How to read comfortably on a tablet

[Lemurion]

It always drives me nuts whenever someone claims the way to read on LCD is light text on a dark screen. It may work for them, but not for me. I prefer dark text on a sepia background.

As for LCD vs EInk, I generally read novels on either my Kindle or my Galaxy Note, and comics on either my Nook HD+ or Galaxy Note. I rarely read novels on the Nook, not because of the screen, but because I find it unwieldy. I prefer a smaller device for fiction, and a larger one for comics or game rules PDFs. Beyond that, I can read on either.

I do find EInk better for long periods of sustained reading, but it's not just the display technology, it's the whole package. It's a single purpose device so I'm less likely to be distracted by notifications, and I don't have to worry about battery life.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by ApK

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.

The implication that some of us are settling for "well enough" is a little insulting (and getting quite old). I can assure you that I personally find the LCD display on my tablet to be superior to eink. I enjoy the reading experience on it more. In fact, the number of books I read has increased (as has the time spent reading) since I switched from eink to a tablet. I switched because it does what I need it to do better, not out of convenience or "settling." I'm not a "settler." I enjoy reading enough that I never would have switched from a "superior" technology to one that "works well enough" just for reasons of convenience, or for any idealistic principle(s). Nor am I looking to combine devices. My daily life doesn't involve carrying any devices around, so I've no need to consolidate.

Eink's "superiority" is based entirely on preferential criteria and not inherent to the technology itself. That's the only point I've ever tried to get across. I have no problem with people having/declaring preferences; only with people assigning preferences more meaning than they really have.

Eink and backlit LCD are equally "right for the job (depending on personal needs/wants)." Why can't we leave it at that?

[cvkemp]

Come on everyone lets just say what works for you/me is just fine with the rest of us and leave it at that.

[copyrite]

Originally Posted by Blossom

I sure do! If you turn the brightness down enough it can look just like a real book.

You can't tell it's backlit except for the glass screen when reading.

I like your background! Is that stock or your own creation?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The implication that some of us are settling for "well enough" is a little insulting (and getting quite old). I can assure you that I personally find the LCD display on my tablet to be superior to eink.

I certainly didn't mean any insult, and don't see that it was insulting. *

Didn't you yourself say just a few posts ago that you wished your LCD screens were readable in bright sunlight, like eink?
Are you saying it's insulting to suggest you want better, or that a specialty device IS better for that specific intended purpose? I don't.

ApK

*[IAM]Hitler![/IAM]

[ApK]

Originally Posted by cvkemp

Come on everyone lets just say what works for you/me is just fine with the rest of us and leave it at that.

Problem is, every-time someone on the eink side states their preference in any way that suggests some other folks might agree because because of some intrinsic property, the other side implies we must be delusional, imagining things, or that we don't know know how to adjust our devices.
So we feel the need to defend the FACT that we (not everybody) are physically more comfortable reading on eink then on other types of current display tech.

[leebase]

Setting a good/preferable color combination depends on the light. As you can see from the photo attached to the first post - my "afternoon going into evening" light I meet with a nice hunter green with a peach text. (Have no idea what the real color names are).

Laying in bed in a completely dark room I go black background with dark grey text. I don't want much light, and I don't want much contrast. It's the most comfortable reading I've ever had....especially for my wife who gets to sleep without me having the light on in the room.

Yes, I'd say it's a bit fiddly to find ones sweet spot. Far easier for me, though, than having to find a lamp that will light my favorite spots to read in just the right way. Personal preference, of course

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by ApK

Didn't you yourself say just a few posts ago that you wished your LCD screens were readable in bright sunlight, like eink?

No. I said nothing of the sort. I said I would recommend eink to anyone who indicated that reading in bright sunlight was a priority of theirs. I also said that readibility in sunlight and battery-life were the only two things that could concievably be considered objective and inherent advantages that eink had over LCD. But they're only advantages if one actually values reading in direct sunlight, or considers charging their device to be a "hassle."

