LCD vs. e-ink: The eyestrain debate

[Prestidigitweeze]

LIH (Laughing In Head) at the seven who picked the LCD display. That's a bold position to take. I'd have loved to hear more about the reasons on this thread.

[toddos]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

LIH (Laughing In Head) at the seven who picked the LCD display. That's a bold position to take. I'd have loved to hear more about the reasons on this thread.

Pretty sure I'm one of the 7, and I've explained why multiple times in other threads. It's a pixels per inch thing. Backlight headaches are a myth (well, the headaches are real, but the reason is wrong). LCD reading sucks because most people have only experienced it on devices with less than 150ppi displays. Low resolution (as in pixel density, not display resolution -- in this case, a 480x800 screen with 200ppi is higher resolution than a standard 1366x768 15" laptop with 100ppi) is what causes the headaches, and reading on a high resolution device (most smartphones and 7" tablets, but not 9-10" tablets like an iPad) will be comfortable despite the backlight.

I read on my Nook STR on planes and on vacation -- places where I will have a guarantee of good light and may not have recharge options. Everywhere else I read on my phone, because my phone is always with me and I don't have to worry about having enough light to read on e-ink or carrying around a separate light.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by toddos

Pretty sure I'm one of the 7, and I've explained why multiple times in other threads. It's a pixels per inch thing. Backlight headaches are a myth (well, the headaches are real, but the reason is wrong). LCD reading sucks because most people have only experienced it on devices with less than 150ppi displays. Low resolution (as in pixel density, not display resolution -- in this case, a 480x800 screen with 200ppi is higher resolution than a standard 1366x768 15" laptop with 100ppi) is what causes the headaches, and reading on a high resolution device (most smartphones and 7" tablets, but not 9-10" tablets like an iPad) will be comfortable despite the backlight.

I read on my Nook STR on planes and on vacation -- places where I will have a guarantee of good light and may not have recharge options. Everywhere else I read on my phone, because my phone is always with me and I don't have to worry about having enough light to read on e-ink or carrying around a separate light.

But once again, that's you... a Nook STR I borrowed to try, gives me a headache/eyestrain just as quick as any other LCD screen when used for sustained reading but e-ink doesn't... better ppi gives better quality image but it's still a damn light shining directly in my eyes regardless of how many pixels it's made of...

[toddos]

Originally Posted by elcreative

But once again, that's you... a Nook STR I borrowed to try, gives me a headache/eyestrain just as quick as any other LCD screen when used for sustained reading but e-ink doesn't... better ppi gives better quality image but it's still a damn light shining directly in my eyes regardless of how many pixels it's made of...

Nook STR == Simple Touch Reader == e-ink. I assume you meant Nook Color?

And the backlight is not "shining directly in your eyes" any more than the light reflecting off of an eink page is "reflecting directly in your eyes".

Finally, more pixels == smoother letters == easier to read without straining, regardless of backlight or otherwise. Due to the nature of pixels on LCD (perfect squares) vs. eink (rough-edged squares), LCDs require a higher pixel density to produce as smooth letter forms. A nook color with a 7" 1024x600 screen is still only 170ppi. Try reading on a phone with over 200ppi (or an iPhone with over 300ppi) and see if that makes a difference.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by toddos

Nook STR == Simple Touch Reader == e-ink. I assume you meant Nook Color?

And the backlight is not "shining directly in your eyes" any more than the light reflecting off of an eink page is "reflecting directly in your eyes".

Finally, more pixels == smoother letters == easier to read without straining, regardless of backlight or otherwise. Due to the nature of pixels on LCD (perfect squares) vs. eink (rough-edged squares), LCDs require a higher pixel density to produce as smooth letter forms. A nook color with a 7" 1024x600 screen is still only 170ppi. Try reading on a phone with over 200ppi (or an iPhone with over 300ppi) and see if that makes a difference.

Tried my wife's iphone 4. Yes, it is better than lower resolution LCDs. But no, it isn't as comfortable for extended use at close range as e-ink.

