Innovative solution for e-Ink screen lighting

[howyoudoin]

I'd hate to read on anything but white/gray/sepia though. I like the idea of a white light layer.

[NightGeometry]

Surely the flex light would be no help. It is lighting *above* the text. WOuldn't you want the light below the text, so that the dark areas block some light (and hence the problem with white/black eink).

I guess this is adding reflective light, so should work that way it just seems... wrong. (But i'm no lighting engineer)

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by Rob Lister

I have a much simpler solution to the back-lit ebook conundrum. Simply add a thin layer of radium to the underside of the screen. This would accommodate reading in pitch dark.

I'd personally implement this idea but but wacko-environmentalists, meanie-greenies, the NRC, FDA, and probably even Underwriter's Labs would all gang up on me. PETA would probably be okay with it though.

Isn't the radium paranoia pretty much a North American phobia?
Maybe we could smuggle some in from Europe or Asia for personal use if they were to be made.

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Originally Posted by carpetmojo

Rather b & w ?


Well, yes, providing it doesn't pack up.

Or blind you with it's effulgence.

Some people may buy ereaders because they're trendy. But that is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is this: on an objective level, does this piece of technology solve a problem? Ereaders definitely do. They solve many problems. I got one because it solves a problem that exists between reading how I want to, and my lifestyle.

The "task" may be more than simply "reading" in the abstract. It may be accommodating how much you read, how fast, and over a given period of time. This may require several books. Or just one ereader. Thus, the ereader solves problems by requiring fewer parts, less space, less weight, etc. Or, it may be "reading with very bad eyes," in which case an ereader with adjustable font size is the clear winner over a paper book, and again, it solves a problem.

There is no technological solution that is ever perfect. Its predesessor always has some "pros" to its name - usually having to do with stability and familiarity. New technologies will always be flawed. But the main question is, "does it solve a problem?" In the case of a lighted layer, yes, it does.

I'd much rather have an embedded layer in my ereader that can light the screen than an external doohickey. It's less stuff to deal with. That is, provided that I can turn it off at will and that it doesn't negatively impact the daytime reading experience.

[carpetmojo]

Which was really my point - what may be perfect for some people ain't for others !

Similarly, the physical book solves a problem for some people, or indeed, some occasions.

It was the "better", full stop, I felt was rather sweeping, to say the least...

[vxf]

My worry with this would be - wouldn't this have the same impact on eyes as reading on something backlit? Like an LCD? I enjoy reading on my eink devices much better than on my iPad - simply stated, my eyes don't seem to tire as much.

If I have to get the eye-strain, then I don't see a point in using eink.

I do use a cover with light on both my PRS350 and PRS950. But that light is reflected and it doesn't seem to bother me as much.

I guess I would have to try this before expressing an opinion. Seems like a neat idea.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by NightGeometry

Surely the flex light would be no help. It is lighting *above* the text. WOuldn't you want the light below the text, so that the dark areas block some light (and hence the problem with white/black eink).

I guess this is adding reflective light, so should work that way it just seems... wrong. (But i'm no lighting engineer)

One of the whole points about e-ink is reflective viewing - it doesn't shine a light in your eyes so putting a light at the back for the dark letters to obscure... means the rest is shining a light in your eyes... just like an LCD...

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Originally Posted by carpetmojo

Which was really my point - what may be perfect for some people ain't for others !

Similarly, the physical book solves a problem for some people, or indeed, some occasions.

It was the "better", full stop, I felt was rather sweeping, to say the least...

Well, whether it's better and whether you want it are two different things.

I don't care about color eink. But that doesn't mean it isn't better than monochrome-only.

The way I use my ereader, I doubt it will make much difference to me whether my device has color or not. But if I don't want it then I simply won't use it. It's not like it would be a bad thing if my ereader had color. And there are people who would benefit from color, with the way they use their ereaders. It is solving a problem - even if it's not a problem I personally have.

So, regardless of whether or not I want it or would use it, it's still better.

[SmokeAndMirrors]

Originally Posted by vxf

My worry with this would be - wouldn't this have the same impact on eyes as reading on something backlit? Like an LCD? I enjoy reading on my eink devices much better than on my iPad - simply stated, my eyes don't seem to tire as much.

