A question for expericned ebook readers.

MatYadabyte · 08-15-2005, 04:49 PM

I have read a lot of ebooks on a lot of devices, going way back to the old Psion Series 3 in glorious low res black and white.

And, unlike many forums on the web, most readers here will have done the same.

Am I mistaken in thinking that the most modern screens are not in fact the best screen for reading an e-book?

Something happens when you up the resolution, up the brightness and refresh rate. And I don’t know what it is but something happens. If I had to read a novel on a handheld I would do it on something old – a Palm 3C or a Netbook. I would do it in preference to my Ipaq 4700 or Tungsten.

Does anyone know what I mean? Is there a real qualitative difference in “abstract reading experience quality” that is inversely proportionate to screen technology advances or is my eyesight simply getting worse?

xx

Mat

doctorow · 08-15-2005, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewsRaider

...or is my eyesight simply getting worse?

It's probably your eye-sight, LOL. When I was still in my 20s, I had no problem reading with fontsize 10 on a 1280x1024 screen. Nowadays, I have a larger resolution (1600x1200), but my fontsize is also considerably larger when I read documents (I use CTRL+ in Firefox to increase it temporarily). I don't think the new PDAs make it harder to read e-books. Seriously, how could a 160x160 screen be better than a 640x480 screen? Only make sure to pick larger fonts, and you should be fine

MatYadabyte · 08-15-2005, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doctorow

Seriously, how could a 160x160 screen be better than a 640x480 screen?

I don’t know but how about two possible reasons:

1)How about that the simplicity and blockyness of low res makes it easier to concentrate on the text rather than having to process all that extra visual information that must come with font smoothing and kerning and softness. Reading isn’t like watching a movie - visual quality is irrelevant to the text (Take a look at the quality of a paperback books paper compared to printer paper.).

2) Perhaps there is some feature of new screen technology that means that though it ostensibly looks better it makes reading a more tiring and less natural experience.

If we think of the interface between text and mind (Be that a paper book, an audio book or an ebook) one of the key roles of that interface is to get the text into the mind in the most efficient, reliable and lasting way. And this is not necessarily the most pretty way.

Bob Russell · 08-15-2005, 05:27 PM

That's an interesting question. I find, though, that the bigger and brighter screens, better fonts, better resolution and even better battery life all help to make for a better reading experience for me. One comparison that's pretty easy to do is between two different 320x320 PalmOS devices I've had (Sony Clie SJ33 and my Treo 650) vs lo res or black and white PalmOS devices (absolutely horrible in comparison to the hires), or vs a 240x320 Toshiba e405 PPC (where you get more on the screen, but the experience is more eye-tiring and less pleasant for me).

I haven't had the pleasure of reading on a hires+ Palm or a VGA PPC unfortunately, but with what I've tried, I'll have to put in another vote for "it's your eyes!"

macrotor · 08-15-2005, 06:53 PM

I find that screen brightness can be tiring. I switched to a light-gray background and reduced the brightness. That made things a lot easier for me.

As for resolution: I cranked up my old visor to compare. I will have to disagree: high-rez is MUCH easier on the eyes.

- Jim

Dick Tracy · 08-15-2005, 07:57 PM

Another vote for aging eyes and contrast fatigue. I now use a larger font, light gray background, and reduce screen brightness. The E2 is nicer on the eyes than the IIIxe (and I can get away with not wearing the reading glasses for a short time).

Laurens · 08-16-2005, 04:45 AM

For me, the reading experience itself is not noticably better than it was on a 160x160 screen. I only read news and articles, though, and then only for 30-60 minutes each day.

MatYadabyte · 08-16-2005, 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laurens

the reading experience itself is not noticably better than it was on a 160x160 screen

That is my point exactly. And when you come to reading very long texts I think this unexpected difference is amplified

Mat

dwig · 08-16-2005, 09:54 AM

I find my old Clie T415 (mono, 320x320) sharper than my newer UX50 (color, 320x480). I prefer the UX50 because its brighter but if the T415 was equally bright it would be preferable. Its text is sharper, chrisper, and more pleasurable to read.

Color screens are less sharp that mono screens of the same resolution. Also, font smoothing is acutally a process to blur the edges of the fonts making them smoother but less sharp. IMHO, the color screen technology in current portable devices is not good enough to match the sharpness of print or of previous generation mono screens.

Jules · 08-19-2005, 11:45 AM

Naw!

When I got my Clie T625 (320x320) it was a revalation and the first time reading on a handheld format was practical to my mind.

