Quote:
Originally Posted by moz
Personally, 300 ppi at 16 gray levels would be fine for me. I'd rather see more contrast (and contrast control) than more pixels once we get to 300dpi. One thing is that there's almost certainly s a tradeoff there - more pixels means more dead space compared to pixels, so the effective contrast will drop. LCD displays and digital camera sensors have this problem, for instance.
|
OFFTOPIC: While I don't know about LCDs, the issue with Digital sensors isn't so much to do with dead space as it is shinking photosites. The smaller these are, generally the weaker their signal and the more amplification is needed. This in turn leads to more noise in the picture, which manufacturers often try to compensate for by lowering the effective dynamic range.
ON TOPIC: According to the link this screen also has a contrast ratio of 10:1. If correct, this would actually be an improvement over the current screens, which are only 7:1.
Quote:
Originally Posted by awi
I never understand why an ereader should have facing pages to stick to the "old" book idea.
One of the main benefits of a "one faced" ereader is the ability to hold it comfortable in one hand.
|
Well, there are certain circumstances where having two screens side-by-side might be beneficial. Such replicating the effect where a magazine, comic, or textbook has content stretched out across both pages, or perhaps when you need to to have two different books open at the same time.
On the other hand I agree that just having one screen is convenient in its own right.