31–40 of 211 posts
Posh frames e-ink friends! Here's my generative newspaper: https://i.imgur.com/tD1t9u3.jpeg My wallet stopped at 13.3" though :) Update for those who saw me post it before: I recently charged the battery for the first time since hanging it in March, which met my expectations. Shout-out also to the people at Halbe Rahmen, the best picture frames in the world.
Posh frames e-ink friends! Here's my generative newspaper: https://i.imgur.com/tD1t9u3.jpeg My wallet stopped at 13.3" though :) Update for those who saw me post it before: I recently charged the battery for the first time since hanging it in March, which met my expectations. Shout-out also to the people at Halbe Rahmen, the best picture frames in the world.
Where is the information on how you built it?
Also the album link in the other comment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Realistically, it’ll be when the patents expire.
My understanding is it's much more about demand than patents. LED panels got cheap because we built factories that pump out a lot of them.
That's a very neat project. The only issue I have with it is that it's basically a passive energy waster. It produces images by burning GPU power, when it could instead curate art from an existing amount of art (of which there is more to ever go through, almost in any category). Some projects that use AI could be replaced with other tech and be much more efficient.
Samsung sells an LED TV specifically for this use case. Currently only at 4K. https://www.samsung.com/us/tvs/the-frame/highlights/
Well done. There would be so many more cool applications of e-ink if it wasn't $2,500 for a 42" display: https://shopkits.eink.com/en/product/detail/42''MonochromeeP... (minimum order 3) For comparison a 42" full-color 60fps TV with remote, speakers, wifi, etc. etc. is $140. It seems like the patent holder could be making a lot more money if they dropped the price.
Does Rakutan/Amazon/Pocketbook really pay a similar cost/size ratio for the panels on their ereaders? I hope not!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding is it's much more about demand than patents. LED panels got cheap because we built factories that pump out a lot of them.
I just glanced, they still want about 500 bucks for the 13" screen and half of that for the board to drive it. While I have no clue what making the screen at a low scale might cost, the board cannot possibly be five times more expensive than a Raspberry Pi, can it?
Here's the data sheet for the ITE IT8951, a frequently-used ASIC for this purpose that supports basic partial updates as well: https://www.waveshare.net/w/upload/1/18/IT8951_D_V0.2.4.3_20...
Here's a sourcing price: https://www.win-source.net/products/detail/ite/it8951e-64-dx...
It's basically a fairly simple SPI interface (or here a SPI wrapper around an internal Z80 protocol). The rest of the board is power supply handling and a DRAM framebuffer chip, external to the driver ASIC on SPI as well. I wrote a custom driver for this in Rust for my project, and it only took about a day despite a few leaky-abstractions oddities in how it communicates over SPI.
The chip itself is basically buffer handling, image processing (features like JPEG decode, resampling and some LUT mechanisms) and a waveform generator. Others will have some IP blocks for, say, a HDMI frontend. Any decent chip company can crank this out pretty quick. There's easily 10+ product lines on the market.
For simple things you may not even need one and can drive the panel from an MCU directly.
There are more expensive, more advanced drivers that implement more complicated and higher-performance (say, refresh rate) update schemes or I/O though.
Well done. There would be so many more cool applications of e-ink if it wasn't $2,500 for a 42" display: https://shopkits.eink.com/en/product/detail/42''MonochromeeP... (minimum order 3) For comparison a 42" full-color 60fps TV with remote, speakers, wifi, etc. etc. is $140. It seems like the patent holder could be making a lot more money if they dropped the price.
Because it's a lot easier and cheaper to manufacture large LCD panels at scale than E-ink film.
>It seems like the patent holder could be making a lot more money if they dropped the price.
I don't know any company or shareholders that would say no to making more money so if this would actually be true then it would, but that's not the reality.
The FUD that large e-ink displays are expensive because of some patent conspiracy needs to stop.
Large e-ink screens are expensive because manufacturing yields are very low and so are sales volumes.
Source: worked with e-ink on products with big and small displays
Edit: So I'm saying the truth and getting down voted for it? Fine, then feel free to keep believing whatever you think is the truth. No point in discussing it further.
Well done. There would be so many more cool applications of e-ink if it wasn't $2,500 for a 42" display: https://shopkits.eink.com/en/product/detail/42''MonochromeeP... (minimum order 3) For comparison a 42" full-color 60fps TV with remote, speakers, wifi, etc. etc. is $140. It seems like the patent holder could be making a lot more money if they dropped the price.
Then again, if that was really it, surely there'd be a market for people who want a 42" e-ink display and are willing to accept some proportion of bad pixels in exchange for a deep discount. Which really shouldn't matter much, particularly for applications where distance-viewing is the expectation.
Samsung sells an LED TV specifically for this use case. Currently only at 4K. https://www.samsung.com/us/tvs/the-frame/highlights/
Especially at night, I find the backlight makes it painfully obvious that it's just a TV and I'd much rather have something like e-ink which blends into the surroundings.