Display Technology and Eye-strain

[nikkie]

I definitely agree that the brightness of the screen matters. And further that the brightness of the surrounding area matter. That's why I use f.lux in Windows to control the brightness of my LCDs. I am at my computer from the moment I wake until the moment I go to bed on an average day, minus any time I spend reading. I definitely find that if I am in a dark room trying to read on a bright white screen, it hurts my eyes. This is why I read grey on black on the iPhone, with the brightness turned way down.

My theory on the matter is that your eyes get tired of adjusting the aperture from when you switch back and forth between bright and dimly lit areas. This leads to a kind of muscle fatigue. Having your screens match the brightness of your room decreases the brightness contrast so your pupil doesn't have to dilate and shrink with as much frequency.

[fugazied]

I can read on anything, but I am in my early 30s and I am a computer programmer by trade so that might explain it.

I spend 11-12 hrs a day looking at computer screens (work + play), so maybe my eyes are 'used' to LCD. No eye strain at all. Those old CRT monitors on the other hand.. not good.

[Lemurion]

My personal preferences go as follows: my Sony, followed by my Palm TX, followed by my iPaq and then a computer. Form-factor matters more to me than screen technology, at least as far as eyestrain is concerned. One thing that may make a difference with my LCD devices is that I always keep the backlight turned down as low as possible (primarily to extend battery life) so they don't bother my eyes that much.

End result is that I can't read as long on an LCD device as an EPD, but the difference is a matter of degree, not kind.

However, when it comes to devices, I have a very strong preference for ones with an EPD display for reasons other than simple eyestrain. Two big ones are screen size and battery life. I have a 6" Sony, and that's about as small as I am willing to go - I'd prefer larger but I'll settle for 6". EPD battery life is fantastic. I can leave my Sony for a day or two and still have lots of charge left. I can read half a dozen books in a binge session on one charge.

I'd be fine with a decent-size LCD, provided it had what I consider a usable level of battery life. Now usable battery life is a very personal thing, so here's what I consider a minimum: I want to be able to leave the house early in the morning, spend at least 6 hours using it during the day (without access to power) and still have charge left for anywhere from 5 minutes to an hour before going to sleep at night, and ideally not need to charge it until some time the following day. Call it ten hours of active reading and at least 72 hours of standby time.

I can't get that amount of use time on any non-EPD device currently available.

[scottjl]

No offense but the terminology used in your poll already shows you're biased against LCD and pro e-ink. Next time you might consider neutral language for all platforms.

[netseeker]

Originally Posted by scottjl

No offense but the terminology used in your poll already shows you're biased against LCD and pro e-ink. Next time you might consider neutral language for all platforms.

Please explain why you think that. The used language seems entirely neutral to me, eg. Transflective clearly includes transreflective LCD's.

[scottjl]

I was referring to the comments such as "I'm a PURIST" and "It GLOWS, It BLOWS". I've designed and conducted polls professionally, and just wanted to point out the choice commentary, maybe intended as humorous, really doesn't give this poll an unbiased appearance.

[netseeker]

Originally Posted by scottjl

I was referring to the comments such as "I'm a PURIST" and "It GLOWS, It BLOWS". I've designed and conducted polls professionally, and just wanted to point out the choice commentary, maybe intended as humorous, really doesn't give this poll an unbiased appearance.

Perhaps you are right and the comments can lead to a parting of the ways, though i still can't notice the Pro-E-Ink and Anti-LCD bias you mentioned in your first post.

[kacir]

I am complicated.
In the past I have read on lots and lots of various displays from really ancient ones (you remember monochrome (amber) plasma displays for laptops?) to the e-ink.
For fiction, text-only, linear reading I strongly prefer e-ink.
I can, however, imagine myself sitting in an armchair and browsing Mobileread, or reading Mastering Regular Expressions on an APPLIANCE that resembles iPad.

I am currently using an LCD display for browsing, work and entertainment and I expect to use a light-emitting display for those tasks in a foreseeable future.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by scottjl

No offense but the terminology used in your poll already shows you're biased against LCD and pro e-ink. Next time you might consider neutral language for all platforms.

Sorry, I took the language from the posts of supporters of each one here...somewhat humorously, I thought. It isn't really meant to be taken as a scientific poll, nor should any one taken here

And, for the record, I'm not an eInk believer (despite owning two devices with eInk). As I've posted elsewhere, while I love the static screen display, the page turning screen flash is just too distracting for me to read for any length of time. And I've not had a much of a problem reading on LCDs, even with fluorescent backlighting...and with my new LED backlit devices, never.

