Easiest on my eyes?

[Ken Maltby]

Originally Posted by Synamon

The descriptors you are looking for are e-ink or tablet.

They are your eyes, use whatever is easiest for you.

E-Ink is not the only reflective display technology.

Luck;
Ken

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Matriarch

Angle has everything to do with it, and that simply isn't how light works; by your logic, you wouldn't be able to see things illuminated by a torch that's facing away from you. Light is a beam of energy. That beam hits whatever it's facing, and then is refracted away from that thing at a different angle. That much weaker refraction is what enables us to see where it's pointing. This is how light works - you can learn more about this here. So the screen of an e-ink reader catches the brunt of the light,and we only see the very weak refraction produced by the screen not absorbing all of the light - thus, eye fatigue is greatly reduced because we're seeing a "secondary" light ray and we're seeing it at a "lesser" angle.

I think the word you want is reflected - light hitting something and bouncing off as opposed to refracted - light passing through something and being bent (usually in another direction unless the same density as air)...

[Matriarch]

Originally Posted by elcreative

I think the word you want is reflected - light hitting something and bouncing off as opposed to refracted - light passing through something and being bent (usually in another direction unless the same density as air)...

My bad, yep, reflected.

[unkilbeeg]

Also note that another aspect of the 'LCD vs e-ink' controversy is flicker. Even reflective LCDs have the flicker issue.

LCDs flicker, and *that* is tiring to the eye. E-ink is static -- it stays exactly the same until it is changed. It doesn't have to be refreshed until the image itself has to change, typically at page turn.

The same is true of other dynamic screen technologies like OLED.

[wannabee]

Originally Posted by Blossom

. . . . . . Truthfully reading on the EInk for longs periods of times makes me drowsy. I don't know why . . . . .

The following may have a bearing on why you get drowsy Blossom.

I was asked by a naturopath, who wants a reader, to research the light emitted from them because blue light has a direct affect upon the melatonin levels in the body which affects circadian physiology, alertness, and cognitive performance levels.

Strangely, I found this study which points to the need to design a computer screen with a spectral profile that can be individually programmed to add timed, essential light information to the circadian system in humans.

I say strange because I found the study half hour after I downloaded a program for the Mac that modifies the computer screen with a spectral profile that can be individually programmed to add timed, essential light information to the circadian system in humans.

Anyway, I don't suppose anyone knows of a light emitting reader that can be programmed similarly, so night reading doesn't make you drowsy . . .heh!

[Russell Brooks]

I have a laptop and have read Kindle books on it. That hasn't hurt my eyes. PDF is more difficult to read on the laptop.

[NickyWithNook]

I personally find the e-ink to be much easier on the eyes.

[lioslaith]

For reading I much prefer the eInk screen to backlit screens of a tablet. For books anyway, for magazines or reading online content its the exact opposite.

[vans]

I took a relation to the Low Vision clinic at our local hospital and asked if they had a preference for e-ink over lcd. They said it was a personal to the individual. I asked if an Ipad screen would damage a persons eyes and they said no.

[wannabee]

Originally Posted by vans

I took a relation to the Low Vision clinic at our local hospital and asked if they had a preference for e-ink over lcd. They said it was a personal to the individual. I asked if an Ipad screen would damage a persons eyes and they said no.

I don't think that's right vans. I have it on good authority that iPads can impare 50% of your vision with only one use.

Spoiler:

Oh GROAN . . . Sorry.

[MrDoug]

Originally Posted by wannabee

I don't think that's right vans. I have it on good authority that iPads can impare 50% of your vision with only one use.

Spoiler:

Oh GROAN . . . Sorry.

That Pic looks like me now..

[drofgnal]

I've had CSR in the past (retina condition). When I had it I found my ipad much easier to read. In fact, it's why I bought and ipad. I had gotten to the point my K2 was hard to read. Now that the condition is cleared, I've gone to a K4 and hardly use the ipad for reading anymore.

[vans]

Originally Posted by wannabee

I don't think that's right vans. I have it on good authority that iPads can impare 50% of your vision with only one use.

Spoiler:

Oh GROAN . . . Sorry.

I was just repeating what I was told by the Low Vision Clinic.

Can you share the source of your infomation on iPads imaparing vision?

[Fluribus]

Originally Posted by vans

I was just repeating what I was told by the Low Vision Clinic.

Can you share the source of your infomation on iPads imaparing vision?

Whenever I see people with iPads, I poke them in the eye with a sharp stick. Perhaps wannabee has seen me do it.

[wannabee]

Originally Posted by vans

I was just repeating what I was told by the Low Vision Clinic.

Can you share the source of your infomation on iPads imaparing vision?

Vans, a study was done under strict guidelines to determin the eye damage of various devices. Pictured here is a participant undergoing preparation for the iPad study.



message sent from my iPad