tft display eyes quotation

The prototype was built by plugging the ESP32 and displays into breadboards and using jumper wires. This is convenient for initial experimentation but is prone to poor connection especially if moved about. It the eyes are to be used as part of a costume then soldering all connections is recommended.

Normally the TFT chip select line for a single display is defined within a user_setup file of the TFT_eSPI library, however when using the library with two displays the chip selects must be controlled by the sketch, thus you must NOT define the TFT_CS pin in the TFT_eSPI library setup files. Instead, the chip selects (CS) must be defined in the "config.h" tab of the Animated_Eyes_2 sketch.

The TFT_eSPI library uses "user_setup" files to define all the parameters for the display, processor and interfaces, for the Animated_Eyes_2 sketch the "Setup47_ST7735.h" file was used with the wiring as shown above.

The displays used for testing were 128x128 ST7735 displays, the TFT_eSPI library setup file may need to be changed as these displays come in many configuration variants.

The tft (thin film transistor), a thin film field effect transistor, is one of the active matrix liquid crystal displays. It can “actively” control each individual pixel on the screen, which can greatly improve the response time. General tft response time is relatively fast, about 80 milliseconds, and the viewing angle is large, generally can reach about 130 degrees, mainly used in high-end products. The so-called thin film field effect transistor means that each liquid crystal pixel point on the LCD is driven by a thin film transistor integrated in the back. tft belongs to the active matrix LCD, which technically adopts the “active matrix” method to drive, by using the thin film technology to make the electrode of the transistor, and using the scanning method to “actively pull “The light source is first transmitted upward through the lower polarizing plate when irradiated, and the light is conducted by the liquid crystal molecules to achieve the purpose of display through shading and light transmission.

TFT in active matrix liquid crystal display, in the technology used zhuan active shu matrix way to drive, the method genus is the use of thin film technology made of electro crystal electrodes, the use of scanning method active pull control any one display point on and off, light source irradiation first through the lower polarizing plate upward transmission, with the help of liquid crystal molecules to conduct light, through shading and light transmission to achieve the purpose of the display.

TFT also improves the phenomenon that STN will flicker (water ripple) blur, effectively improving the ability to play dynamic images. Compared with STN TFT has excellent color saturation, reproduction ability and higher contrast ratio.

1, the use of TFT LCD module design products, pay attention to the perspective of the liquid crystal and the design of the product use consistent with.

This square 4" IPS TFT is great for displaying information indoors. It would make an excellent display for an Internet of Things (IoT) application. The square form factor helps make the final product look modern and clean. Plus, with 16 million colors, this display supports vivid eye-catching graphics.

Is LCD or AMOLED better for eyes？The full English name of LCD is Liquid Crystal Display, which is a general term. According to its driving method, it can be divided into various specifications. Most monitors and laptops on the market today are thin-film transistors. Because TFT has better color saturation and viewing angles than other technologies, it is also the mainstream specification on the market today. The models on the market are mainly based on TFT, and LCD has now become synonymous with the term TFT display. Next, I will tell you in detail which LCD screen or OLED screen is better for the eyes.

Both OLED and LCD can cause damage to the eyes, because both OLED and LCD emit blue light, which is unavoidable. However, users can turn on the eye protection mode of the mobile phone to reduce the damage of blue light to the eyes. In addition, OLED"s dimming technology and LCD"s blue backlight are also one of the reasons for the "eye-hurt". OLED adopts PWM low-frequency dimming technology, which is a technology that adjusts the brightness through the rapid flickering of the light-emitting unit, so looking at the screen for a long time will cause eye fatigue. The blue backlight of an LCD monitor emits high-energy short-wave blue light.

In terms of manufacturing process, OLED adopts self-luminous technology and has no backlight layer, so this screen can be made very thin. In addition, each light-emitting unit of OLED can emit light independently when it emits light, and has the function of color screen display. LCD is composed of backlight layer, liquid crystal layer, color filter and other components, and the screen is made of inorganic materials, so the service life of this screen is relatively long.

Is LCD or AMOLED better for eyes？The above is the difference between lcd and oled. Users should try to avoid staring at the phone screen for a long time. Reduce LCD and AMOLED viewing time in dark environments. If you have the habit of reading late at night, you also need to turn on a light to neutralize the strobe light. Moisten your eyes with eye drops when your eyes are dry.

The Snake Eyes Bonnet is a Raspberry Pi accessory for driving two 128x128 pixel OLED or TFT LCD displays, and also provides four analog inputs for sensors. It"s perfect for maki…

IPS (In-Plane Switching) lcd is still a type of TFT LCD, IPS TFT is also called SFT LCD (supper fine tft ),different to regular tft in TN (Twisted Nematic) mode, theIPS LCD liquid crystal elements inside the tft lcd cell, they are arrayed in plane inside the lcd cell when power off, so the light can not transmit it via theIPS lcdwhen power off, When power on, the liquid crystal elements inside the IPS tft would switch in a small angle, then the light would go through the IPS lcd display, then the display on since light go through the IPS display, the switching angle is related to the input power, the switch angle is related to the input power value of IPS LCD, the more switch angle, the more light would transmit the IPS LCD, we call it negative display mode.

The regular tft lcd, it is a-si TN (Twisted Nematic) tft lcd, its liquid crystal elements are arrayed in vertical type, the light could transmit the regularTFT LCDwhen power off. When power on, the liquid crystal twist in some angle, then it block the light transmit the tft lcd, then make the display elements display on by this way, the liquid crystal twist angle is also related to the input power, the more twist angle, the more light would be blocked by the tft lcd, it is tft lcd working mode.

A TFT lcd display is vivid and colorful than a common monochrome lcd display. TFT refreshes more quickly response than a monochrome LCD display and shows motion more smoothly. TFT displays use more electricity in driving than monochrome LCD screens, so they not only cost more in the first place, but they are also more expensive to drive tft lcd screen.The two most common types of TFT LCDs are IPS and TN displays.

LCD stands for “Liquid Crystal Display” and TFT stands for “Thin Film Transistor”. These two terms are used commonly in the industry but refer to the same technology and are really interchangeable when talking about certain technology screens. The TFT terminology is often used more when describing desktop displays, whereas LCD is more commonly used when describing TV sets. Don’t be confused by the different names as ultimately they are one and the same. You may also see reference to “LED displays” but the term is used incorrectly in many cases. The LED name refers only to the backlight technology used, which ultimately still sits behind an liquid crystal panel (LCD/TFT).

