.


    Here is my bottom line I have to deliver images to clients and I can always say and I do I have a wide gamut monitor that's perfectly calibrated for color and what a offset printer will see and what you viewing on is a piece of **** monitor that's off and not representative of the file. I do say that much nicer than just said. But at some point someone will point the finger at me as the issue. I want to cover myself. Retina is nice on a IPad and iPhone but it ends there. They are very saturated and and just too punchy to be photo accurate, sure lovely to look at but it's not what your file is.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  23. #23
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    The iMac 5K is off the table as a possibility now.

    It dawned on me that I need to step up to a Mac Pro for one key reason … it is now so small I can easily transport it back and forth between both locations thus also solving the looming issue of replacing my aging Mac Pro here at home. 8 Core rather than Quad Core doesn't hurt.

    This opens up the possibility of profiling monitors that match in both locations. Sharp, NEC, whatever … I'll look into it more deeply now.

    Now I just need to sell some stuff to fund it all.

    Thanks for all the great input everyone! This place is invaluable.

    - Marc

  24. #24
    Senior Member RVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I use NEC wide gamut monitors. They profile just about perfectly and I bought high DR cameras and I want to see all of it. Plus if your printing in my case my monitor is exactly what my printer Epson 7900 prints out. I rarely ever need to make a second print.


    Here is my bottom line I have to deliver images to clients and I can always say and I do I have a wide gamut monitor that's perfectly calibrated for color and what a offset printer will see and what you viewing on is a piece of **** monitor that's off and not representative of the file. I do say that much nicer than just said. But at some point someone will point the finger at me as the issue. I want to cover myself. Retina is nice on a IPad and iPhone but it ends there. They are very saturated and and just too punchy to be photo accurate, sure lovely to look at but it's not what your file is.

    Agreed,iMac is only about 70% of adobe RGB,why have high end sensors and then process on such a low quality panel,NEC and Eizo have close to 97% of Adobe RGB gamut..

    In fairness the iMac panel wasn't designed for high end color accurate processing.

    Rob

  25. #25
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    No there not and outside of critical color for photographers, graphic designers and video they are really nice for viewing. But they are not color critical. Actually with my wide gamut monitor and my Sony A7r the DR is so good I actually have to add to my black point like 3 or 4 points to get that punch sometimes. You would not be doing that with other non wide gamut monitors. The point being I am seeing almost the full range coming off my sensor with regards to DR which in turn tends to make images look flat. In reality that's what really is going on with your files with this much DR in these cams or backs. This gives you full range in your shadows that you can actually see visually.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    I don't really care all that much about color accuracy. I care about getting the color I want in a photo, and in making sets of photos that have the same/right look. That rarely need much accuracy ...

    Absolute color accuracy is primarily an issue when doing movie work, where putting together clips taken at very different times and often with very different equipment can produce jarring effects if you don't have adequate color calibration and accuracy. Still photography is only very very rarely so demanding.

    And since my principal love in still photographs is a print and/or a book, the dynamic range and color space of nearly any modern high-end display is FAR greater, which means I can calibrate and adjust most anything to make my prints. :-)

    G

  27. #27
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Sorry Godfrey I totally disagree as my printer just screwed up a printing job because he did not follow what my file was and made a fatal mistake. They had to reprint it at their costs. Color critical is paramount when going to press. Most folks don't go to press but most commercial shooters do. Can they get it right without it on our end, sure but that leaves decisions up to the printer. For graphics I want Pantone whatever and design that way and it better be that Pantone color. Is this for everyone no but most high profile photographers that are printing art are all on wide gamut monitors.

    You may not believe in it but ask any accomplished landscape shooter doing their own printing and they are on NEC or Eizos
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  28. #28
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Sorry Godfrey I totally disagree as my printer just screwed up a printing job because he did not follow what my file was and made a fatal mistake. They had to reprint it at their costs. Color critical is paramount when going to press. Most folks don't go to press but most commercial shooters do. Can they get it right without it on our end, sure but that leaves decisions up to the printer. For graphics I want Pantone whatever and design that way and it better be that Pantone color. Is this for everyone no but most high profile photographers that are printing art are all on wide gamut monitors.

