Kobo v Paperwhite for readability; and which model of Kobo to go for

[rashkae]

Originally Posted by Quoth

No, because the Libra Colour replaces the superior Libra2, if you are reading regular novels.

I've had/have 167, 150, 227 dpi and approximately 267dpi (Original H2O). The original H2O is nearly as good as a 300 dpi screen. The 167 (older Kindle Basic) and 150 dpi are really a lot poorer, especially on nicer smaller fonts.

Are you implying here that the Libra Colour B&W font redering is closer to 167 and 150 dpi devices than a Libra 2? Because, brother, that is not only wrong, it's outright delusional.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by rashkae

Are you implying here that the Libra Colour B&W font redering is closer to 167 and 150 dpi devices than a Libra 2? Because, brother, that is not only wrong, it's outright delusional.

No, but it's not 300 dpi mono without artefacts.
There is a setting to make mono rendering be 150 dpi, to avoid certain repeating pixel details causing a rainbow (coloured diagonals) effect.

LCDs and OLED (only with stripes, not patterns) can have subpixel addressing to slightly improve text. It's better off at about 140 dpi and higher, and the screens with 2 x 2 square pixels instead of 3:1 stripes and 1/3rd width are more prone to artefacts.

It's delusional to claim a 300 dpi mono panel with coloured dots printed roughly in the middle of each pixel (not covering it so as to brighten it and enhance 300 dpi mono content) in a 2 x 2 pattern is the same resolution as a 300 dpi panle without the coloured dots.

So it's better than a pure mono 150dpi but poorer than a pure mono 300 dpi. For 300 dpi mono content the quality and artefacts vary with content. The quality is only constant with minimal artefacts (possibly none other than "screen door" effect if the mono is rendered at 150 dpi.

It's delusional not to accept that for mono 300 dpi content that the Libra Colour isn't poorer than either model of mono Libra, especially with front light off and serif fonts designed for paper.

The Libra Colour is a backward step for reading actual novels. The 6″ screen is also too small for most 100% colour content. For novels you are sacrificing quality for 4 hours of reading a novel to see the cover briefly in colour.

My £229 14.25″ Nxtpaper 3.0 arrived this afternoon, but I'll keep the 10.9″ Nxtpaper 2.0 also.

I'll continue to read regular novels on my Libra or Sage.

[rashkae]

Originally Posted by Quoth

It's delusional not to accept that for mono 300 dpi content that the Libra Colour isn't poorer than either model of mono Libra, especially with front light off and serif fonts designed for paper.

We''ll just have to disagree. I speak as someone who switched form a Libra 2 to a Libra Colour, and have over 300 hours of novel reading time on it. It wasn't a step back at all. I would even say, Libra Colour is Better than Forma.. (I did notice the improvement between Carta 800 and Carta 1200, and that same bolder black is still apparent on the Colour.)


Edit: Sorry, I wrote Sage, but meant Forma

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by rashkae

We''ll just have to disagree. I speak as someone who switched form a Libra 2 to a Libra Colour, and have over 300 hours of novel reading time on it. It wasn't a step back at all. I would even say, Libra Colour is Better than Forma.. (I did notice the improvement between Carta 800 and Carta 1200, and that same bolder black is still apparent on the Colour.)

That's fine if you are happy with it.

However the physics is incontrovertible for mono text and images. It's impossible for the Libra Colour to match the quality of any Carta 300 dpi screen with mono. Especially with the front light off.

[jackie_w]

Originally Posted by Quoth

That is a useless comparison.

Thank you for your kind, considered opinion, I will treasure it always.

Originally Posted by Quoth

The valid comparison is in ambient light good enough to read a non-POD paperback or any Carta variant eink screen with front light off.

Who died and voted you chief arbiter of what's valid? It's November, it gets dark early in these parts. My photo was a simple attempt to show a realistic side-by-side comparison of the screens of 2 similar devices under the *actual* conditions in which I *actually* read at this time of year. I don't care what any reader looks like with the light off because I won't be using it that way. Nor do I care what a frontlight set to max blue looks like in the evening.

Those who prefer different reading conditions are encouraged to post their own comparisons. They'll probably be more valuable to those trying to make an honest decision than the same old science dogmatic rhetoric being spouted endlessly and repetitively.

What a stroke of luck that the only people who like coloured eink devices are those who own them! I expect we'll like new, improved models even better. It's great being allowed to spend your own money on whatever you want, whenever you want, without needing the approval of self-appointed "experts".

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by jackie_w

What a stroke of luck that the only people who like coloured eink devices are those who own them! I expect we'll like new, improved models even better. It's great being allowed to spend your own money on whatever you want, whenever you want, without needing the approval of self-appointed "experts".

Confirmation bias!

And people can spend their money as they want. Don't expect me to spend my money on something that would be inferior by any scientific basis, because you and some other people like the Libra Colour.

[rashkae]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Confirmation bias!

And people can spend their money as they want. Don't expect me to spend my money on something that would be inferior by any scientific basis, because you and some other people like the Libra Colour.

