6 ms·

> It turns out that staring at back-lit computer monitors for 40+ hours a week might not be the best thing for you. Source? Light is still hitting your retinas

> It turns out that staring at back-lit computer monitors for 40+ hours a week might not be the best thing for you. Source? Light is still hitting your retinas, whether it comes from reflection or from a backlight. I really enjoy E-Ink displays, but not because of perceived health benefits from reflected light. I enjoy how readable they are under sunlight, how they consume zero energy to show a static image, and how this enables them to always show content even if the device has no power. It's simply not necessary to use unsourced health claims to justify a great technology like E-Ink.

thomas 8y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17724995 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17724995 Was a good thread
- fermienrico 8y ago
  I don't see anything related to reflectivity vs. backlight illumination. Most of the discussion is around the wavelength of light (blue) and its effects.
  - coder543 8y ago
    does light have any other intrinsic properties besides spectrum/wavelengths and intensity (EDIT: properties that vary based on the light source alone)? It doesn't matter if it came from a backlight or reflection, the electromagnetic waves are still electromagnetic waves. If the color spectrum is unpleasant, it's possible to use Night Shift or other features to shift the spectrum. If the intensity is unpleasant, just turn down the brightness.
    - romed 8y ago
      The problem is LCDs have much worse objective performance as the backlight diminishes. E-Ink has tragically bad contrast of 15:1, but it maintains that contrast ratio in low lighting conditions. LCD panels rely on high brightness for their contrast. At very low brightness, even the best LCD display has poor contrast. OLED displays have a different problem; they have so much noise at low brightness that the image falls apart. Still, I think a monochrome OLED display is what the person who wrote this article actually wants. It would have better performance in every respect to E-Ink, and it doesn't sound like their application requires E-Ink's low power.
      - coder543 8y ago
        I have used both LCD and OLED smartphone displays at incredibly low brightness in pitch black rooms for a long time, and I have to completely disagree. On the other hand, E-Ink is amazing in sunlight, where smartphone displays can't get sufficiently bright.
        singularity2001 8y ago
        Which smartphone displays can you set to 'incredibly low brightness'? all iPhones and Androids I've used are like bright flashlights when the lights are switched off.
        coder543 8y ago
        It's all relative. I don't own a single flashlight that can be set dimmer (or anywhere close to as dim) as my iPhone XS Max is at minimum brightness on a white page. If the XS Max is showing mostly-dark content, the amount of light emitted is really tiny at minimum brightness because of that OLED display. On the various Android devices I've owned, I've used a useful app called Screen Filter that adds a translucent layer on top of all apps to dim the screen beyond the artificial manufacturer-imposed minimum brightness, which worked especially well on OLED Android phones, but also LCDs worked fine too.
        orbital-decay 8y ago
        Presumably, all or most Xiaomi phones. I've never used one for long, but the lowest backlight level in those I tested (Redmi Note 2, Mi A1, RN5) was comparable to the level 2 or 3 of the Kindle Paperwhite frontlight. (level 1 is a failsafe option since the Paperwhite has no physical buttons, it's not meant for reading, being too dark even for a pitch black room) That said, I don't think reading in poor lighting conditions is a good idea for your eyes, no matter the technology.
        Obi_Juan_Kenobi 8y ago
        You can use an app to reduce the brightness further. I've been using Twilight on Android, and it does indeed get much dimmer. You will certainly lose some image quality/performance, but it's very nice for viewing in a dark room.
    - jseliger 8y ago
      This is actually a reply to @Romed: OLED displays have a different problem; they have so much noise at low brightness that the image falls apart. Still, I think a monochrome OLED display is what the person who wrote this article actually wants. It would have better performance in every respect to E-Ink, and it doesn't sound like their application requires E-Ink's low power. My understanding too is that OLEDs can have "true black" pixels that emit no light at all. For "dark mode" style screens, this is a huge benefit, because the majority of the screen may simply be turned off. Conventional LCD screens still send current to each pixel, but the "black" is simply tuned to a dark frequency, rather than being altogether off.