[Cinisajoy]

Hey folks,
Might I remind us all of one little thing. The fact that we are discussing the "best" way to read means that we can read. We should consider ourselves very lucky because one we can read which is more than 50% of the world population can do. 2 we are fortunate enough to have easy access to reading material.

Just a little food for thought.

[cvkemp]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

Hey folks,
Might I remind us all of one little thing. The fact that we are discussing the "best" way to read means that we can read. We should consider ourselves very lucky because one we can read which is more than 50% of the world population can do. 2 we are fortunate enough to have easy access to reading material.

Just a little food for thought.

I agree with you so much.

But there seems to be something now days that seems to go a long with the ME generation that says that if I do it this way everyone has to follow me. No one seems to except that we are all individuals and the all have our own ways of doing so.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

No. I said nothing of the sort.

Oh, frick, that was Katsunami. Sorry, I confuse you guys all the time.....

Yeah, we can all read, that's great, but it's a little sad that clicking the page back button is apparently too much research effort for me.....

[leebase]

Originally Posted by silverraven

That looks great!
Will this work on the $50 Kindle Fire? And if so, will you enlighten us as to how exactly? For all of us tablet n00bies. Even with the light turned down as far as it will go it is still bright for my eyes. I'm sure I'm just missing something.
Thanks!
S

I searched fort screen dim in Amazon's app store and there were several. Tried Dimly and kt works great

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by ApK

Oh, frick, that was Katsunami. Sorry, I confuse you guys all the time...

I'm the green one.

[AnotherCat]

Originally Posted by ApK

...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?...

You are not a physicist are you (that's a statement not a question) else you would know better. You should, perhaps though, know better than to risk the possibility of getting into an argument from a position of little knowledge with a physicist.

Photons are indeed photons and they only differ among themselves in their energy and propagation direction (both being the components of their wave vector). Using your claims, which I can only interpret as meaning that there are different sorts of photons because their wave vectors differ according to their energy (you start talking about high energy microwave and gamma rays) and direction, it seems that you believe that when you start running (and so increase your kinetic energy) you change into a different person or when you change direction (and so change your propagation direction), both of which change your wave vector, you become a different person.

You may live under such delusions that you can morph into a different personthrough such actions but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that your physics is bad. I am also quite confident that when you start mixing up comparisons of gamma rays, microwaves, etc. into your arguments about a subject concerned only with visible light most will see your absurdity.

I, as have others, have said that the choice of display is personal (which for the sake of clarity means some may like the appearance of one display type over another, or that the simplicity of E Ink due to its low flexibility of display is attractive), but that does not change the physics of what is happening.

This is getting off topic so apart from adding that I am amazed by the irrational non scientific gymnastics you are prepared to go through to defend E Ink and to try to prove that photons are not photons, I will leave it at that.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by AnotherCat

which I can only interpret as meaning that there are different sorts of photons because their wave vectors differ according to their energy (you start talking about high energy microwave and gamma rays) and direction,

You should have interpreted it to mean "there are differences among photons." Difference enough to make the comment "photons are photons" utterly irrelevant when talking about lighting an object for viewing. That they may all be the same kind of particle or wave or field or whatever they actually are in some context is, again, irelevent to this discussion.

Originally Posted by AnotherCat

This is getting off topic so apart from adding that I am amazed by the irrational non scientific gymnastics you are prepared to go through to defend E Ink and to try to prove that photons are not photons, I will leave it at that.

I actually did check into the physics before I posted about that level, just to make sure there was discussion of differences in the literature, and indeed, photons can apparently be "distinguishable" for various purposes at that level. For example, if all photons were the same, there would no reason to specify "indistingushable" in experiments like:
http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract...ett.104.123605

But any how, I believe I made the point that that was not the practical level involved here. As the analogy with atomic particles was meant to illustrate, it's what you're doing with them that matters: quantity, direction, source, spectrum, etc. As a photographer, I don't need to address photons on the quantum level to manipulate the effect they have on what we see, and how it makes our eyes and brains feel.

Upshot: "photons are photons" is an utterly meaningless comment in this conversation.