Color No future for this device

[Valentinka]

Originally Posted by mod186k1

Ok, I'm not American I ignore what "average" light is. Could you describe me the type of light? For example: "incandescent tungsten 60Watt white no-trasparent" or "halogen 200Watt" or "fluorescent energy-saving light 20Watt white" or "ultra energy-saving led light 8Watt", etc... ?

mod186k1,

You know I even don't want to take my time and read all these characteristics in all my lamps. Because I believe that $500 eInk Reader should be COMFORTABLY readable IN MOST OF light conditions indoor and outdoor (like my $199 Kindle DXG and my $88 Sony T1 are). JBC is not acceptable device for me for COMFORTABLE reading both indoor and outdoor.
And once again - I am not going to invest our money in changing our house's light conditions since all our family members are completely satisfied with our light in terms of our everyday tasks.

[mod186k1]

Yeah I know. I don't suggest you to change light. I am only curious.

[ProDigit]

Originally Posted by mod186k1

30cm is the minimum distance for a good vision on Triton to see an homogeneous colors. 40cm Is evne better!

Distance is entirely dependent on the device.
When you're studying in school, books are about 30cm away from your eyes when on the school benches.

When the device is small, and the letters are small, there's no other option than to read close by. As long as you don't stare multiple hours to the same distance, but regularly shift between distances, the eyes will never grow accustomed to the closer/further than optimal distance, and no damage is done.

Occasionally to get the eyes fixed on a 30cm distance, 40CM for the Jetbook is indeed the optimal distance.


Just as long as you have multiple book sizes or devices or monitors, say a 5" e-ink reader, a Jetbook Color, a 24" monitor, and you read evenly on those (holding the jetbook closer to you than the monitor, while further away than the 5" e-reader or a book),your eye will adapt and not become stagnant.

It may be difficult in the beginning, especially if you already are wearing glasses, but it's important to LEARN to read from distances that are just a tad outside of your comfort zone!
Many people could RE-TRAIN their eyes, and some might even entirely get rid of their glasses!

I've applied these principles, and they have helped me avoid glasses; and I DO read a lot!

[ProDigit]

I find the screen acceptable with a 1W LED light, 3-5W Halogen, or 15-20W incandescent spot light; or a 2W LED, 40W incandescent, or 12W Halogen bulb I can read it comfortably.

Recommended light is office light or brighter, which is just like with a book.

[mod186k1]

And what the standard/average american light is?

[ProDigit]

For an average room, 60-100W incandescent; upto 250W incandescent if it's a larger livingspace.

[mod186k1]

Originally Posted by ProDigit

For an average room, 60-100W incandescent; upto 250W incandescent if it's a larger livingspace.

Thank you, opaque or transparent glass?

Anyway I find 60W opaque incandescent is good if you use as desk lamp else one should have an 100W trasparent (incandescent).

[parkher]

Distance:

The shorter the distance the more strain to the eye muscles.
That's why I think less than 40 cm is bad.
Even when reading printed books.
It is possible to comfortably read books (including ebooks on a 6" device) from 40-50 cm distance, even when using rather small fonts: 20-21 points. The range of font sizes in the printed books I have (mostly American paperbacks) is 19-25 points although I've seen even larger sizes.
I would not go below 19 points, if you need smaller fonts, the screen is too small. Throw away that device.
(I'm not sure if the size in points is absolute enough, I compared Amasis font on T1 with various printed books. Also DejaVu on PB902 looks the same size)

The minimal distance imposed by the color sub-pixels on JBC is a different matter.

Lighting:

I suggest having excessive lighting with the possibility to reduce it.
I have 5 x 4 W 400 lm LED lights (so, 20W 2000 lm) from a rather close range (about 1 meter).
It is equivalent to (almost) a 150W incandescent @ 220V.

So, when you increase the strength of the lighting the screen looks whiter and whiter.
But at some point it begins to hurt the eyes like a LCD - it feels like it is emitting the light itself. So then you reduce the light (or direct it partially away) until it is perfectly comfortable to read.
Furthermore, it is a good thing to choose the color (temperature) of the light, if possible, in such a way that the screen looks really white or just a bit yellowish like a real paper, to get rid of the blueish-greenish tint.
Then you have the whitest screen possible.
I think at home you should always have dedicated lighting for reading, you always should have perfect lighting conditions. Even if you read only printed books.

I realize that if JBC is used for textbooks at schools, then you don't have control over the lighting conditions.

So there are two questions about JBC:
- is it good enough under perfect lighting conditions?
- is it good enough to be used in schools.

[ProDigit]

Whether or you have dedicated lighting or not makes very little difference! Just as long as you have enough lighting!
Most schools have office-like lighting, so they will be good places to use the JBC.
As far as 150W is A LOT for a dedicated light! No wonder your eyes get burned!
I can do easily with 1/5th to 1/7th of that!

One of the things also is that the JBC has a white border. having too bright light while reading, may make the border too bright. Brighter reading is only good if you can color the border to a darker color (and make it matte).

[parkher]

Originally Posted by ProDigit

No wonder your eyes get burned!

No, they don't.
As I wrote, you need to reduce the light until it is perfectly comfortable for reading.
Certainly, all five focused on the screen is too much.
Both too much and not enough light puts a strain on the eyes.

On my T1, I am using gray adhesive tape to fix the issue with reflective borders.
Or a Tuff-Luv cover which fully covers the borders.
.

[Valentinka]

Ok. My last set of pictures that I promised to lorenzoens. I took these JBC's pictures with as bright direct sunlight as possible in our geographical area at this time of the year. It is the middle of the day, the sun is in its highest position on the sky.
Pictures 1-3 of JBC were taken INDOOR together with iPad 2 to get the idea how the colors look on the brightest possible NATURAL light INDOOR in our place (since Ipad 2 looks bad with the sunshine outdoor).
Pictures 4-8 of JBC and DXG were taken OUTDOOR under DIRECT SUNLIGHT with as bright direct sunlight as possible in our geographical area at this time of the year
Pictures 9-10 of JBC and DXG were taken with exactly the same light conditions as pictures 4-8 + SUNGLASSES WITH DARK GREY LENSES, since in these conditions in order to read outdoor I HAVE TO use my sunglasses. These kind of direct sunlight is just TOO BRIGHT for my eyes and makes my eyes feel discomfortable (even if I read paper book).

Page 6 of the file from lorenzoens is displayed on all these pictures.

EDIT: I have trouble uploading pictures 5-10. I will try again.

[Valentinka]

Pictures 5-10. Description - above.

[mod186k1]

So, you say the JBC in direct sunlight was so bright that it burns your eyes and so you have to dress sunlight even to read paper and Kindle.

I too read sometime paper (especially when pages have white background) with sunglasses when I am on beach, for example.

But paper has a far more reflective surface that Triton eink. So I have no trouble in reading JBC with direct sunlight because it has in reality a filter over it.

It is very strange that you said so because your photo seems to confirm my experience:

[mod186k1]

Originally Posted by Valentinka

Edit: mod186k1, why do you think my pictures are not as objective as thet could be? All I am doing - is taking the pictures of JBC (and my other devices) with good quality camera in different light conditions. I am not making any modifications to these pictures (Photoshop and etc).

No Valentinka, I wasn't talking about your photo, but about the speed factor.

I have done a video to show the speed of Graphic Calculator:

[ignacio ferrer]

Originally Posted by mod186k1

No Valentinka, I wasn't talking about your photo, but about the speed factor.

I have done a video to show the speed of Graphic Calculator:

THX for your effort.
Unless you have noticed: something is pretty funny as far as some postings are concerned ...