    You may not believe in it but ask any accomplished landscape shooter doing their own printing and they are on NEC or Eizos
    Guy,

    It's all right to have a different opinion; needs and sensitivities differ. I don't have to 'ask any accomplished landscape shooter' because it isn't really all that relevant to my photography what other people do. I'm not primarily a landscape photographer, although some folks classify some of my photos as landscape. Most of what I do is more in the street, culture, and fine art domains, very little in commercial or other domains more demanding of color accuracy.

    As I said, color accuracy isn't that important to me, but getting the color I want is. I don't wander about my scene with a color meter and then check my work for accuracy of reproduction. I check my work, and the prints and books produced from it, for whether they are the color I expect them to be, consistently, and make adjustments if they're not.

    There's a great deal of difference between color accuracy and getting the color right (pleasing, 'what I want', etc). Very few people's eyes see color in exactly the same way... Accuracy is rarely that important in fine art, editorial, and event photography. It's more important in forensic, documentarian, scientific, and product photography.

    I sold a lot of work when I was a pro running my photo business, printed all my work myself too, and I never once found I needed a wide-gamut display to do my image processing.

    G

  29. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn NY
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    8

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    the question might be how much worse is the gamut than the bog standard apple 23" cinema display? or 27" led cinema display.....

  30. #30
    Senior Member RVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Sorry Godfrey I totally disagree as my printer just screwed up a printing job because he did not follow what my file was and made a fatal mistake. They had to reprint it at their costs. Color critical is paramount when going to press. Most folks don't go to press but most commercial shooters do. Can they get it right without it on our end, sure but that leaves decisions up to the printer. For graphics I want Pantone whatever and design that way and it better be that Pantone color. Is this for everyone no but most high profile photographers that are printing art are all on wide gamut monitors.

    You may not believe in it but ask any accomplished landscape shooter doing their own printing and they are on NEC or Eizos

    Guy,Lloyd just post this on his blog and it provides visual clarity in the Eizo vs iMac panel comparison.. diglloyd: Apple iMac 5K: Gamut and Display

  31. #31
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Guy,

    It's all right to have a different opinion; needs and sensitivities differ. I don't have to 'ask any accomplished landscape shooter' because it isn't really all that relevant to my photography what other people do. I'm not primarily a landscape photographer, although some folks classify some of my photos as landscape. Most of what I do is more in the street, culture, and fine art domains, very little in commercial or other domains more demanding of color accuracy.

    As I said, color accuracy isn't that important to me, but getting the color I want is. I don't wander about my scene with a color meter and then check my work for accuracy of reproduction. I check my work, and the prints and books produced from it, for whether they are the color I expect them to be, consistently, and make adjustments if they're not.

    There's a great deal of difference between color accuracy and getting the color right (pleasing, 'what I want', etc). Very few people's eyes see color in exactly the same way... Accuracy is rarely that important in fine art, editorial, and event photography. It's more important in forensic, documentarian, scientific, and product photography.

    I sold a lot of work when I was a pro running my photo business, printed all my work myself too, and I never once found I needed a wide-gamut display to do my image processing.

    G
    It is interesting to read different experiences and correlate them to my own.

    While I understand the desire to "see" as much as the high end cameras can capture to do PP work, the reality for me is that most commercial work is translated into CMYK Printer's PDFs and sent to the publications on a deadline. Theory and reality make for odd bed-fellows.

    Frankly, I cannot recall any Art Director or Advertising Designer that was working on a high-end monitor, and they frequently are the ones determining what something is going to look like when it gets printed.

