This is a nice idea. But it appears the trend of "Look at this astonishing youth!", then in paragraph 8, "whose parents own a recycling company near Shenzen...and connected him with manufacturers" so this is a joint venture between his parents company and some of their friends to back their son's business idea. Very newsworthy.
I personally would like to see a resurgence and expansion of Reflective LCD screens, and this seems sort of similar. I mostly associate Reflective LCD screens with Gameboys.<p>Remember how helpful it was to go outside to see the Gameboy screen? There was a reflective material on the back side of the screen, which "lit" up the screen. As an aside, there was even a cool Gameboy Advance game with a solar sensor that encouraged the player to go outside to charge up the protagonist's "solar gun": <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boktai:_The_Sun_Is_in_Your_Hand" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boktai:_The_Sun_Is_in_Your_Han...</a>. Even the GBA SP, which had a light you could turn on and off, lit the screen up from the front.<p>I'm definitely not an expert in the area. My impression is that after the Gameboy, there wasn't much demand for these types of screen. I also suspect something about them doesn't scale to larger sizes as cost effectively as other screens, and there's been little interest from corporations in improving the technology :(
I disagree with other commentators here arguing that there's no benefit this monitor would bring over simply reducing screen brightness. But I also think the claim made by the article here is at best, miscommunicated: that the bounced light improves the monitor light quality itself. On this point, I think the criticism from HN is correct, there wouldn't be a meaningful difference between equivalent bounced light, and light from the monitor. There might be a possible benefit from the lack of light flickering from AC-driven electric lights, but that is only true if the space is daylit.<p>However, I think there is a quantifiable benefit from making the monitor light directly dependent on environmental light, which forces our perception to adjust to a more, low contrast, diffuse environmental context.<p>Part of the problem is that "brightness" in the context of monitors is different from how "brightness" is used in science of light, where it is defined as the subjective perception of light that changes relative to differences in light levels[1]. So you can see your way to the washroom in the middle of the night with no lights, but can't see your way back after you turned on the washroom light, because your subjective perception of light (brightness) has changed, even though objectively the amount of visible light (illuminance) has not changed.<p>Therefore, having a screen lit by the environment, would shift your perception of light to better see duller, low-light conditions, which is better for our eyes, since more uniform, diffuse light causes less strain than strong, directed light.<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brightness" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brightness</a><p>[2] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficiency_function" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_efficiency_function</a>
Not to crap on an inventive kid, but I don't get this.<p>A normal LCD screen works by shooting a backlight (usually LEDs) through an LCD panel. All this project does is replace the backlight with either a reflective backlight, or ambient light if it's bright enough.<p>So how could this be any improvement beyond just turning down the brightness on a plain old LCD screen?
One of the things I really hate about reviews of laptops, screens, etc, is the focus on how bright the screens are <i>as though it's a good thing.</i><p>Who really wants to be staring at 1,600 nits of brightness all day? Certainly not me.<p>A much better screen, in my opinion, would have super high contrast with <i>low</i> brightness. Yet, this isn't something that gets measured by reviewers. Coincidentally, that's also why I like using OLED screens. At least with true black, much of the light can get turned off completely.
I wish the article explained why redesigning the monitor to use ambient light is better than turning down the "brightness" setting. Anyone know?
I lol'd at this line from the Indiegogo campaign video: "Eazeye has a built in LED strip so it can work in the dark."<p>So, I guess all I need to do is mount aquarium lights directly above my monitor to get an extremely dim image during the day?<p><a href="https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_1200,c_limit,q_auto:best/wp-cms/uploads/2023/10/10-90971739-low-light-computer-monitor.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_1200,c_limit,q...</a>
No comment on this actual product, but I found that turning the brightness as low as I can tolerate on my monitor significantly reduced my eye strain and discomfort. It takes a little getting used to, but I highly recommend giving it a try.
