|
Christopher
The problem with screen protectors, Brian, is they are polarised - so no problems with high contrast displays when you view them without any polarised or darken photochromatic lenses. If you know about filters, then you'll know that if you stack two polarised filters, you actually get more light reduction than the sum of the individual reduction ratings. So if you used say a 10% filter (90% light passing) and say a 5%, the effect is more in the 20-30% effective range. So, to use my problematic RW scenario, because I have to use 80% reduction polarised lenses as a minimum, I cannot use most screen protectors as that would creating an effective filtering of about 100-150%, basically then even with a display on max backlit and super contrast, you'd see bugger all and in sunlight levels where glare is a universal pain in the ass, the screen may as well not exist. Sometimes when there's unfixable extreme lighting that'll result in hideous over-exposure, the right combo of polarised filters normally unusable can get you out of trouble in video and photography shoots, most of the rest of the time, combining polarised filters is more grief than it's worth. So that's why the hood is the easy, costs nothing and probably the least problematic solution - when you consider that professionally, for view screens and displays, outdoors and in high intensity studio lighting, it's either screen hoods or those old style wire mesh filters that get used. As soon as you start trying to combine screen filters (proper polarised ones) with any kind of polarised eye wear you are in added problem territory.? RW example - I can't use screen protectors on devices unless I use basic clear film ones which have nil anti-reflection characteristics because of polarised lenses.? I lose 80-odd percentage of the X6100's brightness by default, so it's highest backlight level all the way for me and that's struggling on a sunny day. Physics is fate's way of screwing up perfectly good ideas... On Mon, 27 Mar 2023, 12:02 Brian K Haney, <brian.haney@...> wrote:
|
