手写笔技术大不全

巡礼:手写笔  + 延伸阅读


http://augix.me/2016/01/%E5%B7%A1%E7%A4%BC%EF%BC%9A%E6%89%8B%E5%86%99%E7%AC%94/
http://www.ticktakashi.com/2014/05/wacom-vs-n-trig-modern-comparison.html

就算当年乔布斯还活着的时候,一些人们也不顾“教主”的倡导,在iPad上面配备一个手写笔。这种手写笔一般分为两种:蓝牙驱动的定位笔或者单纯模仿手指的电容笔。由于iPad当时生来就没有考虑过用笔,所以体验并不是很好。

西方不亮东方亮。三星用自己的Note系列手机,尤其是那只表现不错的笔,吸引了很多人的兴趣,也因为这支笔,收获了不错的销量。同样的,配有手写笔的Surface电脑,也是因为有这支笔,被很多人认为是核心卖点之一。

四面楚歌,不,八面玲珑的库克自然没有那么死心眼,很快,iPad也有了自己笔。

就像一出恢弘的歌剧,终于,所有的主角悉数登场。目前,在高端点的手写笔(排除没啥用的电容笔)领域,主要的派系为:以微软收购的N-Trig系列(用于微软自家Surface产品)、以Wacom为代表的EMR(电磁感应输入技术,Electro-Magnetic Resonance)和AES(主动式静电感应技术,Active Electrostatic Solution)系列、苹果的Apple Pencil(苹果自家黑科技,目前找不到详尽的资料介绍)。

(现在投身做手写笔的大厂还有:Atmel、Synaptics等。但是由于市场占用量太小,就不再论述。)

于是问题就来了……


这次,就来对比一下主流的这几项技术。

Warning:文章中夹杂了大量物理常识(其实连笔者也不懂),请读者选择性食用。如果只关注使用体验上差别,请直接跳转到文章后半部分。


Wacom EMR

在手写笔的领域,Wacom绝对是垄断性的存在。之前曾经挑战过Wacom的公司,差不多都自挂东南枝了。譬如曾经也风生水起的“友基”,现在在Wacom各种高中低产品面前也显得黯然失色。

当然,Wacom的成功,也多半归功于这个EMR技术。


毫无疑问,Wacom最成功的数位板产品线当推影拓(Intuos)系列。影拓系列采用的都是EMR方式的手写笔。

采用EMR方式的手写笔,如果不考虑笔身上面设置必要的按钮(启动程序等功能需要蓝牙连接),本身是可以无电源使用的。这也是这个技术区分于其他所有主流手写笔的最重要特点。事实上,很多廉价国产平板采用的笔都是这个技术的,其笔身没有设置任何按钮,也不需要电池驱动,譬如酷比魔方iwork11系列。

EMR的工作原理


在屏幕下方有可以探测到EMR笔活动的电磁感应板(图片中EMR传感器所在位置),在感应板上面纵横分布着线圈。高中物理常说,“磁生电,电生磁”,随着笔的移动,在通电的感应板所产生的磁场范围内,笔中的共振回路能够积蓄微弱的电能。当笔积蓄到能量后,控制回路就会停止向循环线圈提供电流并把循环线圈接通到接收回路。此时笔所积蓄到的能量会通过共振回路的自由震荡,将能量从笔尖的线圈处传送回感应板。在将能量传回电磁感应板之后,控制回路首先通过对感应板上循环线圈的扫描,从而初步检测出笔的大致位置。接下来再对笔周围的多个循环线圈进行扫描,并对检测出的信号进行计算,即可十分精确地计算出笔的座标值。

通过以上的过程,并不断进行计算,系统不仅可以得到笔当前的坐标,还能获取笔的移动速度等数据。

压感的实现,是通过笔内部的、在笔尖后端的电容器实现。当施加压力的时候,笔尖会向笔里面运动,从而导致电容器正负极之间的距离变化,从而改变电容,实现了对于压力的感应。