    Even the more critical product work I do like General Motors Fabric samples for printed dealer selection catalogs are less critical than I ever assumed. At first I busted a hump shooting Xrite charts in the first round of shots so there would be something to match to, shot with a 60 meg MFD, PP in ProfotoRGB, and used an OttLite to evaluate the material color under constant light source. The Production Manager told me not to bother … just get it close and they would evaluate the CMYK final file against the fabric standards so the printed representation would be as close as it is ever going to get.

    I do a fair amount of prints both internally on my Epson, and at the lab/binderies who print my wedding albums. My main supplier has repeatedly told me that no one provides such well corrected files and as the ones I give him. We have not once had to do a re-run of album pages due to color issues, including critical skin tones. Granted, this application is far less color critical, however consistent skin tones in sequential images can be pretty important.

    Not saying' that we should't strive for craftsmanship, just that our experienced eyes can be a pretty decent tool in the scheme of things.

    - Marc

  32. #32
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,790
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    ... our experienced eyes can be a pretty decent tool in the scheme of things.

    - Marc
    Hard to find any physical device that has the ability to discern subtle differences in light/color/contrast that the eye/brain loop has when trained and engaged.

    Still a profiled Adobe RGB monitor allows a deeper look ... whether it is needed or desired is a personal choice...I know where it falls out for me. And this is not a commercial professional choice just personal satisfaction.

    Regards,

    Bob

  33. #33
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Example go shoot for the company called Coke. If you can't get a Coke red color in your photography going through offset printing and that color is not Coke color someone maybe looking for a new job or lost a client. Many companies have products that are a certain color, if not carried through to the printed piece someone failed along the way.

    This is not about how you work. This is about industry standards that get followed from shooting to offset to even the paper a piece is printed on to be accurate. Many catalog shooters go through this processs every day. It's not about some art director either. It's about accurate color on the printed piece that has to represent a product.

    This is all about limitations of monitors and reading the full gamut or close to it of your files a wide gamut monitor sees 97 percent of a Adobe RGB 1998 profile. A iMac cannot get see that type of gamut it cuts it off and drills your file down to its spec. Which basically is cutting off your full gamut of your file.

    Be it you need it or not does not make any difference these are just facts and limitations.
    Last edited by Guy Mancuso; 22nd October 2014 at 19:02.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  34. #34
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Whatever do photographers do when shooting film, which can't even approach sRGB for accuracy of reproduction?

    I worked for four years at a pro lab/photofinisher, so the question is rhetorical. Answer: they did the best they could, the pro lab did the best it could, and the goal was to please the art director. Nothing more, nothing less. Coca Cola took the results as input and tweaked it in the offset lab to meet their exacting demands. Just like they do today.

    (Note: one of my clients was Red Bull in Austria. They bought, on two occasions, ten image spreads of my work made with a Panny FZ10 and used them to illustrate two feature length articles about the Isle of Man and Laguna Seca Raceway in their sports magazine. They didn't even want Adobe RGB or Tiff files, just high Rez JPEGs. And seemed quite happy with the results...)

    G

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Example go shoot for the company called Coke. If you can't get a Coke red color in your photography going through offset printing and that color is not Coke color someone maybe looking for a new job or lost a client. Many companies have products that are a certain color, if not carried through to the printed piece someone failed along the way.

    This is not about how you work. This is about industry standards that get followed from shooting to offset to even the paper a piece is printed on to be accurate. Many catalog shooters go through this processs every day. It's not about some art director either. It's about accurate color on the printed piece that has to represent a product.

    This is all about limitations of monitors and reading the full gamut or close to it of your files a wide gamut monitor sees 97 percent of a Adobe RGB 1998 profile. A iMac cannot get see that type of gamut it cuts it off and drills your file down to its spec. Which basically is cutting off your full gamut of your file.

    Be it you need it or not does not make any difference these are just facts and limitations.