As TFT screens are measured differently to older CRT monitors, the quoted screen size is actually the full viewable size of the screen. This is measured diagonally from corner to corner. TFT displays are available in a wide range of sizes and aspect ratios now. More information about the common sizes of TFT screens available can be seen in our section about resolution.

The aspect ratio of a TFT describes the ratio of the image in terms of its size. The aspect ratio can be determined by considering the ratio between horizontal and vertical resolution.

16:9 = wide screen formats such as 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440. 16:9 is commonly used for multimedia displays and TV’s and is increasingly becoming the standard

The resolution of a TFT is an important thing to consider. All TFT’s have a certain number of pixels making up their liquid crystal matrix, and so each TFT has a “native resolution” which matches this number. It is always advisable to run the TFT at its native resolution as this is what it is designed to run at and the image does not need to be stretched or interpolated across the pixels. This helps keep the image at its most clear and at optimum sharpness. Some screens are better than others at running below the native resolution and interpolating the image which can sometimes be useful in games.

You generally cannot run a TFT at a resolution of above its native resolution although some screens have started to offer “Virtual” resolutions, for example “virtual 4k” where the screen will accept a 3840 x 2160 input from your graphics card but scale it back to match the native resolution of the panel which is often 2560 x 1440 in these examples. This whole process is rather pointless though as you lose a massive amount of image quality in doing so.

Ultra-high resolutions must be thought of in a slightly different way. Ultra HD (3840 x 2160) and 4K (4096 x 2160) resolutions are being provided nowadays on standard screen sizes like 24 – 27” for instance. Traditionally as you increased the resolution of panels it was about providing more desktop real estate to work with. However, with those resolutions being so high, and the screen size being relatively small still, the image and text becomes incredibly small if you run the screen at normal scaling at those native resolutions. For instance imagine a 3840 x 2160 resolution on a 24” screen compared with 1920 x 1080. The latter would probably be considered a comfortable font size for most users. These ultra-high resolutions nowadays are about improving image clarity and sharpness, and providing a higher pixel density (measured as pixels per inch = PPI). In doing so, you can improve the sharpness and clarity of an image much like Apple have famously done with their “Retina” displays on iPads and iPhones. To avoid complications with tiny images and fonts, you will then need to enable scaling in your operating system to make everything easier to see. For instance if you enabled scaling at 150% on a 3840 x 2160 resolution, you would end up with a screen real estate equivalent to a 2560 x 1440 panel (3840 / 1.5 = 2560 and 2160 / 1.5 = 1440). This makes text much easier to read and the whole image a more comfortable size, but you then get additional benefits from the higher pixel density instead, which results in a sharper and crisper image.

Generally you will need to take scaling in to consideration when purchasing any ultra-high resolution screen, unless it’s of a very large size. The scaling ability does vary however between different operating systems so be careful. Apple OS and modern Windows (8 and 10) are generally very good at handling scaling for ultra-high res displays. Older operating systems are less capable and may sometimes be complicated. You will also find varying support from different applications and games, and often end up with weird sized fonts or sections that are not scaled up and remain extremely small. A “standard” resolution where you don’t need to worry about scaling might be simpler for most users.

To display this content of this type, your screen needs to be able to 1) handle the full resolution naturally within its native resolution, and 2) be able to handle either the progressive scan or interlaced signal over whatever video interface you are using. If the screen cannot support the full resolution, the image can still be shown but it will be scaled down by the hardware and you won’t be take full advantage of the high resolution content. So for a monitor, if you want to watch 1080 HD content you will need a monitor which can support at least a vertical resolution of 1080 pixels, e.g. a 1920 x 1080 monitor.

Unlike on CRT’s where the dot pitch is related to the sharpness of the image, the pixel pitch of a TFT is related to the distance between pixels. This value is fixed and is determined by the size of the screen and the native resolution (number of pixels) offered by the panel. Pixel pitch is normally listed in the manufacturers specification. Generally you need to consider that the ‘tighter’ the pixel pitch, the smaller the text will be, and potentially the sharper the image will be. To be honest, monitors are normally produced with a sensible resolution for their size and so even the largest pixel pitches return a sharp images and a reasonable text size. Some people do still prefer the larger-resolution-crammed-into-smaller-screen option though, giving a smaller pixel pitch and smaller text. It’s down to choice and ultimately eye-sight.

For instance you might see a 35″ ultra-wide screen with only a 2560 x 1080 resolution which would have a 0.3200 mm pixel pitch. Compare this to a 25″ screen with 2560 x 1400 resolution and 0.2162 mm pixel pitch and you can see there will be a significant different in font size and image sharpness. There are further considerations when it comes to the pixel pitch of ultra-high resolution displays like Ultra HD and 4K. See the section on PPI for more information.

Instead manufacturers are now focusing on delivering higher resolutions in to existing panel sizes, not for the purpose of providing more desktop real-estate, but for the purpose of improving image sharpness and picture quality. Apple started this trend with their “Retina Displays” used in iPads and iPhones, improving image sharpness and clarity massively. It is common now to see smaller screens such as 24″ and 27″ for instance, but with high resolutions like 3840 x 2160 (Ultra HD) or even 5120 x 2880 (5K). By packing more pixels in to the same screen size which would typically offer a 2560 x 1440 resolution, panel manufacturers are able to provide much smaller pixel pitches and improve picture sharpness and clarity. To measure this new way of looking at resolution you will commonly see the spec of ‘Pixels Per Inch’ (PPI) being used.

Of course the problem with this is that if you run a screen as small as 27″ with a 5K resolution, the font size is absolutely tiny by default. You get a massive boost of desktop real-estate, just like when moving from 1920 x 1080 to 2560 x 1440, but that’s not the purpose of these higher resolutions now. To overcome this you need to use the scaling options in your Operating System software to scale the image and make it more usable. Windows provides for instance scaling options like 125% and 150% within the control panel. On a 3840 x 2160 Ultra HD resolution if you use a 150% scaling option for example you will in effect reduce the desktop area by a third, resulting in the same desktop area as a 2560 x 1440 display (i.e. 2560 x 150% = 3840). The OS scaling makes font sizes more comfortable and reasonable, but you maintain the sharp picture quality and small pixel pitch of the higher resolution panel. A 3840 x 2160 res panel scaled at 150% in Windows will look sharper and crisper than a 2560 x 1440 native panel without scaling, despite the fact both would have the same effective desktop area available.