现在的平板电脑,将显示屏、电容感应屏幕和电磁感应板堆叠在一起,从而实现EMR手写笔和手指都能够操作。

EMR的特点

EMR技术的最大特点就是成熟。作为久经考验的手写笔技术,EMR非常可靠,也意味着廉价。所以EMR技术几乎成为入门级别产品的标配。并且由于不需要电源,EMR的笔可以做的很细,非常适合需要在机身开笔槽的机器,例如三星的Note系列手机。

经过多年的进化,现今EMR技术的笔一般都达到2048的压感级别。在市场上,应该属于最高一档压感级别。

另外,EMR笔都支持悬浮操作,即笔尖距离屏幕一定距离也可以操作。Wacom的EMR技术让悬浮操作延迟较低,而微软的N-Trig虽然也做到了悬浮操作,但是操作时候延迟很大。这个问题在写字或者作图的时候,想对准一个地方的时候,使用N-Trig的笔往往有点麻烦。

但是由于EMR的工作原理,必须在屏幕上放置感应器,所以会增加整个屏幕的厚度。这也是一些追求极致的平板所不能接受的问题(Surface Pro 3放弃在前两代使用的Wacom的笔的原因之一)。

此外,EMR技术在边缘准确度上有很大问题(Surface Pro 3开始微软放弃Wacom的EMR笔技术的第二个原因)。EMR技术在小屏幕上表现良好,譬如三星Galaxy Note系列的手机屏幕;但是在平板这种屏幕尺寸较大的设备上,其边缘的准确度会明显下降,甚至会出现边缘笔迹断断续续的现象。其实这个问题也存在于数位板上面,但是由于数位板没有屏幕,所以即使有偏移和视差(屏幕上显示的位置和真实笔尖在屏幕上的位置的差别),也表现的不是很明显。

总结来说,由于Wacom在整个手写笔领域的事实上的垄断地位,EMR是其主推的一个技术。EMR成熟、可靠,并且价格低廉,是入门级别很好的选择。

补充说明一下,根据网上的反馈和调查,不同操作系统对于手写笔的表现都有影响。在Android系统下,EMR笔的视差和延迟都明显比Windows下好一些。


N-Trig


在Wacom抱着EMR这棵枝繁叶茂的大树不思进取的时候,N-Trig技术以其更好的屏幕边缘精度和较小的时差,被很多厂商看好。当然被看好的结果大家都知道,微软:买买买!

在微软收购N-Trig之前,N-Trig大有和Wacom平分秋色的感觉。包括Thinkpad的一些平板都在尝试使用N-Trig技术的手写笔。然而,自从微软收购了N-Trig之后,这个触控笔技术就变成了微软Surface系列的“御用”产品。

N-Trig的工作原理

事实上,在业界,类似N-Trig和Wacom AES等有源手写笔被称为主动投射式电容笔(Active Projected Capacitance Stylus ,Active P-Cap Stylus)。虽然具体实现上有所差异,但是总体技术原理上差别不大。


首先,有源的手写笔不断发出低频信号(频率一般在30~70KHz之间),信号中包含笔尖所感受到的压力、笔的按键状态和笔的ID序列号等信息。通过上面的结构图可以看出,对于压力的数字化,是通过笔尖压迫快门,促使快门遮挡LED的光线,从而影响在LED对面的检测器的受光量和感光位置,进而计算出笔尖受到的压力。


其次,在机器屏幕上,有网格状的投射式电容传感器,负责整个触摸和笔的感知。这些网格状的电容传感器排线分组连接到若干个控制器上,这若干个小的控制器又连接到一个主控制器上。在工作的时候,主控制器负责控制和管理若干个小的控制器,与这些小的控制器进行数据交换,并收集这些控制器传过来的笔或者触摸的位置信息,同时也将收集到的所有数据处理后提交到主板的相应接口,从而完成对于触摸或者笔的工作流程。

在这个环节,其实每个厂家处理并不相同。有一些厂商,例如Atmel,采用双向传输模式,即笔和传感器之间可以相互进行数据交流。而N-Trig则不同,是采用了单向传输模式,笔只负责发送响应的低频信号到传感器,不再具有信号接收功能。

