10' e-ink readers? Kindle Scribe, Kobo Elipsa 2E...

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by jackm8

Attached Thumbnails

This isnt a Kaleido 3 CFA.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by DNSB

I'll have to break the news to one acquaintance of mine who owns a Boox Tab 8, that his device does not have BSR despite the claims made in the advertising on Boox's web page. See attached images.

In my article I spoke about devices officially available here - not about dubious gray imports from China.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

In my article I spoke about devices officially available here - not about dubious gray imports from China.

I suspect that they would not consider it a "dubious gray import" since they are resident in Hong Kong. IMNSHO, that the device is not officially available in Austria would not have factored into their purchasing decision.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by DNSB

I suspect that they would not consider it a "dubious gray import" since they are resident in Hong Kong. IMNSHO, that the device is not officially available in Austria would not have factored into their purchasing decision.

But Hong Kong is not here from the author’s point of view

[cellaris]

Talking about colour e-readers seems to spark passions. There is no thread in which they are mentioned that does not end up in such confrontational discussions.

Honestly, I can't understand how in a thread about 10" e-readers, colour e-readers can be omitted or dismissed, not least because there are not too many options to choose from and the vast majority of the devices available have a resolution of 227 dpi. Not even with all the technical and theoretical hype can one hide the fact that a colour e-reader is a very good (but also very expensive) option in this 10" segment. And I think there are already more than enough reviews available (many of which compare with other monochrome devices) to give us an idea of what their screens look like in reality.

I think there is an important subjective component in any evaluation. There are users in this forum who, having in their hands a Kindle Scribe (300 dpi) and a Kobo Elipsa 2E (227 dpi), have preferred the Kobo Elipsa 2E and have argued that it looks better. "Theoretically" I may disagree (how is an e-reader with lower resolution going to look better?) but I have no objection to their personal assessment, which is ultimately the one that matters. It is this subjective component that I find missing in the assessment of colour e-readers. There is too much theoretical assessment and not enough practical perspective. Theoretically you can argue indisputably that an image with 300 ppi looks better than one with 150 ppi, but you cannot understand how the contribution of the different colours to that image gives you a more satisfactory overall result (for example, the image of a book cover or the cartoon of a comic book). And it's the same with a text. You cannot understand how you can like a colour text better, with only 150 ppi, if you do not visualise the additional information provided by the different colours that appear in that text (for example, in a Wikipedia article or in a dictionary query, where several colours are combined to give you a more complete final result even with half the resolution). That practical experience, with its strong subjective component, is what I miss in assessments that focus on purely theoretical aspects. No matter how much someone tells me (with all the weight of theory) that black and white images look better because they have a higher resolution, I will still prefer to see the covers of a book in colour. And no matter how much someone insists (with all the reason in the world) that the colour of an e-reader is rubbish compared to that of a tablet, I will still prefer to read a comic book on a colour e-reader rather than a monochrome one because I think (subjectively) it looks better.

[Quoth]

Unless someone is looking for colour on eink, bringing colour into the mix on a request for a 10" eink ereader is pointless, because unless you need colour for prolonged periods (like you mostly read comic books/graphic novels) they are pointless.

So it's not just the theory of the resolution. Unlike LCD or OLED the colour eink are inherently much poorer experience for regular novels or mono textbooks than colour vs mono on LCD/OLED. They are not that great even for colour being either pastel (current ones) or darker (triton) and less than 4096* colours/hues/shades compared with 32,000+ on High Colour and 16,000,000+ on True Colour LCD/OLED. They need hugely bright ambient light or significant front light. In ambient light good enough for non-POD or old paperback mono eink are fine to read, even with Pearl eink, never mind Carta or Carta1200. And they are definitely lower quality text than 300 dpi mono, especially in Dark Mode.

@cellaris
You are being too kind to Colour eink. They are a niche. Of course most of those people that have bought one will be happy with it.

[* Forget about Gallery, while ingenious it's not currently suitable for an ereader, it's for signage and though more colours and potential for better resolution due to C Y M cells, at 1.5 second for a full update it's uselss for an ereader].

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Unless someone is looking for colour on eink, bringing colour into the mix on a request for a 10" eink ereader is pointless, because unless you need colour for prolonged periods (like you mostly read comic books/graphic novels) they are pointless.

Don't you want to believe it?
10 inch Kaleido 3 devices display text (black on white) sharper than Carta 1000 devices with 227 ppi - a bright but colored dot of a maximum of 0.13 mm (it can't be bigger) that is between black and white at best you can see it with a magnifying glass; Not with the naked eye - the resolution of the eye is quite limited.

[cellaris]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Unless someone is looking for colour on eink, bringing colour into the mix on a request for a 10" eink ereader is pointless, because unless you need colour for prolonged periods (like you mostly read comic books/graphic novels) they are pointless.

