PocketBook announces frontlit color eInk for June 2013

[ApK]

Let's adjust one thing:

Its called backlight in some articles because it is a more common term many writers don't know the difference, and don't bother or care about finding out the facts.

If being a common term was the driving factor, then we should be seeing them use the term "light" which is far more common than either backlight or frontlight and has the added virtue of being correct.
"Lighted," "Illuminated," "integrated light," are all quite common terms, and would all be correct, unlike "backlight" which is just wrong.

As for the video above, I don't speak Russian, but I'm curious to know if the head of the company actually SAID "backlight" or if it was just translated or captioned that way in error.

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by ApK

As for the video above, I don't speak Russian, but I'm curious to know if the head of the company actually SAID "backlight" or if it was just translated or captioned that way in error.

I'm not fluent in Russian, but it sounded to me like the reviewer said it was "underlit" (something like "podsvietkom"), which I guess we would call backlit. It sounded to me like the director used the same term.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by rkomar

I'm not fluent in Russian, but it sounded to me like the reviewer said it was "underlit" (something like "podsvietkom"), which I guess we would call backlit. It sounded to me like the director used the same term.

I don't want to drag this too far down this tangent, but I am curious about it.

Googling your guess at the word, I found this forum post out on the interwebs:

"Resp stačil by mi predný panel na Naka CD40z, mám s orange podsvietením a potrebujem zelené... Alebo tú ALpinu, či Becker, resp. nejaký slušnejší Clarion so zeleným podsvietkom.."

Google Translate detects the language as Slovak, and translates the word "podsvietením" as "backlight" and cannot translate the word "podsvietkom" at all.

In any case, it's possible that in that language the word is correctly used for both kinds of integrated illumination.
In English, however, front lighting and back lighting are different things, and there is no reason to use the wrong term. If in doubt, just say it has a light-up screen.

[rkomar]

Both were speaking too quickly for my poor Russian/Ukrainian abilities, and I took a guess at what I heard. The "podsviet..." part I heard clearly, which is what I based the "underlit" translation on (pod -> under, sviet -> light). I agree that it would be good to hear from someone who is fluent in Russian.

[Sil_liS]

Is it possible that "backlit" is the correct term for these devices?
Wikipedia:

Backlights illuminate the LCD from the side or back of the display panel, unlike frontlights, which are placed in front of the LCD.

LCD with CCFL backlight


LCD with LED matrix backlight

If the light source is coming from the side, according to wikipedia it is backlit.

[HarryT]

That's talking about something fundamentally different. An LCD screen is transparent, so it can be lit from the back or from the side. With an eInk screen, it's opaque, so the lighting has to be from the front. Even when the lighting LEDs are at the sides of the display bezel (as they are for all illuminated eInk devices), they are still in front of the eInk panel, so to refer to them as a "backlight" is fundamentally wrong. It's their location with respect to the display panel that's important. The lighting LEDs found in eInk devices are in front of the display panel, hence they are front-lit.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's talking about something fundamentally different. An LCD screen is transparent, so it can be lit from the back or from the side. With an eInk screen, it's opaque, so the lighting has to be from the front. Even when the lighting LEDs are at the sides of the display bezel (as they are for all illuminated eInk devices), they are still in front of the eInk panel, so to refer to them as a "backlight" is fundamentally wrong. It's their location with respect to the display panel that's important. The lighting LEDs found in eInk devices are in front of the display panel, hence they are front-lit.

In front of the opaque capsules that form the pixels in you have transparent layers. You can also have a lightguide layer to distribute the light over the surface.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's talking about something fundamentally different. An LCD screen is transparent, so it can be lit from the back or from the side. With an eInk screen, it's opaque, so the lighting has to be from the front. Even when the lighting LEDs are at the sides of the display bezel (as they are for all illuminated eInk devices), they are still in front of the eInk panel, so to refer to them as a "backlight" is fundamentally wrong. It's their location with respect to the display panel that's important. The lighting LEDs found in eInk devices are in front of the display panel, hence they are front-lit.

I don't wish to challenge or contradict what has been said in this thread by very knowledgeable contributors, but I thought something akin to a translucent layer for eInk or translucent eInk, was being looked at.

"Systems and Methods for Switching Between an Electronic Paper Display and a Video Display. That’s the lengthy title of a patent filled by Apple in October of 2009 but recently discovered that, as the title suggests, details a hybrid display. A translucent e-ink screen would lay on-top of a traditional LCD screen giving the user the option of switching between a battery saving and sunlight-friendly e-ink display and the LCD. The advantages should be obvious: longer battery life, works in direct sunlight, and easier on the eyes when reading books all while not sacrificing full motion and vibrant colors that only LCDs can provide.