While this aspect is not always discussed by display manufacturers it is a very important area to consider when selecting a TFT monitor. The LCD panels producing the image are manufactured by many different panel vendors and most importantly, the technology of those panels varies. Different panel technologies will offer different performance characteristics which you need to be aware of. Their implementation is dependent on the panel size mostly as they vary in production costs and in target markets. The four main types of panel technology used in the desktop monitor market are:

IPS was originally introduced to try and improve on some of the drawbacks of TN Film. While initially viewing angles were improved, the panel technology was traditionally fairly poor when it came to response times and contrast ratios. Production costs were eventually reduced and the main investor in this technology has been LG.Display (formerly LG.Philips). The original IPS panels were developed into the so-called Super IPS (S-IPS) generation and started to be more widely used in mainstream displays. These were characterized by their good colour reproduction qualities, 8-bit colour depth (without the need for Frame Rate Control) and very wide viewing angles. These panels were traditionally still quite slow when it came to pixel response times however and contrast ratios were mediocre. In more recent years a change was made to the pixel alignment in these IPS panels (see our detailed panel technology article for more information) which gave rise to the so-called Horizontal-IPS (H-IPS) classification. With the introduction of overdrive technologies, response times were improved significantly, finally making IPS a viable choice for gaming. This has resulted more recently in IPS panels being often regarded as the best all-round technology and a popular choice for display manufacturers in today’s market. Improvements in energy consumption and reduced production costs lead to the generation of so-called e-IPS panels. Unlike normal 8-bit S-IPS and H-IPS classification panels, the e-IPS generation worked with a 6-bit + FRC colour depth. Developments and improvements with colour depths also gave rise to a generation of “10-bit” panels with some manufacturers inventing new names for the panels they were using, including the co-called Performance-IPS (p-IPS). It is important to understand that these different variants are ultimately very similar and the names are often interchanged by different display vendors. For more information, see our detailed panel technologies guide.

Nowadays IPS panels are produced and developed by several leading panel manufacturers. LG.Display technically own the IPS name and continue to invest in this popular technology. Samsung began production of their very similar PLS (Plane to Line Switching) technology, as did AU Optronics with their AHVA (Advanced Hyper Viewing Angle). These are all so similar in performance and features that they can be simply referred to now as “IPS-type”. Indeed monitor manufacturers will normally stick to the common IPS name but the underlying panel may be produced by any number of different manufacturers investing in this type of panel tech. AU Optronics have done a good job with finally increasing the refresh rate of their IPS panels, and making them a more viable option for gamers. Native 144Hz IPS-type panels are now available and response times continue to be reduced as well. Modern IPS panels are characterized by decent response times, if not quite as fast as TN Film they are certainly more fluid than older panels. Contrast ratios are typically around 1000:1 and viewing angles continue to be the widest and most stable of any panel technology. You will find varying colour depths including 6-bit+FRC and 8-bit commonly being used, although this makes little difference in practice. One of the remaining limitations with IPS-type technologies are the so-called “IPS glow”, where darker content introduces a pale glow when viewed from an angle. It’s a characteristic of the panel technology and pretty hard to avoid without additional filters being added to the panels. On larger and wider screens some people find this glow distracting and problematic.

This technology was developed by Sharp for use in some of their TFT displays. It consists of several improvements that Sharp claim to have made, mainly to counter the drawbacks of the popular TN Film technology. They have introduced an Anti-Glare / Anti-Reflection (AGAR) screen coating which forms a quarter-wavelength filter. Incident light is reflected back from front and rear surfaces 180° out of phase, thus canceling reflection rather diffusing it as others do. As well as reducing glare and reflection from the screen, this is marketed as being able to offer deeper black levels. Sharp also claim to offer better contrast ratios than any competing technology (VA and IPS); but with more emphasis on improving these other technologies, this is probably not the case with more modern panels. There are very few ASV monitors around really, with the majority of the market being dominated by TN, VA and IPS panels.

This technology was developed by BOE Hydis, and is not really very widely used in the desktop TFT market, more in the mobile and tablet sectors. It is worth mentioning however in case you come across displays using this technology. It was developed by BOE Hydis to offer improved brightness and viewing angles to their display panels and claims to be able to offer a full 180/180 viewing angle field as well as improved colours. This is basically just an advancements from IPS and is still based on In Plane technology. They claim to “modify pixels” to improve response times and viewing angles thanks to improved alignment. They have also optimised the use of the electrode surface (fringe field effect), removed shadowed areas between pixels, horizontally aligned electric fields and replaced metal electrodes with transparent ones. More information about AFFS can be found here.

This panel technology was developed by NEC LCD, and is reported to offer wide viewing angles, fast response times, high luminance, wide colour gamut and high definition resolutions. Of course, there is a lot of marketing speak in there, and the technology is not widely employed in the mainstream monitor market. Wide viewing angles are possible thanks to the horizontal alignment of liquid crystals when electrically charged. This alignment also helps keep response times low, particularly in grey to grey transitions. Their SFT range also offers high definition resolutions and are commonly used in medical displays where extra fine detail is required.

One thing to note regarding pixel response time is that the overall performance of the TFT will also depend on the technology of the panel used. TN film panels offer response time graphs similar to that above, but screens based on traditional VA / IPSvariant panels can show response time graphs more like this (we are assuming for now non-overdriven panels):

Some reviews sites including TFTCentral have access to advanced photosensor (photodiodе + low-noise operational amplifier) and oscilloscope measurement equipment which allows them to measure response time as detailed above. See our article about response times for more information on that method. Graphs showing response time according to their equipment are produced. Other sites rely on observed responsiveness to compare how well a panel can perform in practice and what a user might see in normal use. We think it is important to study both methods if possible to give a fuller picture of a panels performance. For visual tests TFTCentral uses a program called PixPerAn (developed by Prad.de) which is good for comparing monitor responsiveness with its series of tests. The favourite seems to be the moving car test as shown here:

In addition to pixel response time measurements and visual tests described above, it is also possible to capture the levels of blurring and smearing the human eye will experience on a display. This is achieved using a pursuit camera setup. They are simply cameras which follow the on-screen motion and are extremely accurate at measuring motion blur, ghosting and overdrive artefacts of moving images. Since they simulate the eye tracking motion of moving eyes, they can be useful in giving an idea of how a moving image appears to the end user. It is the blurring caused by eye tracking on continuously-displayed refreshes (sample-and-hold) that we are keen to analyse with this new approach. This is not pixel persistence caused by response times; but a different cause of display motion blur which cannot be captured using static camera tests. Low response times do have a positive impact on motion blur, and higher refresh rates also help reduce blurring to a degree. It does not matter how low response times are, or how high refresh rates are, you will still see motion blur from LCD displays under normal operation to some extent and that is what this section is designed to measure. Further technologies specifically designed to reduce perceived motion blur are required to eliminate the blur seen on these type of sample-and-hold displays which we will also look at.