N-Trig的特点

自然,相比于之前说过的EMR模式的笔,N-Trig的笔复杂了很多,所以价格上也水涨船高。根据商业规律,大部分厂商都是希望通过配件来赚取更多利润的,而不是仅仅通过主机。一旦配件的成本太高,势必挤压了厂商原本的利润空间。所以即使是在微软收购N-Trig之前,N-Trig的笔也多出现于Thinkpad这种高端机型上面。毕竟只有高端机型,才有足够的利润空间,即使配件的价格稍微高一点,消费者也不会那么在意。

N-Trig的最大特点是将触摸和笔识别结合在了一套系统上,屏幕上只需要放置一层感应层就可以完成。从而减少了屏幕厚度,也减轻了重量。同时,屏幕层数越少,光的折射效果便越不明显,就可以让视差也随之缩小。

当然,实际体验上来看,N-Trig的笔的确在很大程度上解决EMR笔的视差偏移和边缘灵敏度问题。当然,如果严格来说,一点偏移都没有的笔是不存在的,尤其是笔尖的角度较为倾斜的时候。


笔的响应速度方面,N-Trig较比EMR并没有太大的优势,甚至可以说在相应的延迟时间上,EMR技术更短,使用过程中表现出来就是感觉笔迹更“跟手”。当悬浮的时候,N-Trig的笔反应灵敏度立刻降低,甚至有明显的滞后感觉。

一直以来,手写笔不被人看好的很大原因是在屏幕上有一种在“玻璃上写字”的感觉。在Surface Pro 4的笔上,微软也特别加入了硅胶之类的笔尖,从而大大增加了使用时候的摩擦力,让人真的又一种写在纸上的感觉。这点其实非常重要,就像日常购买钢笔一样。一般人首先都是考虑手感,看写出来是否顺滑但还要不至于滑得失控,然后才回去考虑出墨是否流畅等其它方面。

在Surface Pro 4的笔上,微软终于回归了1024级别的压感。早在N-Trig在被收购前,就有256和1024这两个压感级别。但是比较市面上大部分EMR笔都是2048级别(事实上,2015年开始大量上市的Wacom AES技术的笔也均为2048压感级别),N-Trig不知道能不能尽快赶上。

另外就是画线抖动的问题了。这也是从Surface 3时候的老生常谈了,在慢速画直线的时候,N-Trig的笔画出的线条就是仿佛手抖一样的波浪线。这个问题,在Surface Pro 4的笔上依然存在。

当然,作为有源的手写笔,需要安装电池。尽管Surface的笔采用了最细的AAAA(9号)电池,其体积和重量也都算手写笔里面较粗的。还好,每个人对于笔的粗细、重量甚至重量的分布都喜好不同。不过由于体积的限制,Surface的笔就不可能类似很多传统的手写笔一样,在平板机身上开一个笔槽。“设计成内置电池,充电的不就好了么?”太细的笔可能造成笔内电池容量非常不理想,影响整个笔使用时间(没错,说的就是那个设计得那么细、却仍没办法放在平板内、还没有笔夹的Apple Pencil)。而且能换电池的设计,也并不是那么不方便,虽然那群老外根本就没有想过9号电池在中国是多么不好买,但相信随着各种手写笔的普及,9号电池一定会出现在楼下小卖部的柜子里。


2016年1月30日更新:至于为什么Surface Pro 4的笔可以用在Surface 3上面,但仅能提供256级别压感,由于N-Trig的资料并不是那么齐全,只好自己分析一下。N-Trig的压力感知是通过笔尖的快门遮挡LED光束完成转换成数字信号的,并通过低频信号发射出去。但是由于接收和处理压感信号的控制器并不具备处理1024级别压感的能力,所以只能以类似“兼容”模式处理256级别的压感信号。类似于在720P分辨率的屏幕上播放4K分辨率的视频,虽然视频分辨率非常高,但是由于接收视频信号的显示器分辨率的限制,只能最终以720P的分辨率展示出来。