Like many Apple patents, this one may never see mass production. The pics used in the filing clearly fit the description of an iPhone or iPod touch but that doesn’t really mean anything. Those are just place holders describing how the system could be used. You’re free to dream though."

[ApK]

Originally Posted by frahse

I don't wish to challenge or contradict what has been said in this thread by very knowledgeable contributors, but I thought something akin to a translucent layer for eInk or translucent eInk, was being looked at.

As I read the patent, it looks like the idea would be that the eink display turns translucent to show the video display, but opaque when it itself is in use, and in that state it would still need front lighting, like any other opaque surface.

Also, that a back-lightable eink-type display may one day be invented doesn't change anything right now.
I can imagine a display where the "white" part was phosphorecent, or fluorescent like the white surface of a fluorescent light bulb, opaque to visible light, but energized from below, and then self-illuminated with a perfectly even glow.

Hmm...should I have spoken to a patent lawyer before posting this....?

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by ApK

As I read the patent, it looks like the idea would be that the eink display turns translucent to show the video display, but opaque when it itself is in use, and in that state it would still need front lighting, like any other opaque surface.

Also, that a back-lightable eink-type display may one day be invented doesn't change anything right now.
I can imagine a display where the "white" part was phosphorecent, or fluorescent like the white surface of a fluorescent light bulb, opaque to visible light, but energized from below, and then self-illuminated with a perfectly even glow.

Hmm...should I have spoken to a patent lawyer before posting this....?

Ha! That's a very cool idea. The backlight would probably only have to be on for a brief time while the screen is flashing to a new state, thus dropping the power required even more.

I suppose they could also impregnate the white balls with tritium to always make them glow (for about 10 years, anyway), like on watch faces, but I suspect people wouldn't be too happy with radioactive devices.

[JakeBadlands]

Originally Posted by rkomar

I'm not fluent in Russian, but it sounded to me like the reviewer said it was "underlit" (something like "podsvietkom"), which I guess we would call backlit. It sounded to me like the director used the same term.

Originally Posted by rkomar

Both were speaking too quickly for my poor Russian/Ukrainian abilities, and I took a guess at what I heard. The "podsviet..." part I heard clearly, which is what I based the "underlit" translation on (pod -> under, sviet -> light). I agree that it would be good to hear from someone who is fluent in Russian.

Originally Posted by ApK

I'm curious to know if the head of the company actually SAID "backlight" or if it was just translated or captioned that way in error.

Yes, you are right! I asked my Russian friend, yes the head of company
said backlit - "podsvetka", but that is because there is no such word in Russian
as frontlit - "nadsvetka". Actually, there is a Russian article about this device
where its said "Screen has podsvetka, more precisely, nadsvetka" :
http://www.ferra.ru/ru/epads/review/...nk-first-look/
(use Google Translate)

But, again, there is no such a word as nadsvetka, so everyone says podsvetka

[Ken Maltby]

Originally Posted by JakeBadlands

Yes, you are right! I asked my Russian friend, yes the head of company
said backlit - "podsvetka", but that is because there is no such word in Russian
as frontlit - "nadsvetka". Actually, there is a Russian article about this device
where its said "Screen has podsvetka, more precisely, nadsvetka" :
http://www.ferra.ru/ru/epads/review/...nk-first-look/
(use Google Translate)

But, again, there is no such a word as nadsvetka, so everyone says podsvetka

Hmm... I wonder what Mario Pei would have to say about that?

Luck;
Ken

[paola]

The Lux is now being sold in Europe, at €139, the same price of the non lit touch: weird?

http://www.pocketbook-readers.de/index.php?cPath=1

google translate let me down, but I think they say they'll deliver in a week.

[domani7]

This is a really silly tangent. A lot of languages just will not have the exact translation for terms and perhaps they'll use words that are less technically accurate but more understandable to the people, as opposed to google translate. I'm russian and "podsvietkom" to me just sounds like "with light". Really that's all it means to me. Couldn't tell you how to accurately say "frontlight" or "underlight" or "backlight" or "sidelight" or "overlight" or "abovelight". See how silly this is?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by domani7

I'm russian and "podsvietkom" to me just sounds like "with light". Really that's all it means to me. Couldn't tell you how to accurately say "frontlight" or "underlight" or "backlight" or "sidelight" or "overlight" or "abovelight".

Cool. That's what I mentioned I suspected earlier.

See how silly this is?

No, found it quite interesting, actually. Learned a little about another language.
Nice for a global forum about reading to discuss how we interpret stuff.