These tests capture the kind of blurring you would see with the naked eye when tracking moving objects across the screen (example from the Asus ROG Swift PG279Q). As you increase the refresh rate the perceived blurring is reduced, as refresh rate has a direct impact on motion blur. It is not eliminated entirely due to the nature of the sample-and-hold LCD display and the tracking of your eyes. No matter how fast the refresh rate and pixel response times are, you cannot eliminate the perceived motion blur without other methods.Tests like the above would give you an idea of the kind of perceived motion blur range when using the particular screen without any bur reduction mode active.

On screens with blur reduction backlights it is possible to greatly reduce the perceived motion blur. With these blur reduction features enabled the backlight is strobed briefly, once per refresh, for low persistence.The brief backlight flash prevents tracking-based motion blur and the moving object is far easier to see when tracking it across the screen with your eyes (or by the pursuit camera). Normally these blur reduction modes lead to extremely little leftover ghosting caused by pixel transitions (virtually invisible to the human eye), since nearly all (>99%+) pixel transitions, including overdrive artefacts, are now kept unseen by the human eye, while the backlight is turned off between refreshes.

The Contrast Ratio of a TFT is the difference between the darkest black and the brightest white it is able to display. This is really defined by the pixel structure and how effectively it can let light through and block light out from the backlight unit. As a rule of thumb, the higher the contrast ratio, the better. The depth of blacks and the brightness of the whites are better with a higher contrast ratio. This is also referred to as the static contrast ratio.

When considering a TFT monitor, a contrast ratio of 1000:1 is pretty standard nowadays for TN Film and IPS-type panels. VA-type panels can offer static contrast ratios of 3000:1 and above which are significantly higher than other competing panel technologies.

Some technologies boast the ability to dynamically control contrast (Dynamic Contrast Ratio – DCR) and offer much higher contrast ratios which are incredibly high (millions:1 for instance!). Be wary of these specs as they are dynamic only, and the technology is not always very useful in practice. Traditionally, TFT monitors were said to offer poor black depth, but with the extended use of VA panels, the improvements from IPS and TN Film technology, and new Dynamic Contrast Control technologies, we are seeing good improvements in this area. Black point is also tied in to contrast ratio. The lower the black point, the better, as this will ensure detail is not lost in dark image when trying to distinguish between different shades.

Brightness as a specification is a measure of the brightest white the TFT can display, and is more accurately referred to as its luminance. Typically TFT’s are far too bright for comfortable use, and the On Screen Display (OSD) is used to turn the brightness setting down. Brightness is measure in cd/m2 (candella per metre squared). Note that the recommended brightness setting for a TFT screen in normal lighting conditions is 120 cd/m2. Default brightness of screens out of the box is regularly much higher so you need to consider whether the monitor controls afford you a decent adjustment range and the ability to reduce the luminance to a comfortable level based on your ambient lighting conditions. Different uses may require different brightness settings as well so it is handy when reviews record the luminance range possible from the screen as you adjust the brightness control from 100 to 0%.

The colour depth of a TFT panel is related to how many colours it can produce and should not be confused with colour space (gamut). The more colours available, the better the colour range can potentially be. Colour reproduction is also different however as this related to how reliably produced the colours are compared with those desired.

The colour depth of a panel is determined really by the number of possible orientations of each sub pixel (red, blue and green). These different orientations basically determine the different shade of grey (or colours when filtered in the specific way via RGB sub pixels) and the more “steps” between each shade, the more possible colours the panel can display.

Colour gamut in TFT monitors refers to the range of colours the screen is capable of displaying, and how much of a given reference colour space it might be able to display. It is ultimately linked to backlight technology and not to the panel itself.

Experiments at the beginning of the last century into the human eye eventually led to the creation of a system that encompassed all the range of colours our eyes can perceive. Its graphical representation is called a CIE diagram as shown in the image above. All the colours perceived by the eye are within the collared area. The borderline of this area is made up of pure, monochromatic colours. The interior corresponds to non-monochromic colours, up to white which is marked with a white dot. ‘White Colour’ is actually a subjective notion for the eye as we can perceive different colours as white depending on the conditions. The white dot in the CIE diagram is the so-called flat spectrum dot with coordinates of x=y=1/3. Under ordinary conditions, this colour looks very cold, bluish.

Laser Displays are capable of producing the biggest colour gamut for a system with three basic colours, but even a laser display cannot reproduce all the colours the human eye can see, although it is quite close to doing that. However, in today’s monitors, both CRT and LCD (except for some models I’ll discuss below), the spectrum of each of the basic colours is far from monochromatic. In the terms of the CIE diagram it means that the vertexes of the triangle are shifted from the border of the diagram towards its centre.

Traditionally, LCD monitors were capable of giving approximate coverage of the sRGB reference colour space as shown in the diagram above. This is defined by the backlighting used in these displays – Cold-cathode fluorescent lamps (CCFL) that are employed which emit radiation in the ultraviolet range which is transformed into white colour with the phosphors on the lamp’s walls. These backlight lamps shine through the LCD panel, and through the RGB sub-pixels which act as filters for each of the colours. Each filter cuts a portion of spectrum, corresponding to its pass-band, out of the lamp’s light. This portion must be as narrow as possible to achieve the largest colour gamut.

To help develop and improve on the colour space a screen is capable of displaying a new generation CCFL backlighting was introduced. These so-called “wide gamut” backlights allow a gamut coverage of typically 92 – 102% of the NTSC colour space. There is a difference in practice which all users should be able to detect. The colour space available is extended mainly in green shades as you can see from the image above. Red coverage is also extended in some cases. This extended colour space sounds appealing on face value since the screens featuring WCG-CCFL backlighting can offer a broader range of colours. Manufacturers will often promote the colour space coverage of their screens with these high figures. In practice you need to consider what impact this would have on your use.