Switching from OLED to IPS screens that have no flicker helps a lot too.<p>Very hard to find an OLED monitor that doesn't have flicker (this is not refresh rate - this is brightness modulating from 0 - 100% hundreds of times a second - hard on eye muscles). Old CRT monitors were even better than current OLED displays because the flicker modulation was a curve and not a digital hard/on-off type flicker.
In 2007 I was taking apart LCD screens to do multitouch experiments. One of the things that I noticed was that without the backlight panel, you could light up the screen using ambient light and use a camera to get infrared light to reflect your fingertips for detection. A bunch of folks in the NUI space were doing this. Projectors, LCDs, front detection, back detection, capacitive touches, optical touches, etc.<p>The biggest issue with this approach is color balance. Imperfect light creates imperfect colors. The LCD is tuned to display colors at the light intensity of the backlight panel it uses. Without the backlight and filters, light is uneven, unbalanced, and it will show in the screen. Fine if you’re just doing text. Not fine if you’re editing video. In the end, this is not a new approach to monitors but much much worse.
Wait, so instead of a regular screen, you get an unevenly lit screen and a very bright and glary light source that’s visible right above the screen? Those sample pictures look miserable to work near.<p>How about a conventional display with an ambient light sensor that can adjust brightness to match the ambient conditions? Bonus points for optional automatic white point adjustment. (Many mobile devices have these features.)
If nothing else, this monitor is a good way to counteract the problems that come from working in otherwise-underlit workspaces, since it simply won't work there.
Sony released the PCG-C2GPS laptop in Nov 1999 which had a reflective LCD almost exactly like this. The use-case was that you’d primarily use it in your car (during the day) for navigation and want the better battery life by not having a backlight. The back of the LCD hinges off like this but also stores a front light you can attach for low-light situations.<p><a href="https://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/article/991104/sony.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/article/991104/sony.htm</a><p>The photos of the screen in use look bad! B/W only for reflective in my experience (i.e. Pebble watch.)
What we really need is desktop monitors to have similar light following properties as tablets and phones and if that can be calibrated a bit they will follow the lighting of the room as it changes through the day. We don't need completely new monitors we just need desktop computers to copy something phones and tablets have been doing for 15 years now and all for the cost of a simple light sensor.<p>Desktop monitors have not made it possible to adjust their brightness from the PC and that is a big problem in all this or we would have solved this years ago.
Eye strain seems like the wrong thing to focus on here. I'm much more interested in the efficiency of this design.<p>Most of the energy drawn by an LCD goes into its backlight. If you are trying to use one outside, then you are fighting the brightness of the sun by matching its intensity with a backlight. Why not just use the sun <i>as</i> a backlight instead?<p>Of course, this is a very simple and clunky version of that. I do wonder how much could be optimized.
I always have brightness on as low as possible and have noticed people in the office often have theirs up quite a lot.<p>Never suffered from dry eyes, at 36 still have 20/20 vision, and haven't felt a need to do anything about my monitors.<p>The biggest issue I've faced is actually environmental glare (light from windows / bouncing off walls) - but nothing some curtains couldn't fix.
The thing with eyestrain, that it is extremely different to pinpoint what it causes for people with sensitive eye, so any alternative solution would work.<p>The most important factor is, obviously is the backlight, and not only being PWM or DC, but also the spectrum and "texture" of the light itself: a typical LCD has diffusers which may have different construction and cause serious issues for some people. Some may be sensitive to polarisation, some people are sensitive to how grainy is antiglare coating is etc.<p>A good number of people (me including) cannot tolerate backlight with blue at 450 nm, the more it is towards green the better. Some cannot tolerate KSF phosphor in the wide gamut backlights (I am perfetcly fine with it), and love quantum dots.<p>It is a serious problem, but using the ambient light for the backlight would make experimenting the backlight a super easy task, so yeah, this monitor is a great idea.