No one is expecting you to... You prefer to read without the light, (despite the clear advantage frontlight has provided to *any* e-ink screen in almost all lighting conditions.) and that's a perfectly valid preference. The colour screens will simply not accommodate you, that's never been secret. What is annoying is your constantly bolstering of this preference with streams of made up 'facts' as though your preference should be anathema to everyone and not just a small minority.

[cellaris]

Originally Posted by Quoth

For novels you are sacrificing quality for 4 hours of reading a novel to see the cover briefly in colour.

Fortunately I am a slow reader, I can spend 12 hours reading a book. This allows me to enjoy the colour I apply to novels for longer. A double pleasure: the pleasure of leisurely reading and the aesthetic pleasure. A monochrome e-reader, no matter how good its screen, does not give me the pleasure I get from colour.

(I have to look up one of the most passionate pleas made some time ago by one of the developers of KOReader in favour of monochromatism in response to a user's request for the inclusion of colour underlines in KOReader. He was saying that if we started to include colour in the texts, people would eventually want more: headers and footers in colour, chapter titles in colour, notes in colour, quotes in colour... How right he was! Although he bitterly regretted it because he considered it a degradation of reading. I think that comment led me to abandon KOReader and look elsewhere for solutions to my aesthetic concerns. And I don't regret it. Everyone must find their own way in the world of e-readers regardless of what others think.).

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by rashkae

Are you implying here that the Libra Colour B&W font redering is closer to 167 and 150 dpi devices than a Libra 2? Because, brother, that is not only wrong, it's outright delusional.

With the color layer, text at 300DPI may not be as clear/sharp as the LIbra 2 without the color layer.

[rashkae]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

With the color layer, text at 300DPI may not be as clear/sharp as the LIbra 2 without the color layer.

We're going in circles repeating the same things over and over again, but yes, there is visible speckle in the background, so it doesn't look as smooth. And the illumination is much warmer colour temperature than the Libra 2, (ie, screen is not as blue/white, and looks more sepia. Or in E-ink marketing terms, more blue-light filtering.)

Some people might find these changes unpleasant.

However, as I can judge both by in person usage and macro photographs (which I posted in a previous thread where the same inane discussion took place,) the font rendering is just as sharp and clear. And more than a match for pre Carta 800 300dpi screens.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by rashkae

We're going in circles repeating the same things over and over again, but yes, there is visible speckle in the background,


However, as I can judge both by in person usage and macro photographs (which I posted in a previous thread where the same inane discussion took place,) the font rendering is just as sharp and clear. And more than a match for pre Carta 800 300dpi screens.

Yes, you like it and refuse to believe actual facts and repeat the same opinions.

What is a "pre Carta 800 300dpi" screen?

None of the below is opinion.

Kindle 2012: Paperwhite 1 6 in, 212 PPI E Ink Pearl display
Kindle 2013: Paperwhite 2 6 in, 212 PPI E Ink Carta display

The first 300 dpi is now called Carta HD
Kindle 2014 6" Voyage and cost reduced version the Paperwhite 3 in 2015 (both 300 dpi Carta HD).


The eink Corp (5" not listed).

2007 Vizplex (6" 167 dpi)
2008
2009 Vizplex (9" 150 dpi DX)
2010 Pearl & Triton(various 167 dpi 6" and 150 dpi 9" DXG)
2011
2012
2013 Carta (212 dpi, 6" PW2)
2014 Carta HD (Voyage. 6" 300 dpi, one of the best 6")
2015 Carta HD (PW3. 300 dpi)
2016 Carta HD (Oasis 1. 6" 300 dpi)
2017 Carta HD (Oasis 2. 7" 300 dpi)
2018 Carta HD (PW 4. 6" 300 dpi flush screen)
2019 Kaleido (The year Kindle Basic gets a front light and a better screen, but is still 167 dpi)
2020
2021 Carta 1200 (PW5 is 6.8" 300 dpi and adjustable colour front light)
2022 (First Kindle Basic with 300 dpi)
2023 Carta 1300

The Oasis 3 (7" 300 dpi) was 2019 to 2024. Warmer front light than Oasis 2.

Pearl is very good, but only if no additional layers (light pipe for front light, capacitive touch).

At some stage the Carta (maybe 1200?) is improved by eink making the panel with the capacitive touch, instead of a 3rd party panel, which improved contrast a little.

The original E Ink Carta display was renamed to Carta 1000, and refinements in Carta 1100 and Carta 1200 improved response times and display contrast.[54] A later refinement in Carta 1250 improved response times and contrast again.[55]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_Ink#...odels_of_E_Ink See also eink's own site.
Carta HD seems to be simply the 300 dpi version of Carta 1000, but might be Carta 1100. All 300 dpi are Carta HD, or later panels.

The 5" Vizplex and Pearl (Sony and Kobo) must be about 200 dpi as they are 600 x 800 and about 3" x 4".

Triton (2010) used Pearl with three R G B stripes on square pixels (unlike 1/3rd pixel width LCD) so resolution is terrible as it's 1/3rd across stripes and it's about x5 darker. There are several versions

Kaleido is a 2 x 2 coloured dot pattern (Carta family) so resolution is 1/2 in both directions. The various versions adjust the dot coverage and Kaleido 3 uses Carta 1300 mono panels, which are marginally better than Carta 1200, which are marginally better than Carta HD. The fact that the dots don't cover the pixels means it's brighter than Triton, but makes it very pastel. It also allows 300 dpi mono rendering to display, but with artefacts depending on shape / angle of any 300 dpi detail.

