MacBook Pro Retina changes photo resolution

Many pictures in my new MacBook Pro Retina are now displayed in a much smaller size (resolution) than the originals. Could it be that the automatic generation of new high resolution vignettes have altered the original resolution? The altered pictures are now useless and the command "Return to original" does not respond. Most annoying.

If the pixel dimensions of the photos have remained the same then the diffrerences in appearance on your Retina display is due to the many more pixels in that display.  Have you applied all of the updaters for the MBP Retina display?
What do you mean by resolution?  DPI?  DPI does not come into the equation until you go to print a photo.  This webpage explains DPI: The Myth of DPI
OT

Similar Messages

  • MacBook Pro retina 13" scaled resolution as extra desktop space?

    Hi All- I currently have a mid-2010 15" MBP. I was hoping to get some advice as to whether using a scaled resolution greater than 1440x900 on a 13" MBP retina is a usable enough way to have more screen real estate than my current machine. My goal is to mimic the space that a larger external monitor would give me for side by side doc comparison, but on a smaller, lighter laptop with better battery life. I realize that the scaled resolution will make things appear smaller, but my tinkering with the 13" retina display model at BestBuy still seemed as though it might be a valid solution. Anyone out there using this approach? Thanks!

    If i remember correctly, the macbookpro with retina display has a res of 2560x1600. Why do I have 3360x2100?

  • What is the proper resolution to use with bootcamp and Windows 7 on a Macbook Pro Retina?

    Hi All,
    Let me start by saying I have read numerous articles and blog posts about choosing the correct resolution to use when running Windows 7 via Bootcamp on a MacBook Pro Retina (15").  I have not found the "silver bullet" (correct resolution).  My eyes are sensitive to displays that are running in non-native resolutions (scaling). 
    When running the display in native resolution  (2880x1800) everything looks great, except that icons and text are way too small to read.  I have played with the zoom settings (150%, etc.).
    When using any scaled resolutions, the display doesn't look as crisp and I get eye fatigue.  I have also tried Windows 8, with the same results (no surprise).
    I would love to use this Macbook to run Windows 7 because the hardware is great, but it looks like I may have to switch back to Dell/Lenovo/HP. 
    Is there a proper or "best practice" resolution to run at in this scenario?  I want to give it one last try before putting the laptop away...
    Thanks for any help!
    Andrew

    While I've never seen retina display, if you have not tried Hi-Contrast in Windows, you might find settings with it that are comforatable.
    This is set with desktop rightclick->Personalize. You can vary desktop icon size in the View option above Personalize.
    You can change most of what you see in Windows foreground/background colours & text with high contrast settings.
    Also, text size in Windows browsers is variable with the Control an + and - key combo.
    If the display you use is small maybe an external 24" or 27" monitor, if possible, would alleviate problem.
    The attached pics are expadable by double click.

  • Photos on sites are blurry on the Macbook Pro Retina Display?

    I just got a Macbook Pro Retina Display and while browsing I noticed that logos and photos on sites looked blurry. this is something that really bothers me in the fact that I'm a design and photography student.. i dont know if i should return it and get the old macbook pro or what...

    Give the world time. Resolutions above 2560x1600 are only meant for the 30" cinema display I am using right now, and the rest of the world does not have resolution suited for displays above 200ppi below 30". But, you are a photographer, so am I, and the Retina Display is beautiful at high res content including DSLRs and film scans.

  • Is the MacBook Pro Retina display resolution of 2880-by-1800 a strain on the eyes as I understand the higher the resolution the more strainful the screen can be to the eyes?

    Is the MacBook Pro Retina display resolution of 2880-by-1800 a strain on the eyes as I understand the higher the resolution the more strainful the screen can be to the eyes?

    vinay.sujan wrote:
    Is the MacBook Pro Retina display resolution of 2880-by-1800 a strain on the eyes as I understand the higher the resolution the more strainful the screen can be to the eyes?
    Well there are two or three causes of eyestrain with displays different people seem to have.
    1: Small type/UI elements
    2: Glossy screens
    3: Flicker rate
    1:
    The higher pixel rate combined with the display set at the higher resolution is going to cause UI and type to be smaller and harder to see. In fact it's advised to set OS X to a lower resolouton so it upscales better to match the pixel of the higher display.
    Reports coming in say watching HD 1920 x 1080 trailers on the anti-glare 17" is best as the pixel content matches the display almost fullscreen, where on the MBP-R it's upscaled and thus looks blurry.
    HD content makers are NOT going to change all their video cameras to support 2880 x 1800 full screen, so in order to get a clearer image playing HD 1080 content, one will have to do so in a smaller window.
    2:
    The new MBP-R dispalys are 75% less glossy, but not 100% less glossy like the anti-glare models so this can still cause some people problems. This can be lowered to under 1%, however I'm suspecting to do so would be considered giving up a military advantage to China where Apple gets it products made.
    3:
    I don't know about the flicker rate if it's better or not on the MBP-R's than the previous screens.