Of course the opposite is true if in fact you are working with content which is based on a wider colour space. In photography, the Adobe RGB colour space is often used and is wider than the sRGB reference. If you are working with wide gamut content, with wide gamut supported applications, you would want a screen that can correctly display the full range of colours. This could not be achieved using a traditional CCFL backlit display with only sRGB coverage, and so a wide gamut screen would be needed. Wide gamut displays are often aimed at colour enthusiasts and professional uses as a result.

LED backlighting has now become the norm for desktop monitors and is available in a few variations. The most common is White-LED (W-LED), which is a replacement for standard CCFL backlighting. The LED’s are placed in a line along the edge of the matrix, and the uniform brightness of the screen is ensured by a special design of the diffuser. The colour gamut is limited to sRGB as standard (around 68 – 72% NTSC) but the units are cheaper to manufacturer and so are being utilised in more and more screens, even in the more budget range. They do have their environmental benefits as they can be recycled, and they have a thinner profile making them popular in super-slim range models and notebook PC’s. It is possible to extend the colour gamut of W-LED displays using “Quantum Dot” technologies which are fairly new.

RGB LED backlighting consists of an LED backlight based on RGB triads, each triad including one red, one green and one blue LED. With RGB LED backlighting the spectrum of each LED is rather wide, so their radiation can’t be called strictly monochromatic and they can’t match a laser display, yet they are much better than the spectrum of CCFL and WCG-CCFL backlighting. RGB LED backlighting is not common yet in desktop monitors, and their price tends to put them way above the budget of all but professional colour enthusiast and business users. These models using RGB LED backlights are capable of offering a gamut covering > 114% of the NTSC colour space. They are not really used at all nowadays as they were prohibitively expensive.

There are also wide gamut LED backlights available and more commonly used nowadays as they are cheaper to manufacturer than older RGB LED versions. GB-r-LED for instance is provided by LG.Display and can offer wide gamut support from an LED backlight. Other panel manufacturers have their equivalents as well. Modern LED screens with wide gamut support tend to have a percentage coverage of the Adobe RGB reference space listed in the display spec, with 99% Adobe RGB being pretty standard for wide gamut LED technologies.

Viewing angles are quoted in horizontal and vertical fields and often look like this in listed specifications: 170/160 (170° in horizontal viewing field, 160° in vertical). The angles are related to how the image looks as you move away from the central point of view, as it can become darker or lighter, and colours can become distorted as you move away from your central field of view. Because of the pixel orientation, the screen may not be viewable as clearly when looking at the screen from an angle, but viewing angles of TFT’s vary depending on the panel technology used.

TFT screens do not refresh in the same way as a CRT screen does, where the image is redrawn at a certain rate. As a TFT is a static image, and each pixel refreshes independently, setting the TFT at a common 60Hz native refresh rate does not cause the same problems as it would on a CRT. There is no cathode ray gun redrawing the image as a whole on a TFT. You will not get flicker, which is the main reason for having a high refresh rate on a CRT in the first place. Standard TFT monitors operate with a 60Hz recommended refresh rate, but can sometimes support up to 75Hz maximum (within the spec) or sometimes even further using ‘overclocking’ methods. The reason that 60Hz is recommended by all the manufacturers is that it is related to the vertical frequency that TFT panels run at. Some more detailed data sheets for the panels themselves clearly show that the operating vertical frequency is between about 56 and 64Hz, and that the panels ‘typically’ run at 60Hz (see the LG.Philips LM230W02 datasheet for instance – page 11). If you decide to run your refresh rate from your graphics card above the recommended 60Hz it will work fine, but the interface chip on the monitor will be in charge of scaling the frequency down to 60Hz anyway. Some screens will allow you to run at the maximum 75Hz as well for an additional boost in frame rates and some minor improvements in motion clarity. The support of this will really depend on the screen, your graphics card and the video connection being used. You may find the screen operates fine at the higher refresh rate setting but in reality the screen will often drop frames to meet the 60Hz recommended setting (or spec of the panel) anyway. Generally we would suggest sticking to 60Hz on standard TFT monitors.

One thing which some people are concerned about is the frames per second (fps) which their games can display. This is one of the key reasons users will look to boost their screen beyond 60Hz. This is related to the refresh rate of your screen and graphics card. There is an option for your graphics card to enable a feature called Vsync which synchronizes the frame rate of your graphics card with the operating frequency of your graphics card (i.e. the refresh rate). Without vsync on, the graphics card is not limited in it’s frame rate output and so will just output as many frames as it can. This can often result in graphical anomalies including ‘tearing’ of the image where the screen and graphics card are out of sync and the picture appears mixed as the monitor tries to keep up with the demanding frame rate from the card. To avoid this annoying symptom, vsync needs to be enabled. With vsync on, the frame rate that your graphics card is determined by the refresh rate you have set in Windows. Capping the refresh rate at 60hz in your display settings limits your graphics card to only output 60fps. If you set the refresh at 75hz then the card is outputting 75fps. What is actually displayed on the monitor might be a different matter though as we explained above.

The desire to offer higher frame rate support and higher refresh rates has lead to panel manufacturers developing panels which can natively support 120Hz+. It is common now to see 120Hz or 144Hz as natively supported refresh rates. This allows much higher frame rates to be displayed and the increase in refresh rate also brings about positive improvements in perceived motion clarity. TN Film panels have been around for many years now with high refresh rates and in recent years there has been development in IPS-type and VA-type panels to boost their refresh rates as well. You will also now see some ‘overclocked’ monitors available where manufacturers have attempted to boost the refresh rate further. For instance the native 144Hz IPS-type panel of the Asus ROG Swift PG279Q up to 165Hz, or the 144Hz native VA-type panel of the Acer Predator Z35 up to 200Hz. Results of these overclocks do vary and are not guaranteed but may provide some additional benefits.

True 120HZ technology– to have a true 120Hz screen, it must be capable of accepting a full 120Hz signal output from a device (e.g. a graphics card). Because TV’s are limited at the moment by their input sources they tend to use the above interpolation technology, but with the advent of 3D TV and higher frequency input sources, this will change. Desktop monitors are a different matter though as graphics cards can obviously output a true 120Hz if you have a decent enough card. Some models can accept a 120Hz signal but need different interfaces to cope (e.g. dual-link DVI or DisplayPort).