Wacom AES

还好,在N-Trig之类的厂商的压力下,Wacom也终于推出了新的手写笔技术。


其实在很早,Wacom也有过一个带电源的手写笔技术,不过据说这项技术Wacom并不看好,将其卖给了基友厂商——友基。不过这大多是坊间传闻而已。

在最近,Wacom开始推出了主动手写笔的产品。在早期(2015年年初),有一些采用了AES技术的产品,如东芝的部分二合一设备,但是由于那时候Wacom技术不成熟,不同型号的AES笔甚至不能互换使用,这些采用Wacom AES的平板更像是在做Wacom的试验品。但是在2016年初,Wacom推出了完整的AES手写笔系列,并据此推出了Bamboo Smart手写笔。这支笔可以兼容市面上大部分采用AES技术的平板电脑,甚至一些刚刚推出的平板电脑。从而继续奠定了Wacom在此领域的垄断。

AES的工作原理

在Wacom的网站上,并没有详细介绍AES的基本原理。看来对于这个技术,Wacom还有所保留。不过根据Wacom提供的宣传册,应该类似之前提到N-Trig的模式,可能具体实现有所差别。

AES的特点

从2016年初这个时间点上来看,AES都提供了和EMR技术相同的压感级别,达到了2048级别。

AES技术,相比于EMR技术,大大提升了屏幕边缘的准确度,并尽量减小了视差。在接下来的文章中,将会通过对HP Elite X2 1012这款二合一设备的体验感受,来具体分析AES技术,敬请期待。

和N-Trig相似,但是AES提供了2048级别的压感。虽然对于普通人,256级别的压感完全足够,但是对于画师来说,2048才是真正的利器,甚至专业级别的画师需要4096级别的压感。

同样的,AES的笔也可以提供多种材质的笔尖,从而增加摩擦力。但是貌似目前上市各种AES技术的手写笔大部分还是光秃秃的普通笔尖,写在屏幕的玻璃面板上体验还是不那么好。

虽然各方面都类似N-Trig技术(当然这两种笔是不能互换的),AES的笔迹更加“跟手”,当进行悬浮操作的时候,光标较比N-Trig反应更为灵敏。

不过,虽然AES增加了边缘的准确度,但是在画直线的时候,仍然会有N-Trig类似的波动,而且波动甚至比N-Trig的还要大。


此外,为了省电,AES笔会类似一些蓝牙鼠标,在长时间不用的时候自动关闭,当笔尖接触屏幕的时候再再次开启。这样虽然达到了节电的目的,但是显然N-Trig这种一直保持开启状态的笔更让人觉得舒服(Surface Pro 4的笔已经改为自动休眠,拿起时候感受到加速度自动开启)。据说2016年的新机型一些AES的笔也改进了电量管理,也是将笔设置为了常开状态。届时将配合HP Elite X2 1012的使用来验证。

总结来说,AES是Wacom为对付N-Trig开发的一套非常不错的技术。和N-Trig一样的精确度和视觉误差, 有比N-Trig更好的压感和反应速度。如果Wacom继续改进AES技术,相信将来一定是大部分手写笔的首选技术。

目前看来,按照Wacom的产品线,Wacom看家产品数位板还采用EMR技术的笔,证明AES还是需要一定时间才能替代EMR的。Wacom也宣称,即使采用了AES技术,整个手写笔系统的成本依然低廉。可以预测,在2016年,大量国产的千元价位的平板电脑,都会逐步采用更加方便的AES技术的手写笔。


Apple Pencil

苹果至今没有公布任何关于Apple Pencil的技术细节。


Apple Pencil的特点

按照苹果的秉性,不争第一,只求最好。一般苹果推出的产品,都是技术更成熟一些,用户体验也稍微更好一些。尤其是到了厨子库克这一代,不激进的苹果推出产品的态度越来越沉稳。