  • Macbook pro retina color profile changes when switching from integrated to discrete

    Late 2013 macbook pro retina color profile changes when auto switching from integrated to discrete graphics card. Problem started after updating to 10.9.3

    Same here. Really annoying because I have my screen calibrated for photo editing, which makes it much warmer than the default color profile. A lot of websites cause the graphics cards to switch for a couple of seconds, which causes the profiles to switched back and forth a few times, everytime. Really annoying, and dissapointing to see, considering Apple released like a hundred .3 betas.
    You can use gfxCardStatus to make it stay on one graphics card over the other... Just remember to change it back when you're using a program that actually needs the descrete card.

  • How can I open Adobe Bridge CS6 in high resolution on my MacBook Pro Retina display?

    How can I open Adobe Bridge CS6 in high resolution on my MacBook Pro Retina display? When I click Get Info, the "Open in Low Resolution" box is marked and locked. How can I unmark this box? I currently run 10.9.1. I can open Adobe Photoshop CS6 in high resolution without any problem. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks.

    There is no such thing. In CS6 only PS itself is Retina compatible. You would have to use CC for full Retina support.
    Mylenium

  • I,m using macbook pro retina, I have changed the language to Arabic but still I find that password and downloading are coming in arabia

    I,m using macbook pro retina, I have changed the language from arabic to Endlish through system preference, but still I find that password and downloading are coming in arabia, when I start my computer it show password request in Arabic.

    http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4102

  • MacBook Pro retina 13" (late 2013, Haswell) why is the highest resolution rendered in 3360x2100, which the system obviously can't handle?!

    Hey Apple and Apple users,
    I just recently switched from an MacBook Air (mid 2013) to the new Haswell MacBook Pro retina 13" (late 2013 model).
    The main reason to do so was the better screen and the option to run higher scaled resolutions, as advertised.
    I was willing to trade in the Air's low weight, smaller formfactor and the extra batterylife for the better screen.
    When it comes to resolutions:
    1280x800 is just a joke nowadays, why is the MacBook Pro still based on it? 13" and 1440x900 work quite fine...see MacBook Air.
    1440x900 is okay in everyday life situations, but sometimes you just need "more space" as the third scaling option calls it as well in the display-settings.
    1680x1050 on 13" can sometimes be challenging, but it is really fine if you need to work and have a lot UI elements to deal with (Photoshop etc.)
    So 1680x1050 scaled on the 2560x1600 screen would be my daily driver for work. So I expected a scaling factor of "1.5238..." (2560/1680) will be used most of the time.
    Frankly spoken...I am really disappointed by the 13" retina MacBook Pro and the way OS X Mavericks is handling the scaling.
    It obiously works well and responsive with the 1280x800 non-scaling resolution ("best for retina, scaling factor 2: 1280 --> 2560).
    Is still "okay-snappy" at 1440x900 (scaling factor 1.777...: 1440 --> 2560).
    But it totally breaks down at 1680x1050 (scaling factor 1.523...: 1680 --> 2560).
    I use "Mission Control" all the time and it is stuttering and slow...overall a sluggish and unbearable experience.
    The same goes for Desktop-Switching by swiping the screens or resizing and moving windows and files around.
    So I was wondering why...and then I noticed that when taking a screenshot of my entire screen (CMD + 3) the image size of the screenshot was 3360x2100 and not the expected 2560x1600.
    This means Mavericks is not scaling the UI with the appropriate factor (see above). For retina MacBooks it ist simply rendering one pixel of the classic, non-retina Interface in now 4 pixels (2x2) and sending this straight to the screen, which then "scales" it down to the resolution it is able to display.
    Why is this bothering me? – Because the machine has to do a lot more work to render the higher resolution that can't even be displayed, due to the screens limitations.
    2560x1600 = 4096000 pixels = 100%
    3360x2100 = 7056000 pixels = 172%
    This means the MacBook has to render 72% more information than actually can be displayed on the built-in screen and are just lost.
    Of course this makes the overall UI feel sluggish and idly! Especially with the not that performant Intel Iris IGP and no dedicated graphics card.
    All this extra "rendering" just results in a worse battery life due to the extra work that the graphics card and CPU have to do.
    First, Apple...are you serious about this?
    What can we do about this?
    Is there a way to have this properly scaled?
    Thanks in advance to everyone.