If you really want to help with eye strain, make a monitor with some kind of pancake optics so that the screen appears to be at infinity. Having to focus at something right in front of you all day strains the focus muscles in your eyes.<p>Older people will know what I'm talking about here..
One thing I'm curious about... with the hinge closed, is this monitor functionally equivalent to an RLCD display (like SunVision's products or the Hisense Q5), or is there still a discrepancy in brightness versus an RLCD display in equivalent ambient light?
I appreciate this guy trying to solve his problem, but it sounds like what he really needs is blue shifter like flux or the built in systems of the OS to set the color temperature lower.<p>I just have flux running all day cutting the temp to 5900K. Never had eye strain after that (and slept better too because I cut down to 1900K at night (ie. very yellow).<p>If he has to use other people's devices all day, like school devices, he can always wear blue-blocking glasses.
The nice thing about this is that:<p>- the backlight lamp is a point of failure in monitors; good riddance.<p>- if you want this thing brighter, you just supply brighter illumination.
Very nice. Recently we spoke about monitors. Why don't office monitors adjust the brightness. I often just make light in the office, because it is simpler than adjust the brightness from the monitor. I know thats sick, bad, expensive, whatever solution.
My almost 15 year old anti-glare dell monitor has worked great over the years <knock on the wood><p><a href="https://www.ebay.com/itm/266257015988" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.ebay.com/itm/266257015988</a>
It sounds like the issue is that there are too many Computers / TVs and screens in schools. For something that has no evidence its better for learning (And actually evidence its worse for learning). Perhaps schools should rethink things.
Why not just use <a href="https://displaybuddy.app" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://displaybuddy.app</a> on a modern monitor and not strain your eyes
Why can't we software emulate this? We have webcams, we know roughly where light comes from and how much. We should be able to turn those sources into 3D model lights and illuminate a virtuall screen, perhaps even with onscreen objects having some texture, like raised. Button in browsers.<p>Better yet, how can we get just away from screens more without getting bored? I love screens but there's a limit. Gaming and online content are pretty much the ,ain leisure activities that don't involve food or alcohol (and all the health issues of overeating and drinking).<p>Seems like we used to do more other stuff.
Nice one if you working monochromatic. Bad one, of you want to see colors.<p>Nice one if you want it to be cheap. Bad one, if you have to use light sources, that use up more energy than the trad. Backlight.<p>Nice one, if ... Game. What do you think of other pro and contra arguments?
You don't need a fancy monitor to not strain your eyes. You know you need? <i>Lower brightness</i> or <i>more ambient light</i>.<p>This is something I've been saying for ages. Some time in the last 10 years or so, it seems we decided as a collective that screens should be SUPER BRIGHT, and now half the tech crowded uses dark mode.<p>If you "just like dark mode", that's fine. But if you avoid light mode because it hurts your eyes, then your brightness is too high or you don't have enough ambient light.<p>I sit at my computer 12-16 hours a day. Yes, I know, it's pretty unhealthy. But I have <i>never</i> felt eye strain. Even after getting LASIK and my eyes were a little more sensitive to light, I could stare at my screen all day after the first day.
An incredibly bad idea to me, but great if it works for some. Will definitely keep an eye on reviews for it.<p>Also as it always is with these young-person-creates-a-company stories:<p>«Huang’s parents, who run a metals recycling business near Shenzhen, China connected him with manufacturers in the region.»<p>I wonder who payed for the first production run.
Something that drives me absolutely bonkers is how laptops, phones, tablets, all treat brightness as a first class feature. But if you want to quickly adjust brightness on your desktop monitors, it’s intensely tedious or requires you to be tech savvy and install software.<p>Why oh why can’t I just Fn + Fkeys to adjust brightness on the fly?!
A dim, unevenly lit panel with awful color rendering is supposed to <i>reduce</i> eyestrain?<p>This is good for winning first prize at a high school science fair. It makes no sense for any other purpose. And even at a science fair, the ability to build this is somewhat impressive but the inability to recognize it as a bad idea is not.