      - romed 8y ago
        Yes, an unpowered LED emits no light. But an OLED that's barely on, for example at uniform 1% grey looks like crap because of the noise. People describe this as a "texture" or "banding". It's the consequence of trying to drive millions of individual semiconductor devices to the same emissive power. At higher brightness you can't notice the noise.
      - tinus_hn 8y ago
        Lcd screens are transparent and selectively block the light from a backlight. They can’t show full black because they can’t completely block the backlight.
    - pvg 8y ago
      does light have any other intrinsic properties besides spectrum/wavelengths and intensity? Sure, think of things like polarizing filters, lasers, etc.
      - coder543 8y ago
        Lasers are just a method of creating light of a single wavelength. The light itself from the laser is still defined by its wavelength and intensity. Polarization is just related to the orientation of the electromagnetic waves, and it is a property I didn't mention, you're correct. I don't think it really matters here, though. It's kind of like which direction you shine a light, except whether the waves are all oriented the same way or not. I would almost argue that it's an extrinsic property since uniform polarization is almost exclusively the realm of external things like filters, not the light source itself. Your "etc." is a little vague.
        pvg 8y ago
        You were suggesting light doesn't have any other 'intrinsic properties' and that's not the case - phase (a laser is not just a monochromatic light source) and polarization come to mind. Whatever it is you're trying to argue, 'light is just wavelength and intensity' is not a sensible starting point.
        coder543 8y ago
        Is it not sensible, though? People are trying to argue that light from a backlight is inherently more dangerous than reflected light. The easiest way to dispel this notion is to establish that the light from a backlight is just light like any other, which it is. At most, it varies in spectrum and intensity. Polarization is affected by filters outside of the light source. The phase that's hitting your retina varies entirely based on irrelevant things like when the light source was turned on and how far away it is. Starting by pointing out that intensity and wavelength are the only intrinsic properties is a great starting place. You still haven't pointed out any additional properties that have any bearing on how your retina is affected. I was wrong the say that there were no other properties, since we can endlessly discuss the quantum nature of light or how it experiences no flow of time since it travels at the speed of light or all sorts of other properties... but none of these things change based on the light source. Light is light, except for the intensity and wavelength. Unless we're willing to consider things which could affect reflected light just as much as they could affect emitted light, since they're the same thing. Light.
    - fermienrico 8y ago
      Yes, I know what electromagnetic waves are. I found your response very off-putting. The question is whether the intensity is discussed in the link. My point was that the discussion is more to do with the frequency of light than with intensity.
- djsumdog 8y ago
  Yea I remember that discussion. I'm not sure if I'm entirely convinced, but there are so many studies in progress looking at this that I decided to try running Redshift on my desktop again. I will say, it does seem to make it easier to fall asleep at night.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
cimmanom 8y ago
You get a LOT more light from a backlight than from reflection, at least in indoor conditions.
- mrob 8y ago
  I can turn my monitor down so it's dimmer than a sheet of white paper on my desk. If I aim a desk lamp directly at the paper I can make it brighter than the monitor on full brightness. There's no standard brightness for monitor or paper.
  - cimmanom 8y ago
    But can you actually READ your monitor when it’s dimmer than a sheet of paper in ambient light?
    - coder543 8y ago
      why does it have to be dimmer than ambient?
    - mrob 8y ago
      If the contrast of the text is high enough, yes. For many websites this means custom CSS to disable the gray font color, but I do that anyway.
    - pmontra 8y ago
      Not much. I can't read those trendy gray on white web sites too.
  - InclinedPlane 8y ago