All 300 dpi appear to be Carta family. There are some Carta family screens less than 300 dpi, particularly the H2O Original 6.8" and larger than 8" screens.

E Ink Carta HD features a 1080 by 1440 resolution on a 6" screen with 300 ppi. It is used in many eReaders including all new Kindle model lines since 2014 (Voyage, Oasis, Scribe) as well as the Paperwhite 3 (2015) and newer, Tolino Vision 2 (2014), Kobo Glo HD (2015),[50] Nook Glowlight Plus[51] (2015), Cybook Muse Frontlight, PocketBook Touch HD[52] (2016), PocketBook Touch HD 2 (2017), and the Kobo Clara HD[53] (2018).

The 9.7" seems only to have ever been 150dpi, (Viziplex, then Pearl a year later). At least one non-Kindle uses it.

All Carta family models allow Regal wave form for less full refreshes (but seems limited, a full grey scale doesn't seem to work with Regal mode). Kaleido is a 2 x 2 array, rather than stripes, so likely (opinion) can't use Regal when there is colour content as Regal would be limited to maybe less than 16 of the 4096 (all shades of saturation and greys, not 4096 hues).

The main difference between 2019 Kaleido and 2023 Kaleido 3 is simply Carta HD vs Carta 1300, so the contrast and brightness is slightly improved but still too poor for ambient light (Needs front light).
Kaleido is simply printed red, green and blue dots on a mono eink panel. The only complex technology is accurately printing the correct dots on roughly the middle of the pixels. Once you have that, the extra cost of Kaleido is negligable. The ereader software was already supporting colour (based on screen shots of ebook covers on the original Kobo H20, as they are RGB colour).

Advanced Color ePaper (ACeP) is from 2016. It's a completely different stable display that works like subtractive colour printing on paper. Sadly it's at least x10 slower than regular eink, which is already 100 times slower than active displays.

Onyx speed up eink refresh using custom hardware and higher voltages. This seriously impacts run time per charge.
Eink takes no power to display but uses a lot of power to refresh. An 8" 300 dpi panel thus takes nearly twice the power to "page turn" than a 6" 300 dpi eink.

There has been no increase in ppi / dpi beyond 300 dpi in the last 10 years. Kaleido colour really needs a 600 dpi panel to give the same quality as 300 dpi mono, and even then it will need the front light and have slightly less contrast due to the coloured printed dots reflecting.

It's handy to have a front light, but with it on the eink loses one advantage of OLED or LCD with a true matte screen. Battery life is no longer an advantage.

[kangxi]

Many thanks to all who replied. I learned a lot - including how to measure the size of a screen (I should have known it was the diagonal from the old television days). I've gone ahead and bought a Clara bw and I'm quite pleased with it. It's as easy to read as the Kindle, despite the smaller screen, and it's great to be able to sort on authors and series. I do wonder why the Kindle developers apparently ignore Calibre and all it can do - I would have thought it was a prime source for finding out what customers actually want in an ereader.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by kangxi

I do wonder why the Kindle developers apparently ignore Calibre and all it can do - I would have thought it was a prime source for finding out what customers actually want in an ereader.

Because these days Amazon wants you to buy your content only from them and read it only on their devices. They want you keep your Kindle always online. They don't want you to even blink without their knowledge - all this is to gather as much data on you as possible. Customer data is the new gold.

It didn't used to be this way - I was a happy Kindle user for years. But recently it has been, and it's only getting worse.

[cellaris]

No one is obliged either to buy books from Amazon, or to buy e-readers from Amazon, or to have any kind of subscription from Amazon. There are numerous alternatives. If you want to forget about Amazon, you can do so without any problem. Anyone who chooses to use Amazon products (to a greater or lesser extent) does so voluntarily. At least I have never been forced to do so. I don't know if your case is different. Anyone who has no interest in using lousy e-readers and an "ecosystem" designed to make Amazon big and screw the user just has to cut Amazon out of their life. Seems pretty simple to me.

Why don't some of us do it? I have my reasons. But I admit that I am much more intrigued to know why a person who thinks so negatively of Amazon would continue to use their products.

Edit: By the way, several of my e-readers (of other brands) I have bought from Amazon. And the vast majority of the books I read on my Kindle e-readers I have bought from other bookstores and sent using the tools provided by Amazon (Send to Kindle).

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Because these days Amazon wants you to buy your content only from them and read it only on their devices. They want you keep your Kindle always online. They don't want you to even blink without their knowledge - all this is to gather as much data on you as possible. Customer data is the new gold.

It didn't used to be this way - I was a happy Kindle user for years. But recently it has been, and it's only getting worse.

Amazon is making so when you nobody has a pre-2024 Kindle and the Android hack no longer works, nobody will be ale to get purchased eBooks from Amazon other then via WiFi to a Kindle. And DRM will not be able to be removed.