Now I have a Loox (640x480), I can't say that it is much better than the Clie but the extra screen size does give me a few more words.

I find it best to reverse the screen so that I get white text on a black background, much less tiring but the hi-res is SO much easier to read.

Of course, it also matters what reader you are using. I have found that the MS reader is nowhere near as good as MobiBook or eReader.

Full screen can also help because it turns off distracting features.

derekweb · 08-19-2005, 01:18 PM

I love reading e-books. Either on the Zodiac2 or Palm T3, it was great. Now on the hx2755 PPC it's just as good. One thing that absolutely drives me cross eyed (literally) is the PPC version of Font Smoothing. Can't remember what Microsoft calls it, but it makes me go cross eyes trying to focus on the words. /chuckle/

drogo · 10-03-2006, 01:48 PM

Put me in the "hi-res is better res" camp.

I currently have a Dell Axim X51v which is 640x480. When using Haali Reader, the text simply has no corners, (unless intended, of course). The text is light years ahead of everything else I've used. Better than my Palm IIIx, my SL-5500 Zaurus, and my HieBook.

I'm currently watching ebay and thinking of just picking up an NEC LitePad as my next reader. I really want an eInk reader, but for just a bit more, I can have a reader that will display pretty much any text format, play any video clip, sound file, and is very portable. I know the battery life won't compare, but every choice has a compromise somewhere.

vrf · 10-16-2006, 11:39 PM

For me, resolution doesn't have as much to do with ease of reading as the type of display. A purely reflective display is far easier on my eyes than staring into a glowing, constantly-refreshing box for hours at a time. I've read a couple of books on my AlphaSmart Dana (has an older Palm-type display) and it's much easier on my eyes in the long term than my bright, high-res LCD monitor. (This is only true when I have good ambient light... otherwise the Dana display is a bit murky.)

tcv · 10-17-2006, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by derekweb

One thing that absolutely drives me cross eyed (literally) is the PPC version of Font Smoothing. Can't remember what Microsoft calls it, but it makes me go cross eyes trying to focus on the words. /chuckle/

Cleartype.

yvanleterrible · 10-17-2006, 10:46 AM

For me refresh rate is the main culprit. This is mostly why I'd prefer e-ink.

08-15-2005, 04:49 PM	#1
MatYadabyte Zealot Posts: 111 Karma: 1013536 Join Date: Aug 2005	A question for expericned ebook readers. I have read a lot of ebooks on a lot of devices, going way back to the old Psion Series 3 in glorious low res black and white. And, unlike many forums on the web, most readers here will have done the same. Am I mistaken in thinking that the most modern screens are not in fact the best screen for reading an e-book? Something happens when you up the resolution, up the brightness and refresh rate. And I don’t know what it is but something happens. If I had to read a novel on a handheld I would do it on something old – a Palm 3C or a Netbook. I would do it in preference to my Ipaq 4700 or Tungsten. Does anyone know what I mean? Is there a real qualitative difference in “abstract reading experience quality” that is inversely proportionate to screen technology advances or is my eyesight simply getting worse? xx Mat

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
WiFi question on e-readers	ski_power	Which one should I buy?	6	08-01-2010 11:13 AM
A question for the readers here	Steven Lake	Writers' Corner	12	02-05-2010 12:09 PM
Quick question about multiple readers	sunfrog14	Sony Reader	2	11-17-2009 10:29 AM
Question about ergonomics and readers available in UK shops	Storm27	Which one should I buy?	6	08-23-2009 04:00 PM
Question for iphone/itouch readers	human	Apple Devices	6	07-29-2009 03:21 PM

08-15-2005, 05:27 PM	#4
Bob Russell Recovering Gadget Addict Posts: 5,381 Karma: 676161 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Device: iPad	That's an interesting question. I find, though, that the bigger and brighter screens, better fonts, better resolution and even better battery life all help to make for a better reading experience for me. One comparison that's pretty easy to do is between two different 320x320 PalmOS devices I've had (Sony Clie SJ33 and my Treo 650) vs lo res or black and white PalmOS devices (absolutely horrible in comparison to the hires), or vs a 240x320 Toshiba e405 PPC (where you get more on the screen, but the experience is more eye-tiring and less pleasant for me). I haven't had the pleasure of reading on a hires+ Palm or a VGA PPC unfortunately, but with what I've tried, I'll have to put in another vote for "it's your eyes!"