    What you're missing is that your eyes adjust the amount of light they let in and their sensitivity relative to ambient light, which can often result in a monitor having "inappropriate" brightness levels relative to that level. Nobody on the planet spends all day constantly adjusting their monitors' brightness and contrast levels, even assuming that it was possible to reach the appropriate levels in all ambient lighting conditions within the range of those controls (hint: it's not). On the other hand, passive displays (books, e-ink) by their nature inherently match ambient lighting conditions, because they simply reflect ambient light. This is the equivalent of a monitor with a much wider range of contrast and brightness levels equipped with an automatic adaptive adjustment with sub-nanosecond response times, something that simply does not exist with present technology. So yes, in theory a monitor could potentially match a passive display in terms of reducing eye strain and tiredness but in practice it is beyond the state of the art for now.
xkcd-sucks 8y ago
The mammalian visual system has been the predominant model system used in developmental neurobiology research for the past fiftyish years. It's generally known at this point that visual circuits pattern themselves according to input, and that visual systems fed from a constrained input domain lose the ability to meaningfully represent real-world input. We also know that computer displays show a very restricted subset of perceptual info, and also don't relate to other sensory modalities (like proprioception of head/eye movements to look at peripheral objects) which are important for maintaining an integrated environmental map. So, it's more reasonable to assume that looking at monitors is harmful than helpful, especially at a young age (or following a stroke, taking certain HDAC6 inhibitors or other things that increase "neural plasticity"). The common knowledge of developmental neurobiology has advanced to the point where the claim "closer to natural ISN'T better for normal development" is one which requires proof. Now, does this have any meaningful bearing on e-ink displays? The contrast ratio is closer to stuff you get in the natural world, but apart from that it's still a monitor.
- hnuser1234 8y ago
  Everything you said sounds really impressive, but >visual systems fed from a constrained input domain lose the ability to meaningfully represent real-world input. Seems to imply that looking at a computer monitor for too much of your life means you won't be able to see the real world, or not "see it right", whatever that means. The only example of that I've seen is some people (kids, presumably) commenting on the Nvidia RTX demo videos that the non-raytraced versions, which lack real world lighting dynamics, look "better" than the raytraced ones, which were, to me at least, obviously closer to physically realistic, representative images. Now, whether they were saying that because their eyes have literally programmed themselves for cheaply rendered video game worlds, or because they didn't want to face spending the asking price of the RTX hardware, is up to the reader.
  - Roritharr 8y ago
    To add an anecdote from my adolescence: When I was 12-15 I spent pretty much all my time indoors, playing PC games or learning how to code. I realized I hadn't visited the river I was living basically next to for atleast two years when I had to pick something up at a booth next to it. I realized there that I found the water in Star Wars Galaxies much more "realistic" than the actual river flowing by. This freaked me out so much that I took a week off of gaming and went to take walks for a week.
theclaw 8y ago
It's ironic that this advice is written on a website with an 0xFFFFFF brilliant white background. Edit: thank you, Dark Reader[0] [0]https://darkreader.org/ https://darkreader.org/
fouc 8y ago
I need to wear glasses with my retina display, but not with my e-ink reader. The eyes are definitely doing more work when looking at a backlit display for whatever reason.
- jrockway 8y ago
  Same distance, same text size, and same font?
  - coder543 8y ago
    also, same color scheme? I've seen some studies that show it's harder for people with certain vision issues to focus on text that's white text on a black background than it is for them to focus on black text on a white background, so.. if they're trying to read on a dark theme on their phone, that could be noticeably different from using their E-Ink screen, which is almost certainly using a light theme.
    - fouc 8y ago
      That would definitely be a good experiment to try. I would have to try a light black on light grey to match the kindle.