This relates to the connection type from the TFT to your PC or other external device. Older screens nearly all came with an analogue connection, commonly referred to as D-sub or VGA. This allows a connection from the VGA port on your graphics card, where the signal being produced from the graphics card is converted from a pure digital to an analogue signal. There are a number of algorithms implemented in TFT’s which have varying effectiveness in improving the image quality over a VGA connection. Some TFT’s with then offer a DVI input as well to allow you to make use of the DVI output from your graphics card which you might have. This will allow a pure digital connection which can sometimes offer an improved image quality. It is possible to get DVI – VGA converters. These will not offer any improvements over a standard analogue connection, as you are still going through a conversion from digital to analogue somewhere along the line. Dual-Link DVI is also sometimes used which is a single DVI connection but with more pins, allowing for higher resolution/refresh rate support than a single-link DVI.

Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL) is an industry standard for a mobile audio/video interface that allows consumers to connect mobile phones, tablets, and other portable consumer electronics (CE) devices to high-definition televisions (HDTVs) and monitors. You will sometimes see MHL listed in the spec and is often supported over the HDMI interfaces of a display.

DisplayPort is the most common monitor connection type nowadays, offering the highest bandwidth support and therefore being vital to provide the newest high resolution and high refresh rate panels. The DisplayPort (DP) connection comes in two types, either standard or Mini. They are interchangeable and a simple conversion cable can allow connection between each version.

The wide range of conditions over which LCD monitors are used means that it is desirable to produce displays whose luminance (brightness) can be altered to match both bright and dim environments. This allows a user to set the screen to a comfortable level of brightness depending on their working conditions and ambient lighting. Manufacturers will normally quote a maximum brightness figure in their display specification, but it is also important to consider the lower range of adjustments possible from the screen as you would probably never want to use it at its highest setting. Indeed with specs often ranging up to 500 cd/m2, you will certainly need to use the screen at something a little less harsh on the eyes. As a reminder, we test the full range of backlight adjustments and the corresponding brightness values during each of our reviews. During our calibration process as well we try to adjust the screen to a setting of 120 cd/m2 which is considered the recommended luminance for an LCD monitor in normal lighting conditions. This process helps to give you an idea of what adjustments you need to make to the screen in order to return a luminance which you might actually want to use day to day.

Changing the display luminance is achieved by reducing the total light output for both CCFL- and LED-based backlights. By far the most prevalent technique for dimming the backlight is called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM), which has been in use for many years in desktop and laptop displays. However, this technique is not without some issues and the introduction of displays with high brightness levels and the popularisation of LED backlights has made the side-effects of PWM more visible than before, and in some cases may be a source of visible flicker, eyestrain, eye fatigue, headaches and other associated issues for people sensitive to it. This article is not intended to alarm, but is intended to show how PWM works and why it is used, as well as how to test a display to see its effects more clearly. We will also take a look at the methods some manufacturers are now adopting to address these concerns and provide flicker-free backlights instead. As awareness grows, more and more manufacturers are focusing on eye health with their monitor ranges.

Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) is one method of reducing the perceived luminance in displays, which it achieves by cycling the backlight on and off very rapidly, at a frequency you can’t necessary detect with the naked eye, but which could lead to eye issues, headaches etc. This method generally means that at 100% brightness a constant voltage is applied to the backlight and it is continuously lit. As you lower the brightness control the perceived luminance for the user reduces due to a number of possible controlling factors:

2) Modulation –The modulation of the cycling has an impact on the perceived brightness, and this describes the difference between the luminance in an “on” and in an “off” state. In some examples the backlight is completely turned off during the cycle so it is literally being turned on/off rapidly across the full brightness adjustment range. In those examples the luminance output is controlled really by the duty cycle only (see point 3). In other examples the backlight is not always being completely turned off but rather the voltage applied to the backlight is being rapidly alternated, resulting in less extreme differences between the on and off states. Often this modulation will be narrow in the high brightness range of the display, but as you reduce further, the modulation becomes wider until it reaches a point where the backlight is being switched completely off. From there, the change in the duty cycle (point 3) controls the further changes in the luminance output.

While PWM is attractive to hardware makers for the reasons outlined above, it can also introduce distracting visual effects if not used carefully. Flicker from LED backlights is typically much more visible than for older CCFL backlights at the same duty cycle because the LED’s are able to switch on and off much faster, and do not continue to “glow” after the power is cut off. This means that where the CCFL backlight showed rather smooth luminance variation, the LED version shows sharper transitions between on and off states. This is why more recently the subject of PWM has cropped up online and in reviews, since more and more displays are moving to W-LED backlighting units now.

Where the effect of flicker can really come into play is any time the user’s eyes are moving. Under constant illumination with no flickering (e.g. sunlight) the image is smoothly blurred and is how we normally perceive motion. However, when combined with a light source using PWM several discrete afterimages of the screen may be perceived simultaneously and reduce readability and the ability of the eyes to lock onto objects. From the earlier analysis of the CCFL backlighting we know that false colour may be introduced as well, even when the original image is monochromatic. Below are shown examples of how text might appear while the eyes are moving horizontally under different backlights.

It is important to remember that this is entirely due to the backlight, and the display itself is showing a static image. Often it is said that humans cannot see more than 24 frames per second (fps), which is not true and actually corresponds to the approximate frame rate needed to perceive continuous motion. In fact, while the eyes are moving (such as when reading) it is possible to see the effects of flicker at several hundred hertz. The ability to observe flicker varies greatly between individuals, and even depends on where a user is looking since peripheral vision is most sensitive.

It is also important to distinguish the difference between flicker in CRT displays and CCFL and LED backlit TFT displays. While a CRT may flicker as low as 60Hz, only a small strip is illuminated at any time as the electron gun scans from top to bottom. With CCFL and LED backlit TFT displays the entire screen surface illuminates at once, meaning much more light is emitted over a short time. This can be more distracting than in CRTs in some cases, especially if short duty cycles are used.

The flicker itself in display backlights may be subtle and not easily perceptible for some people, but the natural variation in human vision seems to make it clearly visible to others. With the use of high-brightness LED’s on the rise it is becoming increasingly necessary to use short PWM duty cycles to control brightness, making flicker more of a problem. With users spending many hours every day looking at their monitors, shouldn’t we consider the long term effects of both perceptible and imperceptible flicker?