  35. #35
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Godfrey you always put things as what you do. Not sure when you will ever learn but it's NOT about you. It's industry standards and limitations that you can't change. Seriously i give the **** up.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Godfrey you always put things as what you do. Not sure when you will ever learn but it's NOT about you. It's industry standards and limitations that you can't change. Seriously i give the **** up.
    You're right, it's not about me.

    I participate in the same industry you do, Guy. I've been in and out of the photography industry for 50+ years. I sell my photographs, jobs, licences, etc. to clients just like you do. I go about it quite differently from you, I address different market interests and areas, but I feel my experiences are just as valid as yours.

    I didn't say I was "right." I agreed that you are welcome to hold different sensitivities, perspectives, and opinions. What I have done in this business has been perfectly acceptable, satisfactory to both me and my clients. Why do you insist on disparaging me, rather than accepting that perhaps the industry is broader than your perceptions of it? I don't disparage your methodologies, why disparage mine and tell me I'm wrong?

    I don't "give the **** up" on you. I suspect you are a bit too proud of your own methodologies and practices, claiming them to be "facts" and "the only right way" when it is perfectly obvious from the examples I'm stating that other ways work well too.

    I'm not the only photographer with a long history of work in the industry who feels and works the way I do, but I don't cite that as proof of my 'rightness' only as testimony that there are other ways of approaching this business. Let's just disagree on this trivial point of what g•••••m display system you use to tweak your photographs and move on.

    G

  37. #37
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    How do I do this without getting banned …

    I have a bit different take on this than Guy, and shrink at countermanding his obviously successful approach. Yet, there are different ways to see all this.

    I worked at an Offset Printer, then became an Art Director, then started doing my own Photography for some of the printed pieces I created. This is my skew on all this:

    All four color offset printing is done in CMYK color gamut.

    Whether it is Coke red, or Ford Oval blue, or FedEX Indigo/Orange , or Breast Cancer Pink … all of them must be extracted from the CMYK color gamut. Nothing can be offset printed outside of this gamut.

    CMYK isn't anywhere near the Gamut of the Adobe RGB 1998 profile. Almost any modern monitor has a wider gamut than CMYK.

    There are two schools of printing prep for photographic reproduction. Those that provide it as Adobe 1998 and leave it to pre-press to make the conversion, and those who prefer to make the CMYK conversion at the ad or collateral piece prep stage then adjust it during pre-press evaluation. This is why here are a zillion CMYK profiles in PS.

    Color Printing 101: the RGB & CMYK gamuts

    A vast majority of photographers provide as faithful an image as they can manage using Adobe 1998. So a monitor that mostly gets you there is desirable to cover your behind. If color repo goes bad, then someone afterwards screwed up.

    However, it doesn't alter the fact that any image will be converted to the truncated CMYK color space.

    The full gamut of an Adobe 1998 photo file will never be reproduced in offset printing, only approximated during the CMYK pre-press evaluation process.

    Having made thousands of press runs to evaluate four color proofs and progressives on the actual paper stock to be used, or working with an ad agency Art Director and/or Production Manager to do that, I now make the conversion myself to make sure the color reproduction is closer to the reality of CMYK … (even though I still may provide the larger gamut Adobe 1998 profiled image because the printer can occasionally rip a bit more than I can).

    Since my involvement is inception to fulfillment, this process has considerably simplified the pre-press evaluative process, and the reproduction of the photos has taken less pre-press work to approximate the original intent.

    I still do advertising concepts, layouts & copy and often photograph the content myself. Now days, most of the Printers my clients use require that I provide the reproduction piece as High Quality Printer's PDF files in CMYK color space … so it all best best be right in CMYK.

    Different strokes for different folks.

    - Marc

  38. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    565
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    You may not believe in it but ask any accomplished landscape shooter doing their own printing and they are on NEC or Eizos
    Joe Cornish seems to get by on an iMac ok.

