I'm so tired of display screens having low brightness. The max brightness of any display is 300-500 nits. This brightness is barely acceptable indoors, next to my window, with indirect sunlight.
Bonded glass and anti-reflective techniques aren't good enough. It sucks to have to focus your eyes on a dark screen when the environment is really bright.
I heard that more than 1000 nits borders acceptable for outdoors. For indoors, holding my monitor in front of the window to compare, at least 5 times its current brightness would be good. So like 2500 nits.
What ever happened to displays that worked in sunlight? On my ADP1 with brightness turned all the way down the display was entirely usable in direct sunlight
>>53380378
for non-mobile applications a screen that bright would probably want some sort of accuracy in RGB luminance, gamma conformity at deskbound viewing angles, color accuracy, etc.
this becomes difficult and expensive as nits increase.
for outdoor usage high nits are, obviously, the primary desirable and making them isn't hard or very expensive--it just costs more in energy which is in short supply for mobile and expensive in fixed-outdoor.
what we have is more or less what is correct at our current state of technology and for our general use case scenarios.
Just put cardboard over the windows of your mom's basement
I just wish each pixel have its own brightness value. Why isnt this a thing?
>>53382329
Because most displays don't control brightness on a pixel to pixel basis
>>53380378
One x was a piece of shit desu
>>53380378
are you blind? I have the brightness of my Xperia Z1 at minimum all the time.
my Dell u2711's brightness is like at 17% as well.
>>53382329
>what is OLED
>>53380776
Problem of LCD screens. As pixel density increases it is harder for light to get through so the backlight must be brighter, which consumes more power.
Basically density technology has increased faster than lighting.
>>53382378
Yes but why not?
In real life if I had a perfectly red object (0xFF0000)
and I take it in a dark room it doesn't look like 0x800000
It looks like a darkened version of 0xFF00000
if I take it in the sunlight it becomes brighter but not saturated.
Panels cant accurately replicate that having just 1 brightness.
>>53382509
I mean they physically cannot do it. With the exception of certain technologies such as AMOLED, displays use a shared light source for multiple pixels
>>53380378
My phone display reaches about 780 nits and it's so bright it's uncomfortable to look at. Why do you want more?
>>53380378
What are you talking about, nearly every screen is set way too bright as default. A calibrated monitor is way darker than its default setting.
>>53382479
But great improvements have been made to increase light transmission and decrease the black grid between the pixels etc. That combined with the change from CCFL to LED backlights has actually decreased backlight power consumption significantly.
>>53382862
Backlight power efficiency improves, but devices are made thinner, so brighter backlights that take advantage of the increased efficiency can't be isrd.
>>53383363
Well I've personally never had an issue with a display not being bright enough, so I am okay with this.
>>53383453
I had a friend that used the minimum brightness on their phone all day. That's not normal, yo.
Clearblack
L
E
A
R
B
L
A
C
K
>>53382509
So you're saying that the brighter a pixel becomes, the more light it reflects? I don't know if this is related, but there is something like it being developed for incandescent bulbs.
>MIT's design uses photonic crystals to reflect heat-carrying infrared light back at the filament, while ...
>>53383596
OP here, I had that and it was great. I think the phone I used was 350 nits and it was nowhere near bright enough for the sun, but at least usable.
>>53382439
>have the brightness of my Xperia Z1 at minimum all the time.
are you one of those people at the beach all day with sunglasses and minimum phone brightness?
