Japanese electronics giants Sony, Toshiba and Hitachi have been showing off new low-power LCD display technology which seems to combine the best of LCD and e-ink by dispensing with the backlight and instead relying on reflected light. The firms formed their joint venture, Japan Display, earlier this year and appear to have been …
Read this: http://www.ipctechnology.com/support/techinfo/color_gamut.htm
In this context, the NTSC colour gamut refers to more than just what the "Never The Same Colour" TV standard could achieve. By this measure, the display that achieves 36% of the NTSC gamut is about 1/2 as good as a CRT display of old (not an NTSC CRT specifically, just an RGB CRT, presumably).
How does the reflectivity and contrast numbers stack up against the first gen eInk screens that lead to the Pearl devices we are currently used to I wonder ? That would have been an interesting comparison.
Transflective LCD has been around how long? A decade? More? In handheld GPS devices, and some phones (Nokia E61 had a excellent one).
True, but they took a damn sight more than 3mW.
How much power does a normal LCD screen consume?
I know nothing about LCD screen so this could be impressive using only 3mW to power an LCD screen, sounds good. But what size of screen, 1mm x 1mm, probably not very good especially as it states is 3mW with a static image. Now if it’s a 1524mm diagonal screen then that sounds very impressive even with a juts a static image.
For people who still like measurements based on a dead persons thumb 1524mm is 60 inches, but El Reg now only used S.I. units except for pints and height of plains
Resolution and size
Can't say I'd want one for an e-reader, I think they're a dead end and will be superceded by tablets with high res displays. What I would like it for would be a wall picture display, res 1920x1080 or better, screen size 24 inch upwards. Add a wireless interface so it can be accessed remotely and I'd be out to buy one straight away.
Re: Resolution and size
Until tablets use a display technology that doesn't flicker, can be powered for days without recharging, and can be read in bright sunlight, there will be a place for e-Readers.
Something like an iPad is just about okay for flicking through a magazine, but reading anything longer on those screens is a one-way trip to a headache.
For wallcoverings, there's inkjet-printed OLED on a flexible backing. Far too expensive right now, but it will revolutionise interior lighting and design whenever the production cost drops (and cell lifetime improves, it has to be said).
Re: Resolution and size
Reflected light tires the eyes less than direct light, so even if there were no power savings this would be the preferred technology for everything if the quality was in the same ballpark and a backlight could still be used to add light where there isn't enough ambient light.
The quality would have to match that of current LCD IPS technology to start replacing displays on high end smartphones and tablets.
Colour vs brightness
Since the colour is by a filter, inherently the better the colour the less light there is. If the filters perfect you'd lose 2/3rds of the light as the Red filter blocks all the green and blue parts of spectrum to get the red colour.
Hence if you have pastel "weak" colour the filter blocks maybe 10%.
So they can't make it much "Better". It's physics. If you are using passive filters and ambient light then maybe 50% to 60% reflection with very pale colours and no better than 28% to 33% with good colour.
Mirasol can achieve the brightest passive colour display as it's mirrors, not pigment/dye filters and LCD.
The LCD polarisers also lose light.. The LCD itself can be pretty clear.