If I have to get the eye-strain, then I don't see a point in using eink.

I do use a cover with light on both my PRS350 and PRS950. But that light is reflected and it doesn't seem to bother me as much.

I guess I would have to try this before expressing an opinion. Seems like a neat idea.

I obviously don't know the for-sure answer to this, but it doesn't appear that this would be a problem. The layer goes over the eink layer, from what I saw. So it isn't necessarily "back-lit." It also describes the light as a "glow."

I don't know how it would look in reality. And of course, that's the only true test. But it appears that this is something that could be worked around.

Originally Posted by NightGeometry

Surely the flex light would be no help. It is lighting *above* the text. Wouldn't you want the light below the text, so that the dark areas block some light (and hence the problem with white/black eink).

If eink is opaque, then you would have to use a light above the text. (LCD panels are transparent, which is why backlighting is possible.) I'm fairly certain that the flexlight idea was used on LCD screens in the olden days, so it is actually a proven idea. If I recall correctly, modern LCDs use backlights since it improves the contrast, and improved contrast is needed in bright environments. But the flexlight is only needed in low light conditions, since eink is reflective enough for bright environments, so that is not going to be an issue.

Originally Posted by l_macd

If you need a light to read an ereader, you probably need it to read a book.

Actually, I find that ereaders are better in low light conditions. Jacking up the font size makes the text incredibly easy to read in low light conditions. I'm not sure why, but it does!

Maybe the story would be different if I read more stuff printed on bright white paper, but reading textbooks ain't exactly my definition of recreational reading.

[hardgainer]

i wouldn't mind to get it for my Kindle 4 . That what would make Kindle the best in the whole world

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by vxf

My worry with this would be - wouldn't this have the same impact on eyes as reading on something backlit? Like an LCD? I enjoy reading on my eink devices much better than on my iPad - simply stated, my eyes don't seem to tire as much.

If I have to get the eye-strain, then I don't see a point in using eink.

I do use a cover with light on both my PRS350 and PRS950. But that light is reflected and it doesn't seem to bother me as much.

I guess I would have to try this before expressing an opinion. Seems like a neat idea.

A photon is a photon. Your eye doesn't "care" whether it's emitted by the screen, or reflected from it. A light-emitting screen which emits the same level of light as the ambient light-level of the room, is absolutely indistinguishable from a screen which operates via reflected light, as far as your eye is concerned. Anyone who claims otherwise really has no understanding of elementary physics .

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by HarryT

A photon is a photon. Your eye doesn't "care" whether it's emitted by the screen, or reflected from it. A light-emitting screen which emits the same level of light as the ambient light-level of the room, is absolutely indistinguishable from a screen which operates via reflected light, as far as your eye is concerned. Anyone who claims otherwise really has no understanding of elementary physics .

True but they do care about the intensity and contrast involved... or perhaps I and others imagine our incapacitating migraine attacks when using an a backlit LCD for a bit too long but never get similar effects from e-ink over equal or longer periods of time... a photon is a photon (but they can vary in energy according to position in spectrum, if you really want to be picky) but 10 photons is more light than one photon... also basic physics and LCD screens do not usually operate at ambient light levels unlike e-ink which, by default, uses ambient light reflectively... that's the difference between them not source of photons and those who have problems/preferences do appreciate this...

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by elcreative

True but they do care about the intensity and contrast involved... or perhaps I and others imagine our incapacitating migraine attacks when using an a backlit LCD for a bit too long but never get similar effects from e-ink over equal or longer periods of time... a photon is a photon (but they can vary in energy according to position in spectrum, if you really want to be picky) but 10 photons is more light than one photon... also basic physics and LCD screens do not usually operate at ambient light levels unlike e-ink which, by default, uses ambient light reflectively... that's the difference between them not source of photons and those who have problems/preferences do appreciate this...

I completely agree - that's why I specifically said "at the same level as the ambient light in the room". The problem is that many LCD devices either don't allow you to adjust the brightness, or else the user sets the brightness too high. If you set the brightness correctly, there really is no physical difference between the LCD and the eInk screen as far as your eye is concerned.