08-15-2005, 06:53 PM	#5
macrotor Connoisseur Posts: 59 Karma: 2418 Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Fremont, CA, USA Device: Tungsten\|C with Nokia6200	I find that screen brightness can be tiring. I switched to a light-gray background and reduced the brightness. That made things a lot easier for me. As for resolution: I cranked up my old visor to compare. I will have to disagree: high-rez is MUCH easier on the eyes. - Jim

08-15-2005, 07:57 PM	#6
Dick Tracy Detective Posts: 109 Karma: 4455 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: California Device: Palm TX	Another vote for aging eyes and contrast fatigue. I now use a larger font, light gray background, and reduce screen brightness. The E2 is nicer on the eyes than the IIIxe (and I can get away with not wearing the reading glasses for a short time).

08-16-2005, 04:45 AM	#7
Laurens Jah Blessed Posts: 1,295 Karma: 1373 Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: The Netherlands Device: iPod Touch	For me, the reading experience itself is not noticably better than it was on a 160x160 screen. I only read news and articles, though, and then only for 30-60 minutes each day.

08-16-2005, 09:54 AM	#9
dwig Wizard Posts: 1,613 Karma: 6718479 Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Paradise (Key West, FL) Device: Current:Surface Go & Kindle 3 - Retired: DellV8p, Clie UX50, ...	I find my old Clie T415 (mono, 320x320) sharper than my newer UX50 (color, 320x480). I prefer the UX50 because its brighter but if the T415 was equally bright it would be preferable. Its text is sharper, chrisper, and more pleasurable to read. Color screens are less sharp that mono screens of the same resolution. Also, font smoothing is acutally a process to blur the edges of the fonts making them smoother but less sharp. IMHO, the color screen technology in current portable devices is not good enough to match the sharpness of print or of previous generation mono screens.

08-19-2005, 11:45 AM	#10
Jules Nameless Being	Naw! When I got my Clie T625 (320x320) it was a revalation and the first time reading on a handheld format was practical to my mind. Now I have a Loox (640x480), I can't say that it is much better than the Clie but the extra screen size does give me a few more words. I find it best to reverse the screen so that I get white text on a black background, much less tiring but the hi-res is SO much easier to read. Of course, it also matters what reader you are using. I have found that the MS reader is nowhere near as good as MobiBook or eReader. Full screen can also help because it turns off distracting features.

08-19-2005, 01:18 PM	#11
derekweb Groupie Posts: 160 Karma: 3134 Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: United States Device: Palm Treo 700p & iPaq hx2755	I love reading e-books. Either on the Zodiac2 or Palm T3, it was great. Now on the hx2755 PPC it's just as good. One thing that absolutely drives me cross eyed (literally) is the PPC version of Font Smoothing. Can't remember what Microsoft calls it, but it makes me go cross eyes trying to focus on the words. /chuckle/

10-03-2006, 01:48 PM	#12
drogo Connoisseur Posts: 54 Karma: 321 Join Date: May 2006 Location: Virginia, USA Device: PRS-500	Put me in the "hi-res is better res" camp. I currently have a Dell Axim X51v which is 640x480. When using Haali Reader, the text simply has no corners, (unless intended, of course). The text is light years ahead of everything else I've used. Better than my Palm IIIx, my SL-5500 Zaurus, and my HieBook. I'm currently watching ebay and thinking of just picking up an NEC LitePad as my next reader. I really want an eInk reader, but for just a bit more, I can have a reader that will display pretty much any text format, play any video clip, sound file, and is very portable. I know the battery life won't compare, but every choice has a compromise somewhere.

10-16-2006, 11:39 PM	#13
vrf Addict Posts: 218 Karma: 1300000 Join Date: Dec 2004 Device: Oasis 2, Voyage, Paperwhite 2, Kindle Touch, Kindle Keyboard, iPad Pro	For me, resolution doesn't have as much to do with ease of reading as the type of display. A purely reflective display is far easier on my eyes than staring into a glowing, constantly-refreshing box for hours at a time. I've read a couple of books on my AlphaSmart Dana (has an older Palm-type display) and it's much easier on my eyes in the long term than my bright, high-res LCD monitor. (This is only true when I have good ambient light... otherwise the Dana display is a bit murky.)

10-17-2006, 10:46 AM	#15
yvanleterrible Reborn Paper User Posts: 8,616 Karma: 15446734 Join Date: May 2006 Location: Que Nada Device: iPhone8, iPad Air	For me refresh rate is the main culprit. This is mostly why I'd prefer e-ink.

Advert

Advert