A much better method of course would be to purchase a display not relying on PWM for dimming, or at least one which uses a much higher cycling frequency. Few manufacturers seem to have implemented PWM at frequencies that would limit visible artefacts (well above 500Hz for CCFL and above 2000 Hz for LED). Additionally, some displays using PWM do not use a 100% duty cycle even at full brightness, meaning they will always produce flicker. Several LED-based displays may in fact be currently available which do not use PWM, but until backlight frequency and modulation become listed in specifications it will be necessary to see the display in person. Some manufacturers promote “flicker free” monitors in their range (BenQ, Acer for example) which are designed to not use PWM at all and instead use a Direct Current (DC) method of backlight dimming. Other manufacturers such as Eizo talk about flicker free backlights but also list a hybrid solution for their backlight dimming, where PWM is used for some of the brightness adjustment range at the lower end. In fact it seems an increasingly common practice for a screen to be PWM free down to a certain point, and then fro PWM to be used to really drive down the minimum luminance from there.

(Optional) Set the camera white balance by getting a reading off the screen while displaying only white. If not possible, then manually set the white balance to about 6000K.

Display a single vertical thin white line on a black background on the monitor (1-3 pixels wide should be fine). The image should be the only thing visible. Here is an example you may wish to save and use, show it full screen on your monitor.

What we are doing with this technique is turning a temporal effect into a spatial one by moving the camera during capture. The only significant source of light during the image capture is the thin line on the display, which is exposed onto consecutive columns on the sensor. If the backlight is flickering, different columns will have different brightness or colour values determined by the backlight at the time it was exposed.

The oscillographs for a typical CCFL display using PWM at 0% looks like the above. You can see the transitions from on to off are less sudden as the phosphors don’t go dark as quickly as with LED backlight units. As a result, the use of PWM may be less problematic to users.

As we said at the beginning, this article is not designed to scare people away from modern LCD displays, rather to help inform people of this potential issue. With the growing popularity in W-LED backlit monitors it does seem to be causing more user complaints than older displays, and this is related to the PWM technique used and ultimately the type of backlight selected. Of course the problems which can potentially be caused by the use of PWM are not seen by everyone, and in fact I expect there are far more people who would never notice any of the symptoms than there are people who do. For those who do suffer from side effects including headaches and eye strain there is an explanation at least.

With the long term and proven success of a technology like Pulse Width Modulation, and the many years of use in CCFL displays we can’t see it being widely changed at any time soon to be honest, even with the popular move to W-LED backlit units. It is still a reliable method for controlling the backlight intensity and therefore offering a range of brightness adjustments which every user would want and need. Those who are concerned about its side effects or who have had problems with previous displays should try and consider the frequency of the PWM in their new display, or perhaps even try and find a screen where it is not used at all in backlight dimming. Some manufacturers are proactively addressing this concern through the use of flicker free backlights, and so options are emerging which do not use PWM.

