New iMac 20": Entry Level LCD Panel!, 2007-09-10 - Your reactions

[linathael]

First a report from Arthur:

I had a rather bad surprise couple of days ago when starting using my iMac Alu 20" received last Wednesday. Yesterday morning, while displaying a RAW photo with Lightroom, I was surprised by artifacts, similar to those seen on compressed JPEG with blue sky. Then I forgot about it. Till yesterday evening when I displayed a gray to white scale with Omnigraffle... big shock! I obtained large stripes, with ugly sides...a disaster...
So I decided to display a white to black scale, and photos below illustrate the astonishing result. On the white side, the first 5 centimeters on the left are entirely white:



And on the right, the last 5 centimeters are fully black:



And in between one can see those vertical stripes of 1cm with ugly sides.

I started looking on the web, and with our friend Kiryu, we found the reference of the LCD panel being used in the new iMac 20" Alu from <a href="http://
www.kodawarisan.com/imac_2007_mid/imac_2007_mid_03.html" target="_blank">Kodawarisan[/a]. It is a TN panel, encoding colors in 18-bits (6-bits per RGB layer), instead of 24-bits for the previous 20" iMac, or the new 24" iMac Alu (IPS or MVA panel).

Of course, I can not make any use of this new iMac 20" Alu for my photo business, so I will try to negotiate with Apple to get It exchanged with either the previous iMac 20" or the new iMac 24" Alu. I screwed myself as I could not imagine Apple could have changed so dramatically the quality of the LCD panel used in iMacs.

Of course, if you purchase today the new iMac 20" for 1199€ (all taxes included), it will be a perfect companion for most users. However, if you plan to use it as a photo editing/reviewing platform, or more generally if you need support for 24-bits color and a wider view angle, then go for the new 24" iMac Alu, or the previous 20"/24" iMacs.
One can indeed regret that Apple is not providing enough details regarding components being used in hardware models (LCD panel, true CPU/GPU specifications, etc.)

[translation by Linathael]

[AaronD12]

Anyone using an LCD for professional photography -- especially a consumer-grade LCD -- needs to have their head examined.

The black levels of LCDs are not good enough for professional work. A high-grade CRT is still the best solution, though some professional-grade LCD panels are starting to improve their contrast, black levels, and gamut.

-Aaron-

[linathael]

Anyone using an LCD for professional photography -- especially a consumer-grade LCD -- needs to have their head examined.

The black levels of LCDs are not good enough for professional work. A high-grade CRT is still the best solution, though some professional-grade LCD panels are starting to improve their contrast, black levels, and gamut.

-Aaron-

hello Aaron

you are right, but the previous 20" and 24" iMac have been used a lot for video/photo editing, selection, etc... in Pro environment
not meaning that the real super important gamma correction will be carry out on the iMac (suicidal I agree, get a LaCie with the proper calibration and probe), but seriously it is surprising to see Apple getting an 20" not even able to render 24-bits color.

[Metalizer]

MacIntouch were already reporting about the inferior screen in the 20'' iMac only days after its launch. But this did not stop Apple talking up about how "professional" the new models appeared.
I think the Cinema Displays are still fair enough for photo editing, although now long surpassed by the pro ranges from Samsung, Eizo etc.
It's almost sad, in a way, when one considers that Apple earned its crust from the graphics and print industries, over the past two decades (at a time when nobody else bought the Mac), to see it change its priorities in such a manner!

[linathael]

MacIntouch were already reporting about the inferior screen in the 20'' iMac only days after its launch. But this did not stop Apple talking up about how "professional" the new models appeared.
I think the Cinema Displays are still fair enough for photo editing, although now long surpassed by the pro ranges from Samsung, Eizo etc.
It's almost sad, in a way, when one considers that Apple earned its crust from the graphics and print industries, over the past two decades (at a time when nobody else bought the Mac), to see it change its priorities in such a manner!

I agree entirely, the iMac has populated some Pro video/photo environment due to its original quality, for sure Apple might pay such move backwards cash...

[el_mancebo]

That fotos don't look too pro for me.

The LG-Phillips its a 24 bits (16.7M colors) panel, the problem it's a side effect of most TFT panels

This post has been edited by el_mancebo: Sep 10 2007, 05:20 PM

[AaronD12]

I agree entirely, the iMac has populated some Pro video/photo environment due to its original quality, for sure Apple might pay such move backwards cash...

Glad I got one of the previous generation 24" iMacs... a floor model for 50% off. Yahoo!

-Aaron-

[Kenneth B. Done]

I've configured 2 Aluminium 20" iMac's for customers lately and the lcd screen is just fine. It's probably just as good as all those cheap 20" lcd's on sale everywhere. I did notice a smaller viewing angle, and somehow the whole appearance of the screen lacks that extra crispyness and refinement in contrast/gamma. I played a couple of 1080i HD trailers and they look brilliant. Too me it makes perfect sense that Apple is clearly making a profit out of the 20" in this way. True professional graphic artists involved in printing and true colors will look elsewhere anyhow. And even if the screen was of better quality, who is going to properly callibrate it twice a month? Really, most users aren't even aware of any color profiling on their iMacs, they just write emails and surf the web.

By the way Aron, the Alu 24" looks considerably better and has a far better GPU than the previous generation. And the previous 20" may have a better display, its GPU is pretty weak.

[linathael]

I've configured 2 Aluminium 20" iMac's for customers lately and the lcd screen is just fine. It's probably just as good as all those cheap 20" lcd's on sale everywhere. I did notice a smaller viewing angle, and somehow the whole appearance of the screen lacks that extra crispyness and refinement in contrast/gamma. I played a couple of 1080i HD trailers and they look brilliant. Too me it makes perfect sense that Apple is clearly making a profit out of the 20" in this way. True professional graphic artists involved in printing and true colors will look elsewhere anyhow. And even if the screen was of better quality, who is going to properly callibrate it twice a month? Really, most users aren't even aware of any color profiling on their iMacs, they just write emails and surf the web.

By the way Aron, the Alu 24" looks considerably better and has a far better GPU than the previous generation. And the previous 20" may have a better display, its GPU is pretty weak.

thanks Kenneth for this input,
I personaly have 2 20"iMac from previous generation and the Radeon X1600 is more than enough for most users, one of them features 256MB VRAM, but never could see the difference even playing simuation/action games on Mac and Windows.
and for using Aperture on one fo those iMac, I would be really disappointed is Apple would have instaleld a low quality panel inside.
let's face it, how much money does Apple really save by making such "cheap" move??
getting at least a 24-bits color would have been the basis for such hardware advertised as providing brilliant display and bringing high-quality display to the mass...