1. Introduction
The difficulty of reading from a screen in harsh light conditions such as outdoors, is a well-known issue to most display users. The outdoor usage of a smartphone, for example, will often lead to the user increasing the brightness to its maximum. A notification will pop up to warn the user that using a high brightness will drain the battery. If we were able to increase the readability of the screen without having to increase the screen brightness, we would be able to significantly reduce energy consumption of smartphones and other mobile devices. Other use cases that struggle with outdoor readability are displays in the automotive and aviation sector or even outdoor signage. In combination with the increased usage of screens, averaging nearly 7 hours per day globally across mobile phones, computers, notebooks, automotive displays and TVs, [
1] there is an increased interest in minimizing reflections, or glare, to increase the readability. Harsh reflections from e.g., a smartphone screen are the result of a glossy surface that reflects the light directly back to the user’s eye by specular reflection. A possible way to reduce front side reflections from ambient lighting is by the use of anti-glare functionality. An anti-glare screen works by adding a textured surface that reduces specular reflection and increases diffuse reflection (see
Figure 1). Thus reducing the intensity of glare, resulting in improved readability and reduced eye strain [
2].
An additional layer placed in between the display and the viewer will affect the image quality. Therefore, there are several design criteria that should be taken into account when designing anti-glare textures, such as gloss and haze level, sparkle, distance from pixels and the Pixels Per Inch (PPI). [
3] In general, there is a tradeoff between achieving a glare reduction and maintaining a good image quality, such as reducing the glare, but keeping a high transmittance for a clear image.
One important aspect to consider is sparkle: sparkle is the visual effect that results from the interaction of light with the display pixel matrix and the anti-glare surface that contains an irregular micro texture. It occurs when the AG texture size is similar to the pixel geometry within the display. As display pixels become smaller and approach the size of the anti-glare texture, light emitted from each display pixel is refracted by the anti-glare surface texture, which will lead to interference and scattering.[
4,
5] To the user, this becomes visible as a grainy or ‘sparkly’ displayed image with varying colors and intensity and a random distribution across the display. This effect is very sensitive to a changing viewing angle and therefore becomes more obvious when the viewer moves with respect to the display.
As development for displays and pixel sizes is continuously ongoing, manufacturers are challenged to enable customization of the anti-glare features to be able to match them with the different types of displays and pixel sizes.
Currently, anti-glare surfaces are traditionally achieved through e.g., sandblasting, wet etching, sputtering, spraying or a combination thereof [
6]. However, these techniques are restricted in the design of the textures due to constrains in process adjustments. Especially as display pixel sizes get smaller, such design freedom becomes more critical. To unlock design freedom and achieve optimal anti-glare textures and durable performance, this work describes a novel method of creating anti-glare surfaces: Nanoimprint Lithography (NIL) based replication of textures generated through Laser Beam Lithography (LBL). Rather than letting the geometry of the anti-glare texture be dictated by the production process, this combination of techniques allows manufactures to design and optimize an anti-glare texture to give the best optical performance and match with the display. Next to being able to create the most optimal anti-glare texture itself, this combination of techniques also allows for easy ‘selective patterning’. This means that it is easily possible to e.g., keep camera holes for a smartphone or tablet screen untextured. With conventional techniques, this would require masking and this leads to a higher complexity of the production process as well as higher energy and material consumption. An additional advantage of this fabrication method is the fact that every product is identical. With conventional techniques, the texture is a result of random processes and therefore every product is different. Using LBL in combination with NIL would give a reproducibility that cannot be achieved with the conventional fabrication methods.
To showcase this novel fabrication method, Raith Laser Systems BV and Morphotonics BV combined their efforts and techniques (
Figure 2). Firstly, together with PlanOpsim, four different types of anti-glare textures were modeled and the grayscale images were used by Raith to fabricate the master mold using LBL. The photoresist master was used to create a nickel shim that was subsequently used by Morphotonics for the replication onto a glass substrate. The results of this full cycle from design to finished products are described in this work.