So it's not just the theory of the resolution. Unlike LCD or OLED the colour eink are inherently much poorer experience for regular novels or mono textbooks than colour vs mono on LCD/OLED. They are not that great even for colour being either pastel (current ones) or darker (triton) and less than 4096* colours/hues/shades compared with 32,000+ on High Colour and 16,000,000+ on True Colour LCD/OLED. They need hugely bright ambient light or significant front light. In ambient light good enough for non-POD or old paperback mono eink are fine to read, even with Pearl eink, never mind Carta or Carta1200. And they are definitely lower quality text than 300 dpi mono, especially in Dark Mode.

@cellaris
You are being too kind to Colour eink. They are a niche. Of course most of those people that have bought one will be happy with it.

[* Forget about Gallery, while ingenious it's not currently suitable for an ereader, it's for signage and though more colours and potential for better resolution due to C Y M cells, at 1.5 second for a full update it's uselss for an ereader].

Not to be particularly kind, but I think it is precisely in 10" e-readers (which are already a niche of their own) that colour makes the most sense. Mainly for two reasons: because of the size, where colour offers more possibilities, and because the screen resolution is the lowest in monochrome e-readers (with the exception of the Kindle Scribe they are all 227 dpi or less).

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by cellaris

10" e-readers
....
and because the screen resolution is the lowest in monochrome e-readers

13.3 has 207 - but there is still no 300 ppi module.

[jackm8]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

This isnt a Kaleido 3 CFA.

It is same general tech. The difference is that this earlier Kaleido tech uses larger colour filter on top of the bottom. So it's 300p vs 100p in that case.

Originally Posted by cellaris

Talking about colour e-readers seems to spark passions. There is no thread in which they are mentioned that does not end up in such confrontational discussions.

Honestly, I can't understand how in a thread about 10" e-readers, colour e-readers can be omitted or dismissed, not least because there are not too many options to choose from and the vast majority of the devices available have a resolution of 227 dpi. Not even with all the technical and theoretical hype can one hide the fact that a colour e-reader is a very good (but also very expensive) option in this 10" segment. And I think there are already more than enough reviews available (many of which compare with other monochrome devices) to give us an idea of what their screens look like in reality.

I think there is an important subjective component in any evaluation. There are users in this forum who, having in their hands a Kindle Scribe (300 dpi) and a Kobo Elipsa 2E (227 dpi), have preferred the Kobo Elipsa 2E and have argued that it looks better. "Theoretically" I may disagree (how is an e-reader with lower resolution going to look better?) but I have no objection to their personal assessment, which is ultimately the one that matters. It is this subjective component that I find missing in the assessment of colour e-readers. There is too much theoretical assessment and not enough practical perspective. Theoretically you can argue indisputably that an image with 300 ppi looks better than one with 150 ppi, but you cannot understand how the contribution of the different colours to that image gives you a more satisfactory overall result (for example, the image of a book cover or the cartoon of a comic book). And it's the same with a text. You cannot understand how you can like a colour text better, with only 150 ppi, if you do not visualise the additional information provided by the different colours that appear in that text (for example, in a Wikipedia article or in a dictionary query, where several colours are combined to give you a more complete final result even with half the resolution). That practical experience, with its strong subjective component, is what I miss in assessments that focus on purely theoretical aspects. No matter how much someone tells me (with all the weight of theory) that black and white images look better because they have a higher resolution, I will still prefer to see the covers of a book in colour. And no matter how much someone insists (with all the reason in the world) that the colour of an e-reader is rubbish compared to that of a tablet, I will still prefer to read a comic book on a colour e-reader rather than a monochrome one because I think (subjectively) it looks better.

You make some good points. But I'd even go further and say that it's not all subjective. Even lower resolution screen, or older generation screens, can look better objectively, and quantifiably. I own 4th gen Kindle, it's screen is six inch 600x800 px, but it looks better compared to eight inch 1200x1600 px of my inkpad. The reason is very simple. It's got no touch screen, no thick glass protection over it's screen, and no light panels at the sides. This all means that it's eink panel is extremely close to the surface of the device, while all that stuff in front of pocketbook, makes the screen look fuzzy when it's looked at a very close distances (example). Now, all things considered, resolution disadvantage is noticeable regarding fonts, it is just 6inch, and it's got no illumination, so I'd still say that inkpad is better reading device overall. But I wouldn't say that it's got a better screen.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by jackm8

It is same general tech. The difference is that this earlier Kaleido tech uses larger colour filter on top of the bottom. So it's 300p vs 100p in that case.

No - it looks different:

[jackm8]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

No - it looks different:

I guess that this is coloured layer? Resolution is too small to see anything else. I still think that it's the same general tech, but I've also not found any detailed review that would show screen under higher magnifications, so I could be wrong.

[readthinksurvive]

is there a specific sub for sizes dicussion? instead of just ecoystem

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by jackm8

I still think that it's the same general tech

The arrangement of the pixels is completely different.
They are arranged in diagonal rows of RGB and, in my opinion, also in different filter strengths (you can see it quite clearly with the green) - so that every color and one of them is present twice in every 2*2 matrix field.