there's no evidence/meta-analysis pointing e-ink screen tiring eyes more/less than LCD

Is there any actual scientific study saying anything either way?

I'm aware of a lot of anecdotal evidence in favor of e-ink displays being easier on the eyes than normal LCDs in some way, my own personal experience included, but I will happily admit I'm wrong if there are studies indicating otherwise.

I like my Kindle and DIY e-ink weather display but I'm not religious about it. I wouldn't be shocked to find out it was just a weird placebo thing because it's different.

i don't think there are much but i made my research a decade ago after realizing i was having a good time with my smartphone compared to my e-reader

[1] suggests that LCD even increases processing speed compared to e-ink

[0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22762257/

[1] https://bop.unibe.ch/JEMR/article/view/2338/3534

there's a study from Havard concluding "e-ink is 3 times better for eye health than LCD" but it feels rather dubious from the claims (blue light stressing more the retina... like i couldn't use a glass or apply a filter on my screen), light intensity (again...), in-vitro study and who funded the study (a great e-ink screen producer) -> https://sid.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jsid.1191

i probably read hundred books since i sold my e-reader and moved to my smartphone. i really like having a single device. battery is fine. physical books with images still rocks but maybe becuse i don't have a tablet :)

I've spent thousands of hours (I think) reading on a phone. I even prefer it over a physical book because it doesn't have that annoying crease and it doesn't spoil the story by telling me how far along in the book I am.

Well, not sure about your eyes, but you are certainly inviting neck problems, and carpal tunnel syndrome.

The problem is that there's not even a hypothesis for how light reflecting off an e-ink display could be easier on the eyes than light emitted from an LCD, unless the LCD is using PWM dimming of the backlight and thus flickering. I've never seen a claim that e-ink displays are easier on the eyes get further than the most obvious question: have you tried e-ink and LCD at the same brightness and similar color temperature?

How would that comparison work using an e-ink display illuminated only with ambient light in the room?

(i.e. setting the "frontlight" brightness to 0% on a Kindle, which would also eliminate color temperature control other than room ambient light).

It does seem hard to believe that e-ink + a reflected frontlight would be any easier on the eyes than an LCD backlight (particularly since it's probably also using PWM). But an e-ink display on its own at least removes an additional light source pointing directly at the eyes, which could provide a potential mechanism for different effects on the eyes/brain.

> But an e-ink display on its own at least removes an additional light source pointing directly at the eyes, which could provide a potential mechanism for different effects on the eyes/brain.

Not really, since LCD/OLED aren't an additional light source, but absorb and thus replace the ambient light that would be coming from their direction.

I don't know the science, but my experience is that my brain is simply able to process and retain information so much better with eInk than with LCD screens.

I started as a teenager with cathodic tubes, which were killing my eyes and bringing daily headaches; moved on to LCDs which stopped the headaches but still tire my eyes significantly (some of them literally make me cry after a few minutes); and then found eInk and it's so much better, I will definitely move to that once prices of large color monitors at 60hz get into my price range. I honestly don't care about power draw one bit.

Not really, since it's not just about the light intensity, but also its spectral power distribution. This especially matters when using the display in a darker environment with low-temperature illumination, e.g. when reading before bed.

Quick experiment to show the effect: Go into a room with low 2700K or lower-temp lighting. Take an LCD, set its colour temperature same as the external lighting, then display an all-black screen. Since the screen is displaying #000, the software colour temp adjustment can't do anything, and you'll see the screen as emitting blue light, the colour of its backlight.

OLEDs don't have this issue, which makes them great for night-time use when configured properly, but they also generally use low-frequency PWM dimming on low brightness.

If you've got that much backlight bleed, turn down your backlight.

Each LCD has a minimum backlight brightness, and I don't know any LCD that could be turned down enough to appear truly dark in a dimly-lit room.

> Not really, since LCD/OLED aren't an additional light source, but absorb and thus replace the ambient light that would be coming from their direction.

Don’t they actually have to over power the reflection you would see with the screen off?

Displays don't usually reflect significantly more than 10% of incoming light

the e-ink advantage is that it forces screen brightness to track room brightness.

Huh? I never read studies about it, but no hypothesis?

I frequently stumbled upon the assumption that a LCD screen is pulsed and flickers and that makes all the difference as E-Ink is more steady. (Artificial lightsources can also flicker, but with reflection it evens out)

In (old?) theory too fast for the eyes to notice, but I surely notice a difference.

I expect most eInk users use a frontlight, many/most of which are PWM-controlled.

E-Ink’s brightness is naturally proportional to ambient lighting. From indoors to bright sunshine.

Their brightness can also be conveniently, even subconsciously controlled, by how they are held.

LCDs can be dimmed and brightened, but matching the E-Inks “response” in both brightness and contrast over a high range of ambient lighting would be difficult. Probably impossible without an LCD specifically designed to do that.

You wait for the science then. I'm not sure about anyone else, but I can't use an LCD screen for more than 30 minutes without getting a headache. I use my e-ink screen all day without it triggering a headache.

>I can't use an LCD screen for more than 30 minutes without getting a headache

You're a software developer. How do you function? Do you spend pretty much your entire waking life with a headache?

I believe HN has a slightly wider demographic these days. Maybe we should have people fix a bug in some bash script everytime they log in :p

It is fair for you to think I assumed the poster was a software developer, but in fact I looked him up before I made my comment and that is how he makes a living. (Unless something has changed recently.) I am genuinely curious how people (he's not the only one I know of) with such high sensitivity to LCD screens manage a career where staring at such screens for prolonged periods is the norm.

Before I got the e-ink screen, yes, more or less. At the peak I did little screen-based development and a lot of pen-and-paper maths. I thought I would have to give programming away, and retrained for a different job. I got the e-ink screen 1 year ago and since then have slowly started developing again.

Go look at comparing reading books to screens. And all the studies looking at sleep quality and display usage.

There's no evidence/meta-analysis pointing milky and a warm blanket is cozier than water and a sleeping bag.

It's also about being usable in the sun.

Whereas it may be used in outdoors-like natural lighting, it is not (always) true that it is "usable in the sun". On one such product¹ there's this "Important Notice" advising users to "avoid exposing the E-ink screen to direct sunlight or intense ultraviolet rays, as this may cause irreversible damage to the screen."

¹ https://shop.dasung.com/products/dasung-25-3-e-ink-monitor-p...