    Okay...I thought deeply about this issue.
    Even looking into ways to maybe fixing this on the software side. But it occured to me that this is to deeply embedded into the system that it won't be possbile to come up with a sufficient third-party solution.taht
    The problem is that there is no intermediate step inbetween "standard DPI" graphics and "HiDPI" (image-resources named "[email protected]").
    But there should be one, to minimize the amount of image information that needs to be processed by the device.
    This effects especially the MacBook Pro retina 13", as it has the less powerful Intel Iris IGP, when performing on the highest scaled resolution (equivalent to 1650x1080).
    As well as the MacBook Pro retina 15" without a dedicated, second Graphics Unit,when performing on the highest possible scaled resolution (equivalent to 1920x1200).
    Those devices don't have enough resources to handle the consequential "HiDPI" resolutions of 3360x2100 for the 13" and 3840x2400 for the 15" model.
    (Comment: 3840x2400 = 9,2MP, which is more than the standard 4K resolution of 3840x2160.
    I analyzed the scaling factors as follows:
    Factor "2" to display 1280x800 on the 13" model and 1440x900 on the 15" model in HiDPI.
    Factor "1.777..." would be required to display 1440x900 on the 2560x1600 screen of the 13" model.
    Factor "1.714..." would be required to display 1650x1080 on the 2880x1800 screen of the 15" model.
    Factor "1.523..." would be required to display 1650x1080 on the 2560x1600 screen of the 13" model.
    Factor "1.5" would be required to display 1920x1200 on the 2800x1800 screen of the 15" model.
    As all the models seem to have no problem with rendering the intermediate scaling step (1440x900 for the 13" and 1680x1050 for the 15" model) at HiDPI, hence with the scaling factor 2. There is no real need to provide the UI-elements.
    But in my opinion there is a strong need for a "MidDPI" ([email protected]) intermediate step for all the UI graphic elements that wis based on the scaling factor 1.5.
    This would result in the following:
    13" MacBook Pro retina with 2560x1600 screen:
    1280x 800 @ 2x = 2560x1600 (no surplus, native screen resolution)
    1440x 900 @ 2x = 2880x1800 (the surplus of 1088000px = ~1MP can still be handled and compansated by the weak Iris IGP)
    1680x1050 @ 2x = 3360x2100 (the surplus of 2960000px = ~3MP is too much for the weak Iris IGP)
    NEW 1680x1050 @ 1.5x = 2520x1575 (with a small border of left=20px, bottom=13, right=20, top=12 pixels, which means ~2,2mm and ~1.3mm around the 1.5x scaled image!).
    15" MacBook Pro retina with 2880x1800 screen:
    1440x900 @ 2x = 2880x1800 (no surplus, native screen resolution)
    1680x1050 @ 2x = 3360x2100 (the surplus of 1872000px = ~2MP can still be handled by the Iris Pro IGP)
    1920x1200 @ 2x = 3840x2400 (the surplus of 4032000px = ~4MP can't be handled sufficiently by the Iris Pro IGP)
    NEW 1920x1200 @ 1.5x = 2800x1800 (nu surplus, native screen resolution, no border needed!)
    The big advantage is that all the graphics have already been remodeled for the HiDPI mode.
    So scaling those "factor 2x" images down to "factor 1.5x" should be comparably easy!
    Example:
    Left: Traditional "standard DPI" icon of "all my files".
    Right: "@2x.png" for the "HiDPI" modes.
    Middle: "@1.5x.png" suggestions for the "MidDPI" mode; easily scaled down from the lovely HiDPI graphics.
    With this simple introduction of the "MidDPI" modes a significant amount of processing power can be saved.
    This not only improves battery life when driving those higher scaled resolutions, but also lets the user access those resources for what really matters: processing power for the primary job that the Mac needs to get done.
    Thanks in advance.

  • HT5266 best resolution in windows 8.1 on macbook pro retina 15 ?

    Hi
    which resolution is the best in windows 8.1 on macbook pro retina 15 ? for software Like SolidWorks or the other? because the recommended resolution is good but some software like SoliWorks not optimized for retina resolution !!!
    Thanks

    Is your rMBP a dual-GPU model, or does it only have the Intel Iris GPU?

  • Whats the maximum resolution resolution supported @ 60 Hz on an external display for mid 2014 macbook pro retina 13 inch ?

    whats the maximum resolution supported @ 60 Hz on an external display for mid 2014 macbook pro retina 13 inch ?