Along 3 years I have been trying several leg mechanism, at first I decided to do a simple desing with tibial motor where placed on femur joint.This design had several problems, like it wasn"t very robust and the most importat is that having the motor (with big mass) that far from the rotating axis, caused that in some movements it generate unwanted dynamics to the robot body, making controlability worse.New version have both motors of femur/tibial limb at coxa frame, this ends with a very simple setup and at the same time, the heaviest masses of the mechanism are centered to the rotating axis of coxa limb, so even though the leg do fast movements, inertias won"t be strong enough to affect the hole robot mass, achieving more agility.Inverse Kinematics of the mechanismAfter building it I notice that this mechanism was very special for another reason, at the domain the leg normally moves, it acts as a diferential mecanism, this means that torque is almost all the time shared between both motor of the longer limbs. That was an improvent since with the old mechanism tibial motor had to hold most of the weight and it was more forced than the one for femur.To visualize this, for the same movement, we can see how tibial motor must travel more arc of angel that the one on the new version.In order to solve this mechanism, just some trigonometry is needed. Combining both cosine and sine laws, we can obtain desired angle (the one between femur and tibia) with respect to the angle the motor must achieve.Observing these equations, with can notice that this angle (the one between femur and tibia) depends on both servos angles, which means both motors are contributing to the movement of the tibia.Calibration of servosAnother useful thing to do if we want to control servo precisely is to print a calibration tool for our set up. As shown in the image below, in order to know where real angles are located, angle protactor is placer just in the origin of the rotating joint, and choosing 2 know angles we can match PWM signal to the real angles we want to manipulate simply doing a lineal relation between angles and PWM pulse length.Then a simple program in the serial console can be wrtten to let the user move the motor to the desired angle. This way the calibration process is only about placing motor at certain position and everything is done and we won"t need to manually introduce random values that can be a very tedious task.With this I have achieved very good calibrations on motors, which cause the robot to be very simetrial making the hole system more predictable. Also the calibration procedure now is very easy to do, as all calculations are done automatically. Check Section 1 for the example code for calibration.More about this can be seen in the video below, where all the building process is shown as well as the new leg in action.SECTION 1:In the example code below, you can see how calibration protocol works, it is just a function called calibrationSecuence() which do all the work until calibration is finished. So you only need to call it one time to enter calibration loop, for example by sending a "c" character thought the serial console.Also some useful function are used, like moving motor directly with analogWrite functions which all the calculations involved, this is a good point since no interrupts are used.This code also have the feature to calibrate the potentiometer coming from each motor.#define MAX_PULSE 2500 #define MIN_PULSE 560 /*---------------SERVO PIN DEFINITION------------------------*/ int m1 = 6;//FR int m2 = 5; int m3 = 4; int m4 = 28;//FL int m5 = 29; int m6 = 36; int m7 = 3;//BR int m8 = 2; int m9 = 1; int m10 = 7;//BL int m11 = 24; int m12 = 25; int m13 = 0;//BODY /*----------------- CALIBRATION PARAMETERS OF EACH SERVO -----------------*/ double lowLim[13] = {50, 30, 30, 50, 30, 30, 50, 30, 30, 50, 30, 30, 70}; double highLim[13] = {130, 150, 150, 130, 150, 150, 130, 150, 150, 130, 150, 150, 110}; double a[13] = { -1.08333, -1.06667, -1.07778, //FR -1.03333, 0.97778, 1.01111, //FL 1.03333, 1.05556, 1.07778, //BR 1.07500, -1.07778, -1.00000, //BL 1.06250 }; double b[13] = {179.0, 192.0, 194.5, //FR 193.0, 5.5, -7.5, //FL 7.0, -17.0, -16.0, //BR -13.5, 191.5, 157.0, //BL -0.875 }; double ae[13] = {0.20292, 0.20317, 0.19904 , 0.21256, -0.22492, -0.21321, -0.21047, -0.20355, -0.20095, -0.20265, 0.19904, 0.20337, -0.20226 }; double be[13] = { -18.59717, -5.70512, -2.51697, -5.75856, 197.29411, 202.72169, 185.96931, 204.11902, 199.38663, 197.89534, -5.33768, -32.23424, 187.48058 }; /*--------Corresponding angles you want to meassure at in your system-----------*/ double x1[13] = {120, 135, 90, 60, 135 , 90, 120, 135, 90, 60, 135, 90, 110}; //this will be the first angle you will meassure double x2[13] = {60, 90, 135, 120, 90, 135, 60, 90, 135, 120, 90, 135, 70};//this will be the second angle you will meassure for calibration /*--------You can define a motor tag for each servo--------*/ String motorTag[13] = {"FR coxa", "FR femur", "FR tibia", "FL coxa", "FL femur", "FL tibia", "BR coxa", "BR femur", "BR tibia", "BL coxa", "BL femur", "BL tibia", "Body angle" }; double ang1[13] = {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}; double ang2[13] = {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0}; float xi[500]; float yi[500]; float fineAngle; float fineL; float fineH; int motorPin; int motor = 0; float calibrationAngle; float res = 1.0; float ares = 0.5; float bres = 1.0; float cres = 4.0; float rawAngle; float orawAngle; char cm; char answer; bool interp = false; bool question = true; bool swing = false; int i; double eang; int freq = 100; // PWM frecuency can be choosen here. void connectServos() { analogWriteFrequency(m1, freq); //FR coxa digitalWrite(m1, LOW); pinMode(m1, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m2, freq); //femur digitalWrite(m2, LOW); pinMode(m2, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m3, freq); //tibia digitalWrite(m3, LOW); pinMode(m3, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m4, freq); //FL coxa digitalWrite(m4, LOW); pinMode(m4, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m5, freq); //femur digitalWrite(m5, LOW); pinMode(m5, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m6, freq); //tibia digitalWrite(m6, LOW); pinMode(m6, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m7, freq); //FR coxa digitalWrite(m7, LOW); pinMode(m7, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m8, freq); //femur digitalWrite(m8, LOW); pinMode(m8, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m9, freq); //tibia digitalWrite(m9, LOW); pinMode(m9, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m10, freq); //FR coxa digitalWrite(m10, LOW); pinMode(m10, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m11, freq); //femur digitalWrite(m11, LOW); pinMode(m11, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m12, freq); //tibia digitalWrite(m12, LOW); pinMode(m12, OUTPUT); analogWriteFrequency(m13, freq); //body digitalWrite(m13, LOW); pinMode(m13, OUTPUT); } void servoWrite(int pin , double angle) { float T = 1000000.0f / freq; float usec = float(MAX_PULSE - MIN_PULSE) * (angle / 180.0) + (float)MIN_PULSE; uint32_t duty = int(usec / T * 4096.0f); analogWrite(pin , duty); } double checkLimits(double angle , double lowLim , double highLim) { if ( angle >= highLim ) { angle = highLim; } if ( angle <= lowLim ) { angle = lowLim; } return angle; } int motorInfo(int i) { enc1 , enc2 , enc3 , enc4 , enc5 , enc6 , enc7 , enc8 , enc9 , enc10 , enc11 , enc12 , enc13 = readEncoders(); if (i == 0) { rawAngle = enc1; motorPin = m1; } else if (i == 1) { rawAngle = enc2; motorPin = m2; } else if (i == 2) { rawAngle = enc3; motorPin = m3; } else if (i == 3) { rawAngle = enc4; motorPin = m4; } else if (i == 4) { rawAngle = enc5; motorPin = m5; } else if (i == 5) { rawAngle = enc6; motorPin = m6; } else if (i == 6) { rawAngle = enc7; motorPin = m7; } else if (i == 7) { rawAngle = enc8; motorPin = m8; } else if (i == 8) { rawAngle = enc9; motorPin = m9; } else if (i == 9) { rawAngle = enc10; motorPin = m10; } else if (i == 10) { rawAngle = enc11; motorPin = m11; } else if (i == 11) { rawAngle = enc12; motorPin = m12; } else if (i == 12) { rawAngle = enc13; motorPin = m13; } return rawAngle , motorPin; } void moveServos(double angleBody , struct vector anglesServoFR , struct vector anglesServoFL , struct vector anglesServoBR , struct vector anglesServoBL) { //FR anglesServoFR.tetta = checkLimits(anglesServoFR.tetta , lowLim[0] , highLim[0]); fineAngle = a[0] * anglesServoFR.tetta + b[0]; servoWrite(m1 , fineAngle); anglesServoFR.alpha = checkLimits(anglesServoFR.alpha , lowLim[1] , highLim[1]); fineAngle = a[1] * anglesServoFR.alpha + b[1]; servoWrite(m2 , fineAngle); anglesServoFR.gamma = checkLimits(anglesServoFR.gamma , lowLim[2] , highLim[2]); fineAngle = a[2] * anglesServoFR.gamma + b[2]; servoWrite(m3 , fineAngle); //FL anglesServoFL.tetta = checkLimits(anglesServoFL.tetta , lowLim[3] , highLim[3]); fineAngle = a[3] * anglesServoFL.tetta + b[3]; servoWrite(m4 , fineAngle); anglesServoFL.alpha = checkLimits(anglesServoFL.alpha , lowLim[4] , highLim[4]); fineAngle = a[4] * anglesServoFL.alpha + b[4]; servoWrite(m5 , fineAngle); anglesServoFL.gamma = checkLimits(anglesServoFL.gamma , lowLim[5] , highLim[5]); fineAngle = a[5] * anglesServoFL.gamma + b[5]; servoWrite(m6 , fineAngle); //BR anglesServoBR.tetta = checkLimits(anglesServoBR.tetta , lowLim[6] , highLim[6]); fineAngle = a[6] * anglesServoBR.tetta + b[6]; servoWrite(m7 , fineAngle); anglesServoBR.alpha = checkLimits(anglesServoBR.alpha , lowLim[7] , highLim[7]); fineAngle = a[7] * anglesServoBR.alpha + b[7]; servoWrite(m8 , fineAngle); anglesServoBR.gamma = checkLimits(anglesServoBR.gamma , lowLim[8] , highLim[8]); fineAngle = a[8] * anglesServoBR.gamma + b[8]; servoWrite(m9 , fineAngle); //BL anglesServoBL.tetta = checkLimits(anglesServoBL.tetta , lowLim[9] , highLim[9]); fineAngle = a[9] * anglesServoBL.tetta + b[9]; servoWrite(m10 , fineAngle); anglesServoBL.al