Quote:
Originally Posted by AnotherCat
It is also perhaps worth pointing out that AMOLED displays are not backlit; backlighting seeming to be a deficiency compared to E Ink in the minds of some; however, as has been pointed out, photons are photons, whether reflected or emitted.
|
AMOLED is awesome, and while it's technically not "backlit" (it's "self-lit") it still producing it's own direct light of a quality totally different than that what you get reflected back to your eye off a physical page, or opaque eink display.
And, I'm sorry, that "photons is photons" line is utter nonsense on every level from quantum field theory up to the more practical.
You might as well says protons electrons and neutrons are all protons electrons and neutrons, so breathing oxygen is no different than breathing plutonium.
But there's really no need for analogy to make the nonsense plain to see: Gamma rays are different than microwaves are different than violet light are different than red light, and they are all made of photons.
And even in light of the same frequency (or frequency mix--white light from the sun has very different effects on people's eyes and brains than does white light from florescent office lights.) the way those photon mix, interact, scatter, reflect, the direction they hit and off of what material or surface all effect how are eyes and brains perceive them, A photograph take with a harsh flash looks very different than when that same photo is taken with a softbox in front of the flash, even if the "total number of photons" is the same.
So can we please stop that nonsense?
Or do you think a print of El Captain by Ansel Adams is indistinguishable from every vacation snapshot captured on a tourist's iPhone and posted to instagram?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blossom
You can't tell it's backlit except for the glass screen when reading.
|
That's a gorgeous background, but that glossy glass screen is hard to ignore when reading every line, every word, and I'm sure that's a factor, perhaps as much as is the emitted light quality. Reading that page on my phone, I was distracted my all the reflections in the glass.
Something might look hyper-realistic in a photo or video, when you site staring it for hours at 20" away or what ever, you see the differences, and they may or may not be pleasant to the experience.
The same screen that makes videos and photos pop gorgeously and make a windows on another world does not necessary make the best reading surface, which maybe why most book paper is matte, not super glossy.
Oddly, for me, that deep "blacker than black" ultra sharp text on my AMOLED screen looks...wrong. Perhaps it's the same way that ultra high def video productions sometimes look wrong to people used to grainy 35mm movies, Maybe I'd eventually get used to it, or even prefer it, but I'm content to enjoying the life-long familiarity of what text on a page should like, which is what a good eink device gives me.
For the record, I prefer my K3 in good room light, daylight, or with a good book light over my PaperWhite, as well. The quality of light is important.
I hope there will eventually be a display technology that does it all as well as specialized displays currently do their tasks.
But there isn't currently, even if some people find theirs do it all well enough.