[aagstn]

Never had an issue with either and I've been reading ebooks on backlit screens for 12 years. Eink is my outdoor choice and LCD for inside reading.

[howyoudoin]

I find it tough to go to sleep if I'm looking at an LCD screen at night, but not so if I'm reading from an E-ink display. I'm far too used to LCD displays over the years to let it give me a headache unless I'm staring at it all day long, but I do have friends who get headaches from looking at an LCD screen for more than a couple of hours.

LCD screens do affect humans in a way that is different to e-ink, no denying it.

[HansTWN]

Perhaps it also depends how you read? How close do you hold the tablet/ereader to your face? With a computer/laptop/netbook you are far away from the screen. An e-reader or tablet you can hold quite close up to your eyes.

So when I am on the road and read on the phone I leave my glasses on and try to hold it at arm's length.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by toddos

Nook STR == Simple Touch Reader == e-ink. I assume you meant Nook Color?

And the backlight is not "shining directly in your eyes" any more than the light reflecting off of an eink page is "reflecting directly in your eyes".

Finally, more pixels == smoother letters == easier to read without straining, regardless of backlight or otherwise. Due to the nature of pixels on LCD (perfect squares) vs. eink (rough-edged squares), LCDs require a higher pixel density to produce as smooth letter forms. A nook color with a 7" 1024x600 screen is still only 170ppi. Try reading on a phone with over 200ppi (or an iPhone with over 300ppi) and see if that makes a difference.

Yes, of course Nook colour, won't bother replying to you when short of sleep in future... and yes, I have a high end smartphone and NO it is still rubbish for long term reading and, if the light at the back of LCD screens that shines through the pixels, isn't shining in my eyes then where the hell does it shine... bit difficult to see if it doesn't go in my eyes... and e-ink is REFLECTIVE whereas LCD are TRANSMISSIVE, don't the words give you a clue... Unless using a mirror, reflective light is always easier on eyes than transmitted...

[jocampo]

A little off topic but somehow related?

I've started to see that tablets are more and more popular as reading devices while eink is being put on a second place. Just watch Amazon. Long time critics against iPad and now selling a tablet.

I just hope eink stay with us for long time.

BTW, my vote is for eink.

[Prestidigitweeze]

These are informed responses, toddos, and exactly the kind I've been hoping for all along.

I, too, have noticed that greater ppi = less eye strain. But in terms of smartphones, I've only found ppi to be sufficient on the iPhone 4 and greater. My own phone is a first-gen Galaxy S and my eyes definitely become strained if I stare at its screen for too long. I also see negative scotomas afterward due to the prolonged light, which I don't with eInk.

Now that the Nexus Prime and other smartphones have higher-resolution screens, I'm looking forward to testing that reading experience over time. (Feel free to call the experience DEKNAR -- the Display Enhancement Formerly Known As Retina -- even though it only ever should have been called 640 x 960 at 326 ppi.)

As you mention, the iPad's resolution is still gimped, which is one of the many reasons I don't own a tablet currently.

But here's the question: In terms of eye strain, why does resolution matter so much on an LCD screen and so little on an eInk screen? Is it really only a matter of "perfect squares"? And what about the depth distance argument that is sometimes made against LCD screens?

Originally Posted by toddos

Nook STR == Simple Touch Reader == e-ink. I assume you meant Nook Color?

And the backlight is not "shining directly in your eyes" any more than the light reflecting off of an eink page is "reflecting directly in your eyes".

Finally, more pixels == smoother letters == easier to read without straining, regardless of backlight or otherwise. Due to the nature of pixels on LCD (perfect squares) vs. eink (rough-edged squares), LCDs require a higher pixel density to produce as smooth letter forms. A nook color with a 7" 1024x600 screen is still only 170ppi. Try reading on a phone with over 200ppi (or an iPhone with over 300ppi) and see if that makes a difference.

[toddos]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

These are informed responses, toddos, and exactly the kind I've been hoping for all along.

