CPT Transflective Display Comparable to Pixel Qi

There's approx. dozen different videos trying to show how great is Pixel Qi/transflective technology. Virtually all of them show very little of the alleged effect. The reasons are quite obvious:
1. When choosing your camera man, don't use one with trembling, shaky hands. Or the one who cannot stand still for more than 5 minutes. Better put the camera on a tripod. Naturally, the presenter must exhibit the same virtues too, and if not (like she/he needs to dance a lot when talking), let him/her put the object on the stand, so the angle stays the best glare-less during the whole shot. Except for mere seconds to show critical (170+ degrees) viewing angles. Now you can dance and gesture away Thank you.
2. The shots made under direct sunlight are obviously the best demonstration of the principle. If in lack of natural sun, just use the strongest light bulbs you can find, plus virtually centimiters from the screen. Thank you for this (unshot yet) footage, too.
3. For the particular “CPT” shot, when talking about perceived irregularity of font rendering in transflective mode, you again may want to put your camera on the stand from the best (glareless) angle, the use the macromode/zoom carefully, slowly, so the AF picks correct distance. However, the modern font rendering technologies explicitly use color in their font hinting routines, so when the color is out the font outlines may become distorted/blurred at smaller pointsizes if the manufacturer forgot to switch the font renderer into the monochrome mode when the backlight is off.
4 The emerging transflective technology begs for making good (staged according to simple rules above) side by side comparisons of Pixel Qi, Liquavista, Bridgestone, whatever, and iPad, plus between transflective pairs. Any potential transflective screen manufacturer should be asked whether their technology is compatible with IPS, OLED, 4-color, 3D displays.

There's approx. dozen different videos trying to show how great is Pixel Qi/transflective technology. Virtually all of them show very little of the alleged effect. The reasons are quite obvious:
1. When choosing your camera man, don't use one with trembling, shaky hands. Or the one who cannot stand still for more than 5 minutes. Better put the camera on a tripod. Naturally, the presenter must exhibit the same virtues too, and if not (like she/he needs to dance a lot when talking), let him/her put the object on the stand, so the angle stays the best glare-less during the whole shot. Except for mere seconds to show critical (170+ degrees) viewing angles. Now you can dance and gesture away Thank you.
2. The shots made under direct sunlight are obviously the best demonstration of the principle. If in lack of natural sun, just use the strongest light bulbs you can find, plus virtually centimiters from the screen. Thank you for this (unshot yet) footage, too.
3. For the particular “CPT” shot, when talking about perceived irregularity of font rendering in transflective mode, you again may want to put your camera on the stand from the best (glareless) angle, the use the macromode/zoom carefully, slowly, so the AF picks correct distance. However, the modern font rendering technologies explicitly use color in their font hinting routines, so when the color is out the font outlines may become distorted/blurred at smaller pointsizes if the manufacturer forgot to switch the font renderer into the monochrome mode when the backlight is off.
4 The emerging transflective technology begs for making good (staged according to simple rules above) side by side comparisons of Pixel Qi, Liquavista, Bridgestone, whatever, and iPad, plus between transflective pairs. Any potential transflective screen manufacturer should be asked whether their technology is compatible with IPS, OLED, 4-color, 3D displays.