/lit/ - Literature

>>20173660
first off

>>20173738
do not buy an ipad. Incase you didn't know, some e-readers have an 'e-ink' screen that replicates the look of paper so that it doesn't strain your eyes. Pic rel

Second off, an e-reader is very convenient: reading in low-light situations, being able to pirate e-books and store potentially hundreds of thousands of them on one device, being able to carry it around with you easily, etc. It will never replace the sensation of reading a physical book but you don't have to choose either/or

I'd recommend getting a bigger one; Why? In 'The Elements of Typographic Style' by Bringhurst, he says that the best amount of characters (letters) per-line is about 61 (anywhere from 51 to 68 is okay, but 61 per line is the best; enough characters so that the lines don't feel choppy as your eye moves across and down to the next line, but not long enough for you to lose focus while following the line from one end of the page to the other). It's worth noting that this is the guideline most larger publishers (Penguin, Everyman's, etc) use when typesetting their books.

Now, you don't want the font size to be too small because it will strain your eyes; Most printed books use a font size of around 11pts or 12pts for the main body text; this is a comfortable, readable size (Assuming you're using a normal serif font meant for reading body text, like Garamond, Janson, Times, Gallimard, Bembo, Palatino, Minion, etc).

Now, you want an e-reader whose screen is wide enough to have about 61 characters per line of text at about 11pts; the standard Kobo Clara HD, for example, has a 3.5 x 4.75 screen; this is not wide enough to accommodate the specifications I just laid out; most of the lower end e-readers' screens are not big enough to read comfortably without making the font smaller or increasing the margins and making the lines of text shorter (reducing the amount of characters per-line).

It's also worth nothing that, for some retarded reason, e-readers measure their screens diagonally, like computer monitors; so a "6 inch screen" is actually only "3.5 x 4.75" inches. This article here
>https://wiki.mobileread.com/wiki/Screen_sizes
lays out how big the screens actually are (for example, an advertised "9 inch screen" will actually be around 5 x 7 or thereabouts).

Ok, to get 61 characters per line of text at 11pts on an e-reader, you will want a screen that is at least 4.5 inches wide; that means /at least/ an "8 inch screen" according to advertisements. That's also without margins: the text will have to go right up to the edges of the screen to fit; if you want margins (at least 1/2 inch on either side), you will need a screen that is at least 5.5 inches wide, which means a 9.7 or 10 inch screen (or larger). E-readers with a 10 inch screen are upwards of $400 brand new, so yeah, you might wanna buy used, but I guarantee the reading experience will be much better. Also, get a Kobo if you can, and stay away from Kindles and Nooks

>>19727053
naht6

>>19296853
Retard, that doesbt know wtf he is talking about

pic related

Pic related, OP. Also get a Kobo or something less restrictive than a Kindle.

I used to use Lithium on my phone and the eye strain was unfortunately killing me. I haven't got an ereader but the amount of reading that I do has declined. Don't you get eye strain, anon?

This is a thread to discuss ereaders in general.

>What brand of ereader do you have?
>How do you like it?
>Would you buy it again if it failed?
>How is your reading experience in it?
>How frequently do you use it?
>How's the battery life?
>How's it compared to reading on a LCD/amoled screen?
>If you use a Kobo ereader, do you use KOReader? How's it compared to Kobo's own software?

In the last thread, there were many anons confused about ereaders in general and how well they fare against reading on a LCD/Amoled screen on a smartphone, computer, etc. To this end, I created pic related highlighting the advantages of reading on an e-ink display over an LCD/Amoled one. Thanks to the other anons who provided useful information.

Last thread: >>18730894