  39. #39
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Yea and I can name 20 that use wide gamut monitors. You all missed the point. I never said you can't work with a monitor coming from Apple or any other SRGB monitor. What I am saying is if you want to see and use the full range of your raw file which BTW has a even bigger gamut than Adobe 1998 than a wide gamut monitor has the biggest gamut. As far as offset printing yes things are converted to CMYK and the presses can only handle so much color. But in the same vein this is also changing for the better. These are multi million dollar machines and are color managed and the industry standards are much higher than your SRGB monitors and from I read this monitor can't even be calibrated. Really what's the point of shooting high end color if your not using a color managed system. It makes zero sense. No one said you can't get by and we been getting by for years but now with these higher gamut monitors you can actually see the full range of your DR and color. Frankly when I spend 40 k for a back I want to see that range. I had both at the same time a Apple cinema 30 inch and a NEC 30 inch the diffrence is huge and I could not sell that Cinema Display fast enough. My Epson printer a 7900 is a perfect match for these monitors .

    Do want you want folks but you can't escape the facts. That's all I'm putting down. Look at the gamut Lloyd posted. Those are facts that can't be changed. You can work around them like many do but if I'm spending 1200 on a monitor I'm buying a wide gamut. I see no value than seeing less than what my raw file can do.

    With that Im out of this thread. My words obviously have been twisted enough to fit someone else's agenda.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  40. #40
    Senior Member bradhusick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    2,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    53

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    This thread went in interesting directions. My original post was intended to say, "Isn't it cool that we can now display so many pixels of our photos."

    I still think that's cool. Even if the gamut isn't super wide.
    Brad Husick
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  41. #41
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    I think its very cool but for photographers it has a big question mark. If it can't be calibrated correctly I want no part of it.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  42. #42
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Yea and I can name 20 that use wide gamut monitors. You all missed the point. I never said you can't work with a monitor coming from Apple or any other SRGB monitor. What I am saying is if you want to see and use the full range of your raw file which BTW has a even bigger gamut than Adobe 1998 than a wide gamut monitor has the biggest gamut. As far as offset printing yes things are converted to CMYK and the presses can only handle so much color. But in the same vein this is also changing for the better. These are multi million dollar machines and are color managed and the industry standards are much higher than your SRGB monitors and from I read this monitor can't even be calibrated. Really what's the point of shooting high end color if your not using a color managed system. It makes zero sense. No one said you can't get by and we been getting by for years but now with these higher gamut monitors you can actually see the full range of your DR and color. Frankly when I spend 40 k for a back I want to see that range. I had both at the same time a Apple cinema 30 inch and a NEC 30 inch the diffrence is huge and I could not sell that Cinema Display fast enough. My Epson printer a 7900 is a perfect match for these monitors .

    Do want you want folks but you can't escape the facts. That's all I'm putting down. Look at the gamut Lloyd posted. Those are facts that can't be changed. You can work around them like many do but if I'm spending 1200 on a monitor I'm buying a wide gamut. I see no value than seeing less than what my raw file can do.

    With that Im out of this thread. My words obviously have been twisted enough to fit someone else's agenda.
    Actually, this does make sense to me.

    So, like a crazy golf ball thrown into a shower stall I've bounced back to getting the iMac 5K Retina and will also hook up a wide gamut NEC monitor to it to work on. Great Retina 5K client presentation and accurate color PP. Best of both worlds.

    The Mac Pro + 2 screens cost too much, and I've got other priorities.

    - Marc

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,310
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    9

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    I have to side with Guy on this one, even having just printed a book in CMYK. The printer I worked with for the book developed their own wider-gamut CMYK inks abandoning the CMYK standards to do so. The gamut is 40% greater than ISO standard: TRIFOLIO, Fine Art Books

    They were using Eizo monitors, and so was I...their CMYK conversions looked fantastic and captured the vast majority of the colors in the original.