thomas 8y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17724995 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17724995 Was a good thread

fermienrico 8y ago
I don't see anything related to reflectivity vs. backlight illumination. Most of the discussion is around the wavelength of light (blue) and its effects.
- coder543 8y ago
  does light have any other intrinsic properties besides spectrum/wavelengths and intensity (EDIT: properties that vary based on the light source alone)? It doesn't matter if it came from a backlight or reflection, the electromagnetic waves are still electromagnetic waves. If the color spectrum is unpleasant, it's possible to use Night Shift or other features to shift the spectrum. If the intensity is unpleasant, just turn down the brightness.
  - romed 8y ago
    The problem is LCDs have much worse objective performance as the backlight diminishes. E-Ink has tragically bad contrast of 15:1, but it maintains that contrast ratio in low lighting conditions. LCD panels rely on high brightness for their contrast. At very low brightness, even the best LCD display has poor contrast. OLED displays have a different problem; they have so much noise at low brightness that the image falls apart. Still, I think a monochrome OLED display is what the person who wrote this article actually wants. It would have better performance in every respect to E-Ink, and it doesn't sound like their application requires E-Ink's low power.
    - coder543 8y ago
      I have used both LCD and OLED smartphone displays at incredibly low brightness in pitch black rooms for a long time, and I have to completely disagree. On the other hand, E-Ink is amazing in sunlight, where smartphone displays can't get sufficiently bright.
      - singularity2001 8y ago
        Which smartphone displays can you set to 'incredibly low brightness'? all iPhones and Androids I've used are like bright flashlights when the lights are switched off.
        coder543 8y ago
        It's all relative. I don't own a single flashlight that can be set dimmer (or anywhere close to as dim) as my iPhone XS Max is at minimum brightness on a white page. If the XS Max is showing mostly-dark content, the amount of light emitted is really tiny at minimum brightness because of that OLED display. On the various Android devices I've owned, I've used a useful app called Screen Filter that adds a translucent layer on top of all apps to dim the screen beyond the artificial manufacturer-imposed minimum brightness, which worked especially well on OLED Android phones, but also LCDs worked fine too.
        orbital-decay 8y ago
        Presumably, all or most Xiaomi phones. I've never used one for long, but the lowest backlight level in those I tested (Redmi Note 2, Mi A1, RN5) was comparable to the level 2 or 3 of the Kindle Paperwhite frontlight. (level 1 is a failsafe option since the Paperwhite has no physical buttons, it's not meant for reading, being too dark even for a pitch black room) That said, I don't think reading in poor lighting conditions is a good idea for your eyes, no matter the technology.
        Obi_Juan_Kenobi 8y ago
        You can use an app to reduce the brightness further. I've been using Twilight on Android, and it does indeed get much dimmer. You will certainly lose some image quality/performance, but it's very nice for viewing in a dark room.
  - jseliger 8y ago
    This is actually a reply to @Romed: OLED displays have a different problem; they have so much noise at low brightness that the image falls apart. Still, I think a monochrome OLED display is what the person who wrote this article actually wants. It would have better performance in every respect to E-Ink, and it doesn't sound like their application requires E-Ink's low power. My understanding too is that OLEDs can have "true black" pixels that emit no light at all. For "dark mode" style screens, this is a huge benefit, because the majority of the screen may simply be turned off. Conventional LCD screens still send current to each pixel, but the "black" is simply tuned to a dark frequency, rather than being altogether off.
    - romed 8y ago
      Yes, an unpowered LED emits no light. But an OLED that's barely on, for example at uniform 1% grey looks like crap because of the noise. People describe this as a "texture" or "banding". It's the consequence of trying to drive millions of individual semiconductor devices to the same emissive power. At higher brightness you can't notice the noise.
    - tinus_hn 8y ago
      Lcd screens are transparent and selectively block the light from a backlight. They can’t show full black because they can’t completely block the backlight.
  - pvg 8y ago
    does light have any other intrinsic properties besides spectrum/wavelengths and intensity? Sure, think of things like polarizing filters, lasers, etc.
    - coder543 8y ago
      Lasers are just a method of creating light of a single wavelength. The light itself from the laser is still defined by its wavelength and intensity. Polarization is just related to the orientation of the electromagnetic waves, and it is a property I didn't mention, you're correct. I don't think it really matters here, though. It's kind of like which direction you shine a light, except whether the waves are all oriented the same way or not. I would almost argue that it's an extrinsic property since uniform polarization is almost exclusively the realm of external things like filters, not the light source itself. Your "etc." is a little vague.
      - pvg 8y ago
        You were suggesting light doesn't have any other 'intrinsic properties' and that's not the case - phase (a laser is not just a monochromatic light source) and polarization come to mind. Whatever it is you're trying to argue, 'light is just wavelength and intensity' is not a sensible starting point.
        coder543 8y ago
        Is it not sensible, though? People are trying to argue that light from a backlight is inherently more dangerous than reflected light. The easiest way to dispel this notion is to establish that the light from a backlight is just light like any other, which it is. At most, it varies in spectrum and intensity. Polarization is affected by filters outside of the light source. The phase that's hitting your retina varies entirely based on irrelevant things like when the light source was turned on and how far away it is. Starting by pointing out that intensity and wavelength are the only intrinsic properties is a great starting place. You still haven't pointed out any additional properties that have any bearing on how your retina is affected. I was wrong the say that there were no other properties, since we can endlessly discuss the quantum nature of light or how it experiences no flow of time since it travels at the speed of light or all sorts of other properties... but none of these things change based on the light source. Light is light, except for the intensity and wavelength. Unless we're willing to consider things which could affect reflected light just as much as they could affect emitted light, since they're the same thing. Light.
  - fermienrico 8y ago
    Yes, I know what electromagnetic waves are. I found your response very off-putting. The question is whether the intensity is discussed in the link. My point was that the discussion is more to do with the frequency of light than with intensity.
djsumdog 8y ago
Yea I remember that discussion. I'm not sure if I'm entirely convinced, but there are so many studies in progress looking at this that I decided to try running Redshift on my desktop again. I will say, it does seem to make it easier to fall asleep at night.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

cimmanom 8y ago

You get a LOT more light from a backlight than from reflection, at least in indoor conditions.