    I don't know where you found 1920x1080, but that isn't the max. The INTERNAL display can even support more than that.
    The maximum resolution is really hardware based, and since Thunderbolt 2 has a Mini displayport connector (Mini Displayport 1.2), the max resolution for Mini Displayport is 4k (3840x2160).
    PLEASE NOTE: Not all adapters can support that resolution, most monitors that can run 4k @60Hz have Displayport 1.2 (The most recent revision), Mini Displayport 1.2, and HDMI 2.0. DVI dual link can run 4k, but only 24-30Hz, depending on the monitor.
    Hope this helps!!

  • Text keeps disappearing when I select it to make type at all / make changes / edit. Type tool is not working. I am running CS6 on a Macbook Pro Retina (which I am hating!) 10.9.4 - wish I'd never upgraded.

    Text keeps disappearing when I select it to make type at all / make changes / edit. Type tool is not working. I am running CS6 on a Macbook Pro Retina (which I am hating!) 10.9.4 - wish I'd never upgraded.
    Photoshop General Discussion

    The RAM needs specs as shown below.
    Maximum Memory
    16 GB (Actual) 8 GB (Apple)
    Memory Slots
    2 - 204-pin PC-10600 (1333 MHz) DDR3 SO-DIMM

  • Can the late 2013 Macbook Pro Retina 13" power 2 external Dell UltraSharp U2713HM monitors at full resolution?

    Hi, I'm looking at buying the current Macbook Pro Retina 13", but I'd like to use it with 2 Dell UltraSharp U2713HM monitors http://configure.euro.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=uk&cs=ukdhs1&kc=305&l=en& oc=U2713HM-Black&s=dhs&sbc=dell-u2713hm
    My plan was to use the the thunderbolt ports to the monitors DisplayPort plug. Can the 13" Macbook Pro drive 2 external screens @ 2560x1440 I'm happy to shut the macbook lid if necessary.
    If the 13" can't do it, can the 15" model with it's discrete graphics card?
    The Dell UltraSharp U2713HM – it’s everything you could want in a 27” monitor – screen brilliance, comfort and eco-consciousness all rolled into one
    27-inch (diagonal) VIS with LED backlight
    WQHD resolution, 2560 x 1440 at 60 Hz (Max)
    178°/178° ultra-wide viewing angle
    In-plane switching technology
    Customizable brightness from 50 to 350 cd/m²
    Factory calibrated color report
    More than 99% sRGB (deltaE < 5)
    DisplayPort 1.2, HDMI, DVI and VGA and USB 3.0 ports
    Pivot, tilt, swivel and height adjustable (115mm)
    Arsenic-free glass and mercury-free LED panel
    Why not the Apple Thunderbolt screen, well I prefer a non-reflective screen in the office, but If I can't do it with the Dell's can it be done with 2 27" Thunderbolt monitors from the 13" Macbook Pro?

    In a word, yes.
    The video out capabilities for the 13" and 15" retina MBPs are the same.
    Tech specs

  • HT1379 Help! can´t get 2560 resolution in dell 2711 on macbook pro retina late 2013, only 1920...

    can´t get 2560 resolution in dell 2711 on macbook pro retina late 2013, only 1920...i have the apple thunderbolt to dvi adapter and the dual dvi cable...
    thanks for any help

    http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/specs/macbook-pro-core-i7-2.3- 15-dual-graphics-late-2013-retina-display-specs.html
    says:
    Dual/Mirroring*
    2nd Max. Resolution:
    2560x1600 (x2*)
    Details:
    *This model supports a simultaneous maximum resolution up to 2560x1600 on two external displays via Thunderbolt. Alternately, it can support a single display up to 2560x1600 via Thunderbolt and a single 1080p display at up to 60 Hz, 3840x2160 at 30 Hz, or 4096x2160 at 24 Hz via HDMI. Also see: How many external displays can the Retina Display MacBook Pro models support? What is the maximum supported resolution of each? Are adapters required?

  • The plastic hinge between my screen and the computer (macbook pro retina) is cracked and doesn't hold the screen anymore? Can Apple change it?

    The hinge between my screen and my computer (macbook pro retina) has cracked and doesn't hold the screen anymore. Can I fix it without changing my screen. And if it's still on guarantee does Apple have to repair it?

    Apple can fix any and all of their computers.  Whether it would be charged to you would be the question.   Do you have AppleCare?
    Accidental damage is not covered by AppleCare.
    How old is this computer?

Maybe you are looking for