    I mention this as an example of how technology is always surging forward. CMYK may be a small gamut for most places at the moment, but it is going to expand rapidly as technology improves. The wide gamut monitors are important if only because they give you a more complete view of what you are doing. Even if you don't care about accuracy, you are still adjusting colors you are not even seeing if you work with modern digital files on a standard gamut monitor. You either shrink everything down so you can see what is going on, or you just live with unpredictable results.

    I understand what Godfrey meant about how accuracy was not important to him as much as pleasing results are. That is often the case for many artists and in many media, but to just forge ahead with an uncalibrated and low gamut display seems such a waste of time, if nothing else. Even if you are going to evaluate on the basis of test prints (which I agree is a good way to go!), just getting repeatable and consistent results saves you so much time and hassle. If you are printing on a regular basis, wider gamut monitors are so much easier and less-frustrating to work with.

    Think of it this way: imagine you are in a room with a bunch of bottles, and your goal is to knock a particular one over. With a standard gamut monitor the lights are off and you basically have to flail around knocking over bottles until you hit the right one. With a wide gamut monitor, the lights are on and you just walk over and knock over the right one the first time. It's a weird idea, but it seems to fit here.

    Even if color number accuracy isn't your concern, you gain a great deal from having a wider gamut monitor, even if you goal is to shrink down the gamut later. Better to have a declining gamut scale from monitor to print than to have a monitor in sRGB and prints or offset that can show colors you can't see on screen.

    In any case, a 5K monitor sounds just fine by me. I would be happy to have a high resolution, wide gamut Eizo, but I think I will wait a few years until my CG275W starts showing its age and when 4-5K doesn't cost 4-5K.
    My photos are here: http://www.stuartrichardson.com and more recent work here: http://stuartrichardson.tumblr.com/ Please have a look at my book!
    My lab is here: http://www.customphotolab.is and on facebook

  44. #44
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    I'm not siding with anyone. I am reporting my experiences in producing photos as prints for sale, books for sale, and image files for licensing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stuart Richardson View Post
    ...
    I understand what Godfrey meant about how accuracy was not important to him as much as pleasing results are. That is often the case for many artists and in many media, but to just forge ahead with an uncalibrated and low gamut display seems such a waste of time, if nothing else. Even if you are going to evaluate on the basis of test prints (which I agree is a good way to go!), just getting repeatable and consistent results saves you so much time and hassle. If you are printing on a regular basis, wider gamut monitors are so much easier and less-frustrating to work with. ...
    Who said anything about "forging ahead with an uncalibrated and low gamut display"? Certainly not me. I calibrate and profile my displays and produce prints with a 100% color managed workflow. (Fer gosh sakes, I taught simple color management workflow techniques for a year and a half in the late 20-oughts.)

    Frankly, if the only way to see the glorious color a $40,000 digital back can produce is to buy a $2000+ display, it means that back is mostly useless. I print on paper, my clients license photographs that they print on paper or use to produce web pages that are displayed on uncalibrated, sRGB display systems. The vast majority of what is printed is not high-end art books; it's commercials and illustrations on much more pedestrian papers that can't handle even an sRGB color space and dynamic range.

    That is the reality of the industry, the facts if you will, that I produce photographic work for.

    BTW, Note also that I've said exactly nothing about the new Apple iMac with Retina 5K display. I don't have one, haven't seen one, haven't had any time to study one or learn how adaptable to calibration it might be. I'm not all that interested in it, its fancy display isn't doing much of anything I need.

    G

  45. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    590
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    The contrast of the 5K reception on the photo boards vs the "industry" reporters et al, is striking.

    The tech reporters are totally gaga over the 5k. Every one of them. Using superlatives I've never heard in reviews and hands ons.

    On the photo boards it always comes down to calibration and how the true holy grail is Eizo etc.

    I think they miss the point. After all the 5K can always run a nice calibrated second monitor for printing.

    But how much do most of us really print? Meaning say Leica M users? Some print alot, but many seldom print.