mrob 8y ago
I can turn my monitor down so it's dimmer than a sheet of white paper on my desk. If I aim a desk lamp directly at the paper I can make it brighter than the monitor on full brightness. There's no standard brightness for monitor or paper.
- cimmanom 8y ago
  But can you actually READ your monitor when it’s dimmer than a sheet of paper in ambient light?
  - coder543 8y ago
    why does it have to be dimmer than ambient?
  - mrob 8y ago
    If the contrast of the text is high enough, yes. For many websites this means custom CSS to disable the gray font color, but I do that anyway.
  - pmontra 8y ago
    Not much. I can't read those trendy gray on white web sites too.
- InclinedPlane 8y ago
  What you're missing is that your eyes adjust the amount of light they let in and their sensitivity relative to ambient light, which can often result in a monitor having "inappropriate" brightness levels relative to that level. Nobody on the planet spends all day constantly adjusting their monitors' brightness and contrast levels, even assuming that it was possible to reach the appropriate levels in all ambient lighting conditions within the range of those controls (hint: it's not). On the other hand, passive displays (books, e-ink) by their nature inherently match ambient lighting conditions, because they simply reflect ambient light. This is the equivalent of a monitor with a much wider range of contrast and brightness levels equipped with an automatic adaptive adjustment with sub-nanosecond response times, something that simply does not exist with present technology. So yes, in theory a monitor could potentially match a passive display in terms of reducing eye strain and tiredness but in practice it is beyond the state of the art for now.

xkcd-sucks 8y ago

The mammalian visual system has been the predominant model system used in developmental neurobiology research for the past fiftyish years. It's generally known at this point that visual circuits pattern themselves according to input, and that visual systems fed from a constrained input domain lose the ability to meaningfully represent real-world input. We also know that computer displays show a very restricted subset of perceptual info, and also don't relate to other sensory modalities (like proprioception of head/eye movements to look at peripheral objects) which are important for maintaining an integrated environmental map. So, it's more reasonable to assume that looking at monitors is harmful than helpful, especially at a young age (or following a stroke, taking certain HDAC6 inhibitors or other things that increase "neural plasticity"). The common knowledge of developmental neurobiology has advanced to the point where the claim "closer to natural ISN'T better for normal development" is one which requires proof. Now, does this have any meaningful bearing on e-ink displays? The contrast ratio is closer to stuff you get in the natural world, but apart from that it's still a monitor.

hnuser1234 8y ago
Everything you said sounds really impressive, but >visual systems fed from a constrained input domain lose the ability to meaningfully represent real-world input. Seems to imply that looking at a computer monitor for too much of your life means you won't be able to see the real world, or not "see it right", whatever that means. The only example of that I've seen is some people (kids, presumably) commenting on the Nvidia RTX demo videos that the non-raytraced versions, which lack real world lighting dynamics, look "better" than the raytraced ones, which were, to me at least, obviously closer to physically realistic, representative images. Now, whether they were saying that because their eyes have literally programmed themselves for cheaply rendered video game worlds, or because they didn't want to face spending the asking price of the RTX hardware, is up to the reader.
- Roritharr 8y ago
  To add an anecdote from my adolescence: When I was 12-15 I spent pretty much all my time indoors, playing PC games or learning how to code. I realized I hadn't visited the river I was living basically next to for atleast two years when I had to pick something up at a booth next to it. I realized there that I found the water in Star Wars Galaxies much more "realistic" than the actual river flowing by. This freaked me out so much that I took a week off of gaming and went to take walks for a week.

theclaw 8y ago

It's ironic that this advice is written on a website with an 0xFFFFFF brilliant white background. Edit: thank you, Dark Reader[0] [0]https://darkreader.org/ https://darkreader.org/

fouc 8y ago

I need to wear glasses with my retina display, but not with my e-ink reader. The eyes are definitely doing more work when looking at a backlit display for whatever reason.

jrockway 8y ago
Same distance, same text size, and same font?
- coder543 8y ago
  also, same color scheme? I've seen some studies that show it's harder for people with certain vision issues to focus on text that's white text on a black background than it is for them to focus on black text on a white background, so.. if they're trying to read on a dark theme on their phone, that could be noticeably different from using their E-Ink screen, which is almost certainly using a light theme.
  - fouc 8y ago
    That would definitely be a good experiment to try. I would have to try a light black on light grey to match the kindle.