I, too, have noticed that greater ppi = less eye strain. But in terms of smartphones, I've only found ppi to be sufficient on the iPhone 4 and greater. My own phone is a first-gen Galaxy S and my eyes definitely become strained if I stare at its screen for too long. I also see negative scotomas afterward due to the prolonged light, which I don't with eInk.

Now that the Nexus Prime and other smartphones have higher-resolution screens, I'm looking forward to testing that reading experience over time. (Feel free to call the experience DEKNAR -- the Display Enhancement Formerly Known As Retina -- even though it only ever should have been called 640 x 960 at 326 ppi.)

As you mention, the iPad's resolution is still gimped, which is one of the many reasons I don't own a tablet currently.

But here's the question: In terms of eye strain, why does resolution matter so much on an LCD screen and so little on an eInk screen? Is it really only a matter of "perfect squares"? And what about the depth distance argument that is sometimes made against LCD screens?

I can only speak from my own empirical evidence, but for me any LCD over ~160ppi will be comfortable for long periods of reading. Everybody's eyes are different, though, so you need to find what works for you. In my case, I was comfortable reading on my old iPhone 3GS (around 165ppi), but not my Touchpad or my wife's iPad (132ppi). My laptop is decent (15.6" 1920x1080, 141ppi) but I still wouldn't use it for long-term core reading. But it's more comfortable for browsing the web than a 1366x768 screen of the same size (100ppi).

My guess as to why eink is more comfortable at lower ppi is because the pixels don't have sharp edges like an LCD pixel, but I have no research to back that up. To my eye, the rougher pixels give eink a bit of "texture" almost like paper.

As for transmissive vs. reflective light, I call shenanigans. Look directly at a lightbulb. Now take a mirror and reflect that lightbulb right into your eyes. Both hurt the same, yeah? The light from an LCD backlight is diffused through the LCD panel. When you're looking at a white pixel, that's not the same thing as staring directly at a white LED. People get headaches from flicker, not from a light source. Back when LCDs were lit by CCFLs that ran at 60Hz, that was valid. No tablet or phone uses a CCFL backlight, and very few laptops do anymore either. Many desktop LCDs and HDTVs do, however, which is why I suspect people are extrapolating from their poor PC/TV experience and saying they would hate backlit phones or tablets for reading without actually having tried them.

[SCION]

Originally Posted by jocampo

A little off topic but somehow related?

I've started to see that tablets are more and more popular as reading devices while eink is being put on a second place. Just watch Amazon. Long time critics against iPad and now selling a tablet.

I just hope eink stay with us for long time.

BTW, my vote is for eink.

Wise business decision on Amazon's part. Not surprising. You can't ignore the needs of many. Cater to as many as you can, if you can do so successfully. Plus they're selling the Amazon experience with the Fire. Plus many have an eInk Kindle AND a Fire and a regular Android tablet or iPad.

[jocampo]

Originally Posted by SCION

Wise business decision on Amazon's part. Not surprising. You can't ignore the needs of many. Cater to as many as you can, if you can do so successfully. Plus they're selling the Amazon experience with the Fire. Plus many have an eInk Kindle AND a Fire and a regular Android tablet or iPad.

You are correct, it was a business decision but not one thinking in customers.

Sometimes the market forces companies to drop support and devices that are good, just not as profitable.

I don't think that new 3G Kindles are as nice as before, in terms of features I mean. It looks they captured the market and now are taking advantage of it. Hopefully I'm wrong.

[ProDigit]

don't forget, too high contrast rates also give headaches, and flickering screens do too!

I'm quite sure that pixelqi is the way of the future. I mean, my jetbook does 24 hours on an LCD screen, that's not bad at all! And it's not even pixelqi's screen they use!

With a little fine tweaking, I'm sure battery life could go up to 30 hours on a 5" jetbook, and 20hrs for a 1024x600 pix resolution screen.
That's almost a 2MPix black and white screen (since each pixel can be subdivided in 3 B&W pixels)!