当然,根据各方面的评测和信息汇总,苹果这支笔,单纯从压感上来说,也就是256级别。不过Surface的信徒们也不要笑,一年前,Surface的笔也只有256级别的压感。新技术的第一代产品,苹果和微软一样,都不愿意步子那么大。

但是单纯从体验上来说,Apple Pencil应该是最好的手写笔之一。

当使用Apple Pencil的时候,iPad Pro和Apple Pencil之间就以240Hz的采样频率交换数据,所以即使在非常快速的书写的时候,也基本没有“跟不上”的感觉。而N-Trig技术的笔的采样频率仅有140Hz。

Apple Pencil的定位、视差等问题也基本解决。在慢速画直线的时候,也不会有任何波动。边缘准确度和灵敏度都很好。

另外,这支笔支持倾斜角度,从而辅助一些软件,画出不同的效果。笔尖也有摩擦感,不会太滑。

但是,很多人并那么不喜欢Apple Pencil。首先这支笔太细长,造成内部电池容量很小。号称12小时的续航远远达不到,很多人抱怨说是基本是一天一充。虽然Apple Pencil看似可以随时插到iPad的Lightning插口上快速充电,但是这种方式非常不优雅。单独购买一个充电底座,似乎也完全没有必要。自己的Surface 3的笔,随机附送的一节9号电池(超霸电池),在9个月的使用时间中,写了大量OneNote文档,标注大量PDF文档,至今却仍没有换过电池。于是想起小时候,睡觉前,妈妈总会问一句:铅笔削了么?钢笔灌水了么?用Apple Pencil,还真的经常会被没电困扰。还好,官方说,充电15秒,可以使用30分钟。

总结来说,Apple Pencil是一支非常棒的笔。虽然苹果都不好意思透露其压感级别,但是配合iOS不错的软件优化,仍然效果很好。苹果为了做广告,请来一大票艺术家拿着画画。其实单从不愿意透露的压感级别来说,Apple Pencil并不适合画画,相反,用Apple Pencil写字、注释PDF文档、记录OneNote笔记,书写体验甚至超过了大部分的Android和Windows平板。但是,由于iOS在生产力上的先天性不足,自己看文档还好,如果涉及到了“文档批注->批注文档邮件发送->根据批注修改文档”这种常见的工作流,iOS糟糕的生产力提供绝对会成为公司开除一个人的理由……


总结

显而易见,虽然Wacom还没有在自己的数位板等专业的产品线上用AES技术替代传统的EMR技术,但是如今大部分笔都开始向有源方向演进。无论是上面说到的Wacom、N-Trig还是苹果,还是依然在不断努力的Atmel、Synaptics,都已经将有源的手写笔作为自己发力的重点。

采用有源的手写笔,好处显而易见。除了能够提供更好的使用体验,还可以为笔加装蓝牙模块,从而通过按键实现特定的功能,这点在Wacom最新的驱动软件中已经实现,按键的功能也可以自定义。

同时,手写笔的表现,还跟操作系统有很大的关系。总体上来说,Android对于手写笔的处理好于Windows。

综上所述,Wacom AES是比较好的选择。产品丰富,兼容性好,体验也不错。N-Trig被封为微软“御用”之后,产品选择也只有了Surface系列。Apple Pencil也只有iPad Pro一条选择。目前市面上的平板,如果是搭载Wacom笔的,一般有电池的,就是采用了Wacom AES技术的。毕竟对于大多数都厂商来说,对于手写笔的参数并不会标记那么清楚。

对于学生这个庞大的群体来说,有一支笔,真的非常方便。同时,参加会议的时候也能够很方便做笔记(配合OneNote还能录制音频)。所以,在2016年的新年,不考虑试一试么?


延伸阅读

Wacom vs N-Trig - A Modern Comparison

WARNING: This post is long. I wrote this because I could not find an unbiased comparison of the  modern N-Trig and Wacom technologies online. It was written in response to the artistic outcry regarding the Surface Pro 3. If you are an artist, I believe it is worth reading.

