Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2
Well, I never was arguing that matte was a perfect solution either, just that it alleviated the known problems with over saturation and contrast associated with glossy and that it was strongly preferred by graphics professionals. You raise some interesting problems with matte screens that I had not heard of before, but I have known and talked to a lot of graphics professionals over the years and you are the first I have ever heard argue *for* a glossy screen.
Back in the "old" days we used to work in dark rooms wearing black clothing. A small part of that was to prevent reflections, but the rest was to increase the saturation, and apparent blacks to as high a level as possible.
As monitors began to use better phosphors, capable of brighter output, the requirements for those dark rooms began to wane.
All of the top graphics monitors were glossy though. Only the cheaper models were matte. The reason was that matte cut down on stauration and blacks.
When companies stopped making those very high quality monitors, we began to see matte in everything else.
Now, most people are used to matte, and the idea of glossy is odd to them, even for professionals. Unfortunately, because of competitiveness, standards have also gone down in the graphics field.
It used to be that only shops with the experience and money to do it "right" did commercial work. But Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark, etc. brought that down to a much lower level. The cost difference made it difficult for the high end shops to compete on most of the business, and even they reduced their spending. The $10,000 Barco monitors saw fewer sales, and eventually, Barco, and others, dropped out of the graphics business entirely, remaining in the medical, military, and other free spending industries more suited to their products.
What we seem to have now are lower end monitors that are spruced up to graphics levels rather than the other way around. And they are matte.
Your comments are not clear though. Are you just gain-saying my argument by pointing out possible problems with matte screens (which is what it appears like), or are you actually arguing that glossy is "better than matte?" Secondary to that point, are you actually arguing that there are no problems with glossy screens in regards over-saturation and contrast? I'm asking because it seems from your wording that you are very carefully not arguing anything at all and really just trying to be clever.
I tried to be as clear as I could, but possibly not clear enough.
First, I'm not trying to be clever. I can't see how you think that. I gave the reasons that exist. That's not trying to be clever.
I don't see you disputing what I said, point by point. You just seem to be dissing what I did say, without saying anything that I can show to be wrong here.
I pointed out that there are benefits to glossy screens for graphics work, as there are. I also pointed out what they were, clearly, I thought.
I am saying that there are no problems with glossy screens in regards to over saturation and contrast. You are correct in saying that.
If you ever look at reviews for monitors, you will see several things that are thought to be of supreme importance, though there are others. You don't even have to know anything about them to see where the reviews are going:
The more of all of those (though color accuracy rather than "more" is meant) the better the monitor.
As you say down below, agreeing mostly with I've also been saying:
In the end a professional uses calibration, which alleviates a lot of these issues, and the screen part is of much greater importance than the cover or the coating. As I have said though, I have known a lot of people in the field and if you are arguing that glossy is better for professional work, you are in a real minority it seems to me.
I may be in the minority today, because people are used to matte. The one thing it seems to do better, is often considered to be more important than what it does worse. Many professionals today have never seen a high quality glossy graphics display, and what they compare their matte displays to aren't comparable.
As I'm sure you know, its much better to be able to turn saturation, and contrast, down in the calibration process than turning it up. Glossy displays allow that to happen with more regularity than do matte displays, depending on the overall quality of the display, of course.