Quote:
Originally Posted by LucidDreams
That makes sense, I just assumed that the pixel resolution and display density were tied together. Meaning if you increase the density of the pixel resolution (pixels per inch) that you would also do the same for the display (balls that make up the pixels). Thanks for clarifying.
|
Take a look at
this image on Wikipedia. You can tell what an individual "pixel" is supposed to be by the jagged blocks around the outline of the eye-- and you can see that the individual capsules are much smaller-- maybe a couple of dozen or so of them inside each "pixel." And note that the "pixels" aren't sharply defined but have diffuse edges-- that's because there are no physical dividers inside the display fluid making individual cells, so the end of a "pixel" is defined by the electrical field gradually no longer being strong enough to "flip" the capsules further away from the transistor. So the "pixels" aren't really like pixels and actually look more like dots of pigment from an inkjet printer diffusing a short distance through the fibers of the paper that it is splashed down on.
Edited to add: I just isolated a single "pixel" on that image by letting two of the sides of the black pixels count as two sides of a square white pixel (where it is much easier to see the individual capsules) and it looks like the pixel is very roughly 10 capsules wide, so around 100 capsules per pixel. So it seems to me that there should be lots of room for increased resolution with current capsule sizes. One capsule per pixel doesn't seem realistic, but 10 per pixel doesn't sound unreasonable. (This test image is the 166 dpi 6 inch display, not the 200 dpi 5 inch display) If you could make a pixel around 3x3 capsules instead of around 10x10, that would mean you could produce a display with a resolution of 500 dpi without changing the size of the individual capsules.