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by kjk

Sorry, I took the language from the posts of supporters of each one here...somewhat humorously, I thought. It isn't really meant to be taken as a scientific poll, nor should any one taken here

And, for the record, I'm not an eInk believer (despite owning two devices with eInk). As I've posted elsewhere, while I love the static screen display, the page turning screen flash is just too distracting for me to read for any length of time. And I've not had a much of a problem reading on LCDs, even with fluorescent backlighting...and with my new LED backlit devices, never.

Don't worry about the names much. The fact that they're in this forum undermines any objectivity they'd have anyway. And the E-Ink cult is a fair enough stereotype for this community, along with the "flexible" reader of anything. The language does help polarize your results (the extremes are more attractive than the intermediates groups), but that would likely have happened anyway.

[mgmueller]

I've started reading eBooks in 2000 on early PocketPCs.
Back then, I very often have been reading for 6+ hours.
Usually at night, when the backlit came in handy.
In 2005 (newly wed) I've stopped for a few years.
In 2007, I wanted to read more again.
I didn't find any interesting PDAs anymore.
I hate display quality of BlackBerry.
I've got an iPhone in 2007 and I'm fine with reading on it.
But I wanted to have something bigger.
Screen size really was my main criteria.
I ended up on mobileread and chose iRex iLiad.
I like eInk and I don't have any problems with its limited functionality.
I don't need color or faster refresh rates.
Since 2007, I'm checking out more or less all the file formats and different concepts (small display, big display, with touchscreen, without touchscreen, ...).
I find experimenting with a new gadget at least as much fun as later on actually using that gadget.
I love Sony 900, iRex 800 and Kindle 2. But I'll use iPad without hesitation as well. iPad will be good enough to read and it will be fun to check out the additional functionality. But I'll go for Que as well...

[guyanonymous]

Originally Posted by nikkie

I definitely agree that the brightness of the screen matters. And further that the brightness of the surrounding area matter. That's why I use f.lux in Windows to control the brightness of my LCDs.

Thanks for introducing me to this software! And I think you're right about the strain coming from our eyes needing to adjust the amount of light let in.

[Joe Minton]

I've been reading on screens since the first IBM with its fuzzy green screen -- proof that I can read on anything - LOL. I have both the Sony 300 and 600. I also just bought an Apple iPod Touch 4G.

The Touch is the best reader I own. Except for direct sunlight, I strongly prefer it over the 300 and especially the 600 which needs strong light to be useful at all. Also: the control over formatting in Apple's iBook application is excellent; it allows font, font size, print & background color choices together with a convenient choice of reverse lighting.

The Touch's superiority will become more apparent as more of us get to use the remarkable "retina" screen Apple has developed. If they were to make larger version, say with a six-inch screen, most ereader manufacturers would be hiding behind rocks.

Joe

[brecklundin]

Originally Posted by mbovenka

I can read on anything, but I must admit that E-Ink has spoiled me. As far as I am concerned, all it needs is better contrast (I want that background to be white, not gray) and somewhat better resolution, something like 300 dpi.

Colour would be nice, but not essential. The prototype Liquavista display I saw on TV yesterday looked awfully sweet, though (colour video on a purely reflective screen...)

if you want to get true to life as possible resolution what is really needed is at minimum 1200dpi. That is about what film photos work out to be when trying to get a digital analog (yeah I know that was...not punny... ). Some say that 300dpi is "good enough" for the printed word, but if you are going for the best panels possible then shoot for photo quality since these EPD panels are essentially using laser printer concepts to "print" to the panel then why not get to the same image quality? I mean if it can be done with a printer it should be possible with an EPD panel or some close cousin of EPD whatever that ends up being.

And be careful about wishing for a pure white background...a pure white background will be no different from using an LCD panel with the backlight cranked up...plus too white a background will reduce the usability under bright lighting. As far as I can say the only time a true white will be useful is for color panels where it's a must have color, your color printers would not work were it not for the pure white papers we have today...

[brecklundin]

Originally Posted by guyanonymous

Thanks for introducing me to this software! And I think you're right about the strain coming from our eyes needing to adjust the amount of light let in.

been using it for quite some time now and you're right, it's nice software. One thing to not forget, if you do anything that is color sensitive, remember to disable f.lux back up to 5500k or so in order to get a closer color match... ~5500k is, depending on your latitude, considered the temperature of "daylight".

nice to see some people are using it for more than the potential link to insomnia and spending long hours in front of a display with the effective ambient light effect equal to that of daylight. Funny how some things can potentially affect our circadian rhythm...