UPDATED as of 20th June 2014 to reflect N-Trig software advancements.
UPDATED as of 23rd June 2014 to reflect new direct Digitizer comparison information.



Those of you who may visit this site regularly will know that I am a game developer, but what you might not know is that I also do a lot of sketching. (Maybe one day I will post the stuff online)

Since I am a geek, I do almost all of my sketching digitally, which means I am always looking out for new developments in digitizer technology. This brings me to this post in particular:

Following the announcement of the  Surface Pro 3, many artists were shocked and disappointed by the news that the SP3 would be using  N-Trig technology rather than  Wacom technology like the SP2. This is a perfectly understandable reaction, considering how the two have compared historically. A year ago, this news would have marked a fatal deal breaker in the eyes of all artists (including myself).

However, as someone who has used both the  newest Wacom technology and the  newest N-Trig technology on various tablets, I can tell you that the gap between these two brands is not as large as many still think.

This is a direct comparison post, between the most recent N-Trig digitizers and the most recent Wacom digitizers. I will compare the two technologies based on their practical performance. Both in terms of software and hardware. However, I will not compare the two on details like price. Wacom digitizers are significantly more expensive, but since that this does not ultimately effect the  drawing experience, it is not relevant in the context of this comparison. I also neglect device specific factors like extra buttons and other details like N-Trig AAAA battery requirement for the same reason, this is a pure  digitizer comparison.



Pressure Sensitivity


N-Trig devices have  256 Levels of pressure, while Wacom devices can range from  512 all the way up to  2048. As far as numbers go, its is clear to see that in this regard Wacom devices are superior. However, it is important for us to understand what it means to have more levels of pressure. Having more than 256 levels of pressure only makes a difference if you are working with brush that is above size 256.  In other words:

When drawing with a Hard Brush, at a Brush size that is lower than 256, there is no difference in sensitivity between Wacom and N-Trig

This is an important concept for people to grasp, because most artists do not work with brush sizes above 256. Furthermore, the difference does not become easily perceptible for a little while after that.

Some professions will require large brushes. For example: someone who is working on a poster that is going to be blown up to billboard sizes (and aren't using vectors) will definitely need a tool with higher than 256 Levels of pressure.

[Begin Edit] Since this topic in particular is of great interest, I will expand further to ensure there is no confusion.

Imagine using a 100px brush with a device capable of 100 pressure levels, and pressing down with 40/100 levels of pressure, 40% pressure. Based on common software implementation, this will draw a 40px circle. Now imagine using that same brush on a device that has 100,000,000 pressure levels, you press down with 40,000,001/100,000,000 pressure levels, 40.000001% pressure. The circle drawn is still only 40px wide. In this instance, you only need 100 pressure levels to hit every possibility, any pressure levels in between are simply not used.

The pressure curve (mentioned after this edit), can be used to squash the useful range of pen. Lets use a contrived example, mapping all pressure to half of the available pressure levels. We are still in a position where a digitizer with 256 levels of pressure is no different up to brushes of size 128px, which is still larger than what is necessary for most work. Even in the extreme case where someone wastes half of their pressure range, 256 levels is enough.

There are also other factors involved other than just brush size, you can use pressure to vary things like Opacity, Values, Jitter, and a heap of other factors. The point of this pure brush-size example was to encourage this type of thinking across to board: many programs have whole-number opacity percentages, or HSB/RGB parameters that only have a range of 100, 256 or 360. In many of these cases, it still makes little (in the 360 case) or no difference at all to have a more sensitive piece of hardware.

Now, there  are a few cases where the average artist may use a much larger brush, for example, its common to use a very large air-brush for much smaller areas to ensure neat coverage. So if your immediate thought is that you never ever use brushes larger than 256, you may want to think again.

Furthermore, there is another point which I have neglected to mention which ties into the physical limitations of humans. It is very difficult for a human to apply force in small quantities and, when dealing with pressure levels in the hundreds or thousands, the difference in force between each level ends up being incredibly minute. This means that precisely using all the pressure sensitivity of your device is not easy, and some might argue that its outside of physical human capabilities entirely.

