Visual Costs of the Inhomogeneity of Luminance and Contrast by Viewing LCD-TFT Screens Off-Axis

• Autorzy: Ziefle M. , Groeger T. , Sommer D.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In this study the anisotropic of TFT-LCD (Thin-Film-Transistor-Liquid Crystal Display) screens were examined. Anisotropy occurs as the distribution of luminance and contrast changes over the screen surface due to different viewing angles. On the basis of detailed photometric measurements the detection performance in a visual reaction task was measured in different viewing conditions. Viewing angle (0°, front al view; 30°, off-axis; 50°, off-axis) as well as ambient lighting (a dark of illuminated room) were varied. Reaction times and accuracy of detection performance were recorded. Results showed TFT’s anisotropy to be a crucial factor deteriorating performance. With an increasing viewing angle performance decreased. It is concluded that TFT’s anisotropy is a limiting factor for overall suitability and usefulness of this new display technology.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

TFT-LCD; anisotropic characteristics; viewing angle; visual performance; luminance; contrast; off-axis

PL

kontrast światła; fizjologia pracy; komputer; monitor; ekran; luminancja

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2003
• Tom: Vol. 9, No. 4
• Strony: 515--525
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 10 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Ziefle M.

• Psychology Department, Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

autor

Groeger T.

• Psychology Department, Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

autor

Sommer D.

• Psychology Department, Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

Bibliografia

• 1.Groeger, Th., Ziefle, M., & Sommer, D. (2003). Anisotropic characteristics of LCD-TFTs and their impact on visual performance: “Everything’s superior with TFTs?”. In D. Harris, V. Duffy, M. Smith, & C. Stephanidis (Eds.), Human centred computing: Congnitive social and ergonomic aspects (pp. 33-37). Mahwah, NJ, USA: Erlbaum.
• 2.Hollands, J.G., Cassidy, H.A., McFadden, S., & Boothby, R. (2001). LCD versus CRT displays: Visual search for colored symbols. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting (pp. 1553-1557). Santa Monica, CA, USA: Human Factors Society.
• 3.Hollands, J.G., McFadden, S., Cassidy, H.A., & Boothby, R. (2000). Visual search performance on LCD and CRT displays: An experimental comparison. In Society for Information Displays (SID), International Symposion Digest of Technical Papers (pp. 292-295). San Jose, CA, USA: Society for Information Display.
• 4.International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2001). Ergonomic requirements for work with visual displays based on flat panels - Part 2: Ergonomic requirements for flat panel displays (Standard No. ISO 13406-2:2001). Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
• 5.Johnson, C., & Casson, E. (1995). Effects of luminance, contrast and blur on visual activity. Optometry and Visual Science, 72(12), 864-869.
• 6.Menozzi, M., Näpflin, U., & Krueger, H. (1999). CRT vs LCD: A pilot study on visual performance and suitability of two display technologies for use in office work. Displays, 20, 3-10.
• 7.Ziefle, M. (2001a). CRT screens or TFT display? A detailed analysis of TFT screens for reading efficiency. In M. Smith, G. Salvendy, D. Harris, & R. Koubek (Eds.). Usability evaluation and interface design (pp. 549-553). Mahwah, NJ, USA: Erlbaum.
• 8.Ziefle, M. (2001b). Aging, visual performance and eyestrain in different screen technologies. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting (pp. 262-267). Santa Monica, CA, USA: Human Factors Society.
• 9.Ziefle, M. (2001c). User productivity and different screen technologies: CRT screens with high refresh rates vs LCD displays? The Display Search Monitor, 6(14), 11-14.
• 10.Ziefle, M. (2002). Visual performance in CRT and LCD displays in different user groups. The Display Search Monitor, 7(7), 85-88.