    If you don't print you want the richest display you can get, so you can really enjoy your work and other's work.

    Calibration aside this is the most advanced display anyone has ever seen on a personal computer, and it will remain so for some time, as many key suppliers are not scaled for big numbers, at least according to computer world.

    Presentation
    Presentation
    Presentation.

    I can't wait

  46. #46
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    So you piqued my interest. I had an errand to the local Apple Retail Store this afternoon anyway, so I took some time to look at the iMac 27" Retina. Dang, that screen has a lot of pixels.

    I was curious about the display's range of adjustability, so I opened System Preferences and the Display settings panel, walked through the software based calibration and profiling tools to create a display setup typical to what I use at home (targets 110 CDm^2, 1.8 gamma, 5600°K white point). Set up the way I use my Thunderbolt Display 27", the display's color space is significantly larger than it seemed from digilloyd's image of the profile. Of course, it's not as large a colorspace as the device-agnostic Adobe RGB (1998) profile, but then few devices could be.

    You can play with the two profiles (the native one provided by Apple and the one I created myself) using the ColorSync Utility app if you want. This zip file contains both of them ... it's very small:
    iMac 5k Profiles.zip

    To look at in the ColorSync Utility:
    - Unzip into two files
    - Open the Library folder in your account (hold down the option key and choose the Library folder from the Go menu in Finder)
    - Drop the profiles into the ~/Library/ColorSync/Profiles folder
    - Launch ColorSync Utility
    - Click on Profiles
    - Open the User section
    - Click on iMac and iMac Calibrated to inspect the profile in the detail pane.

    Remember that this is a three-dimensional map and you can rotate and view it from all angles..

    Having fooled with one for a bit now and seen that I can calibrate it to my usual target configuration, I still don't have much interest in owning one. The ultra high rez screen is simply a bit too much overkill for my needs. It is nice and crisp for reading, though.

    enjoy,
    G

  47. #47
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #48
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    This is the one I been using for a bit now. Its 1250 or so with the Spectroview puck and software. Highly recommend this calibration kit. It's basically 300 more than the current T bolt not sure the new price for the 5k though.

    NEC PA272W-BK-SV LED Backlit Wide Gamut LCD Desktop PA272W-BK-SV
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #49
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    Specs. Read the SRGB number . Like I have been saying all along hard cold facts nothing more. Regardless of back, camera or even your point and shoot your looking at the full color space of your camera when shooting raw.

    The PA272W-BK-SV LED Backlit Wide Gamut LCD Desktop Monitor with SpectraViewII (Black) from NEC comes equipped with the NEC SpectraViewII color calibration tool and features enhanced color accuracy covering 99.3% of the AdobeRGB color space, 94.8% of the NTSC color space, and 146.4% of the sRGB color space. With a variety of input connectors including DisplayPort, Mini DisplayPort, HDMI, and DVI-D Dual-Link, you can plug this monitor into a variety of computers. You can also connect USB-compatible peripheral devices to either of the two upstream or three downstream USB ports.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  50. #50
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: New iMac Retina has 14.7 megapixel display!

    It's obvious that the iMac Retina Display is not for you, Guy. It's not really for me either, I see no point to it for what I do.

    The nattering on about technology that digilloyd does is of very little relevance to 99% of photographic pursuits. If you enjoy it, by all means go forth and keep enjoying. But whether the calibration done by the Xrite or Spyder on an Apple (or any other) display is "faux" or not is completely irrelevant if it nets the results that a photographer needs to produce consistent, top notch prints. I assure you that it has worked very well for me and for the many thousands of others who use these systems daily.

    To get back to brad's original comment: yes indeed, there are sure a lot of pixels on a 5K display. A full resolution E-1 image file looks like a thumbnail on that screen, a 12-Mpixel original out of the E-5 almost fills it, and the X/E-M1/A7/M9 files need a little subsampling to fit. All look great.

    G
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •