2 ms·

They obviously do. E-ink display in this topic, for example, is 12:1[1]. The best (contrast wise) e-ink displays available commercially are around 20:1. The tra

They obviously do. E-ink display in this topic, for example, is 12:1[1]. The best (contrast wise) e-ink displays available commercially are around 20:1. The trashiest LCD, on the other hand, will be around 500:1. 1. https://www.panelook.com/ED047TC1_E_Ink_4.7_EPD_parameter_25595.html https://www.panelook.com/ED047TC1_E_Ink_4.7_EPD_parameter_25...

carlosjobim 21d ago
Measuring the contrast within the display means practically nothing compared to measuring the contrast in the real world environment, which in this case is outdoors and hopefully in the sun. Compared to the full contrast range of the sun lit real world, all displays emitting light function in a very narrow and very dark contrast range. An eInk display does not emit light, so in that environment you have a clear separation between bright and dark.
- pandaman 21d ago
  > Measuring the contrast within the display means practically nothing compared to measuring the contrast in the real world environment Even if it had been true, claiming the e-ink has the same or better contrast as LCD is still false. The sun-lit world has higher contrast than any display, yet it does not make e-ink's contrast any good. In fact it makes the low contrast display much worse as you are likely to be looking at much brighter scenes than your bike computer's screen immediately before looking at it and thus having even less ability to distinguish slight brightness variations on the low contrast screen. A transflective TFT display in bike computers also does not emit light, it's still higher contrast in the sun than e-ink.
  - carlosjobim 21d ago
    A paper with printed text on a desk in candlelight is harder to read than any LCD monitor with full brightness emitting its own light. But out in the sunshine, the paper will have hundreds of times better contrast than any LCD. The same is true for eInk. Frankly, I don't understand why you are arguing, when it is so ridiculously easy for anybody to test for themselves. Just bring your LCD or OLED device out in the sunshine along with your eInk device and see which one you can read from more easily. TFT displays are really good in the sunshine, but eInk is still a bit better, only beaten by paper for real world contrast. Has it been a long time since you've used eInk? Maybe they were worse in the past? My oldest eInk device is from 2018, so I wouldn't know about the screens that were before.
    - pandaman 21d ago
      >TFT displays are really good in the sunshine, but eInk is still a bit better, only beaten by paper for real world contrast. You obviously have not done what you are suggesting. Paper is low contrast too, on the level of e-ink. >Has it been a long time since you've used eInk? Maybe they were worse in the past? No to both questions. E-ink inherently is low contrast and there is no way to enhance it in this technology: both black and white are done with a pigment, same as print, which caps at ~30:1.
      - carlosjobim 21d ago
        Maybe you live in a place where the sun doesn't shine that strongly? Because otherwise you could do a real life test and know that I'm right in 5 seconds. I read books on my Kindle outdoors in the blazing sun, and so do most of the millions of people who have Kindles or similar devices. Contrast is excellent. In the same conditions an LCD phone is just a black mirror which you can hardly make out any kind of information form. An OLED is better, and you can see everything on the screen dimly if you strain your eyes. A TFT is even better, but none of them compares to eInk or paper. So maybe you live in Britain or in Norway, or somewhere similar where it's cloudy all the time? You saying that paper is low contrast baffles me, actually. It seems like you are hung up on the contrast within the device, which is irrelevant for outdoor use, where the only thing which matters is the contrast as part of the real world environment. Let me ask you, who is the faster runner: The fastest runner on your street or the slowest runner in the Olympics? Because you seem to be arguing for the former because of measuring within limits that do not confirm to the real world - where there is a sun.
        pandaman 21d ago
        I live in Texas. I think you are just confused about meaning of the word "contrast" because you keep using in a way that makes no sense for contrast but makes some sense for brightness. Contrast in this context is the ratio of luminosity between brightest and darkest areas of a display. For a non-emissive display such as e-ink or LCD in a bike computer the ambient light level makes zero difference: the white pigment in e-ink will reflect/diffuse ~15 times more light than the black pigment in the same. Light areas in an LCD screen will reflect 1000 times more light than dark areas. The absolute amount of light above quantum level makes zero difference, it's the same for a candle, Sun or a supernova star - the ratio i.e. contrast remains the same. An e-ink display can be brighter than a reflective LCD though due to higher albedo, this is likely what you are talking about. Also, if you really try to do what you suggested - you should not use an LCD phone, phones do not have reflective LCD displays but use backlight instead so the contrast on those decreases with increase of the ambient as both light and dark areas reflect the same amount of ambient light and the only difference is the backlight's emissive portion, the higher is the ambient, the lower of the ratio i.e. contrast.

carlosjobim 21d ago

Measuring the contrast within the display means practically nothing compared to measuring the contrast in the real world environment, which in this case is outdoors and hopefully in the sun. Compared to the full contrast range of the sun lit real world, all displays emitting light function in a very narrow and very dark contrast range. An eInk display does not emit light, so in that environment you have a clear separation between bright and dark.

pandaman 21d ago
> Measuring the contrast within the display means practically nothing compared to measuring the contrast in the real world environment Even if it had been true, claiming the e-ink has the same or better contrast as LCD is still false. The sun-lit world has higher contrast than any display, yet it does not make e-ink's contrast any good. In fact it makes the low contrast display much worse as you are likely to be looking at much brighter scenes than your bike computer's screen immediately before looking at it and thus having even less ability to distinguish slight brightness variations on the low contrast screen. A transflective TFT display in bike computers also does not emit light, it's still higher contrast in the sun than e-ink.
- carlosjobim 21d ago
  A paper with printed text on a desk in candlelight is harder to read than any LCD monitor with full brightness emitting its own light. But out in the sunshine, the paper will have hundreds of times better contrast than any LCD. The same is true for eInk. Frankly, I don't understand why you are arguing, when it is so ridiculously easy for anybody to test for themselves. Just bring your LCD or OLED device out in the sunshine along with your eInk device and see which one you can read from more easily. TFT displays are really good in the sunshine, but eInk is still a bit better, only beaten by paper for real world contrast. Has it been a long time since you've used eInk? Maybe they were worse in the past? My oldest eInk device is from 2018, so I wouldn't know about the screens that were before.
  - pandaman 21d ago
    >TFT displays are really good in the sunshine, but eInk is still a bit better, only beaten by paper for real world contrast. You obviously have not done what you are suggesting. Paper is low contrast too, on the level of e-ink. >Has it been a long time since you've used eInk? Maybe they were worse in the past? No to both questions. E-ink inherently is low contrast and there is no way to enhance it in this technology: both black and white are done with a pigment, same as print, which caps at ~30:1.
    - carlosjobim 21d ago
      Maybe you live in a place where the sun doesn't shine that strongly? Because otherwise you could do a real life test and know that I'm right in 5 seconds. I read books on my Kindle outdoors in the blazing sun, and so do most of the millions of people who have Kindles or similar devices. Contrast is excellent. In the same conditions an LCD phone is just a black mirror which you can hardly make out any kind of information form. An OLED is better, and you can see everything on the screen dimly if you strain your eyes. A TFT is even better, but none of them compares to eInk or paper. So maybe you live in Britain or in Norway, or somewhere similar where it's cloudy all the time? You saying that paper is low contrast baffles me, actually. It seems like you are hung up on the contrast within the device, which is irrelevant for outdoor use, where the only thing which matters is the contrast as part of the real world environment. Let me ask you, who is the faster runner: The fastest runner on your street or the slowest runner in the Olympics? Because you seem to be arguing for the former because of measuring within limits that do not confirm to the real world - where there is a sun.
      - pandaman 21d ago
        I live in Texas. I think you are just confused about meaning of the word "contrast" because you keep using in a way that makes no sense for contrast but makes some sense for brightness. Contrast in this context is the ratio of luminosity between brightest and darkest areas of a display. For a non-emissive display such as e-ink or LCD in a bike computer the ambient light level makes zero difference: the white pigment in e-ink will reflect/diffuse ~15 times more light than the black pigment in the same. Light areas in an LCD screen will reflect 1000 times more light than dark areas. The absolute amount of light above quantum level makes zero difference, it's the same for a candle, Sun or a supernova star - the ratio i.e. contrast remains the same. An e-ink display can be brighter than a reflective LCD though due to higher albedo, this is likely what you are talking about. Also, if you really try to do what you suggested - you should not use an LCD phone, phones do not have reflective LCD displays but use backlight instead so the contrast on those decreases with increase of the ambient as both light and dark areas reflect the same amount of ambient light and the only difference is the backlight's emissive portion, the higher is the ambient, the lower of the ratio i.e. contrast.