Originally Posted by darinp2
It seems like you agree that giving more area to the blue sub-pixel allows it to be driven with less current for the same average cd/m2 off the screen from a normal viewing distance.
Do you still disagree with:
BTW: If the light is proportional to the current then in my example the current would need to be raised 900% when 90% of the sub-pixel is blocked. Or raised 100% (doubled) if 50% of the sub-pixel was blocked.
Now tell me this, if you were to cover 90 percent of your monitor with a cloth cut out of a material that can block out 100 percent of light, the perceived brightness of the remaining 10 percent would stay the same, would it not? Yes, it would and the reason why lies in the following passsage:
Luminous intensity should not be confused with another photometric unit, luminous flux
, which is the total perceived power emitted in all directions. Luminous intensity is the perceived power per unit solid angle
. If a lamp has a 1 lumen bulb and the optics of the lamp are set up to focus the light evenly into a 1 steradian
beam, then the beam would have a luminous intensity of 1 candela. If the optics were changed to concentrate the beam into 1/2 steradian then the source would have a luminous intensity of 2 candela. The resulting beam is narrower and brighter, though its luminous flux remains unchanged.
And tell me this, if you had a 1nm pixel that was driven at 0.1 microamperes and a 2nm pixel driven at the same amperage, which one do you think would appear brighter, the small one or the big one? The small one would appear twice as bright... and in order for the 2nm pixel to appear as bright it would have to be driven twice as hard.