In summary, digitizer companies use pressure levels in the same way that many tech companies use specs: they count on a lack of public understanding in order to justify expensive upgrades that are largely unnecessary. 256 vs 512 vs 1024 vs 2048 is, for the most part, just marketing.

[End Edit]


While the levels of pressure do not make difference to most artists, there are some other factors that do. The most important two are:  The Pressure Curve and  IAF - Initial Activation Force.

In mathematical terms: the Pressure curve is a function which translates your physical pressure (pounds of force) into virtual pressure. A steep pressure curve will mean that small modifications in your physical force will have drastic effects on the line that appears on screen.

The default pressure curve on Wacom devices is often described as more natural than the N-Trig curve. Furthermore, Wacom devices allow modification of the pressure curve to suit individual needs while N-Trig has no easy method of modifying the default curve.

The other factor, IAF, is the amount of initial force required before marks begin to register. On Wacom devices this is very small, last I checked it was 1 gram of force. For N-Trig devices the IAF is noticeably larger, partially due to the default pressure curve. These two factors are what places Wacom above N-Trig in terms of pressure sensitivity.

Winner: Wacom



Stroke Accuracy


When it comes to drawing, nothing can be more invaluable than having your marks appear where you'd expect them to appear. This is Stroke Accuracy. When drawing with a Wacom device, you draw with respect to the hovering cursor, whether or not this aligns perfectly with your physical pen. This is something that you get used to over a short time.

On the other hand, modern N-Trig devices are very accurate (if not perfectly accurate) in this regard. The marks simply appear beneath the pen. For some, this is an invaluable experience. For others, working with the cursor in mind is satisfactory. In any case this is an area where Wacom needs to catch up.

Winner: N-Trig



Hover


Using either brand of digitizer, you can guide your cursor by hovering the pen close to the tablets surface. In the case of Wacom digitizers, this is important for you to line up your strokes. Hence, Wacom digitizers have a larger hover distance than N-Trig devices.

N-Trig devices also suffer from cursor lag when hovering. While your marks may always appear where the pen contacts the screen, the cursor may trail behind when it comes to hovering. Many artists who are not accustomed to this find it disorienting. For these reasons, the Wacom hover experience is superior.

Winner: Wacom



Stroke Delay


The stroke delay is the time is takes from the moment you finish physically applying the pen to the screen to the moment the mark finishes being drawn. In this instance, your mileage will vary significantly based on the device you are using. Since this largely depends on the underlying hardware, it is not easy to say which digitizer is superior.

Just for perspective: My development machine at the time of writing is a Sandybridge 4GHz Hex-Core with 16GB of RAM and a HD6990. I have used a Wacom Cintiq 13HD on this machine, and still saw stroke delay when working with various brush sizes. On the other hand, I have a Galaxy Note 12.2, which is built with Wacom technology and I have not seen very much Stroke Delay at all. On the N-Trig side of things, I only have experience with modern N-Trig Laptops such as the Vaio Duo 13, working in Clip Studio Paint I did not notice any Stoke Delay when working with brushes at reasonable sizes.

The following is no longer true, see below for more information:

Once the N-Trig-based Surface Pro 3 is out, I will directly compare it to the Wacom-based Surface Pro 2. This comparison will not be entirely fair since the SP3 is "10-20% faster", but it is as close as we can get right now. Because I do not have enough data for a meaningful answer at this moment, I will neglect to give one.

[UPDATE - 23rd June 2014]

With the release of the N-Trig Surface Pro 3, a direct comparison between it and the Wacom Surface Pro 2 can be performed.  AnandTech, a tech review site has compared the pens in terms of latency, yielding a ~30ms improvement on the side of the Surface Pro 3.

Surface Pro 3 vs Surface Pro 2 pen latency - Table taken from AnandTech
An initial reaction may be to say that this comparison is unfair, the Surface Pro 3 is the next iteration and should be more powerful than the Surface Pro 2, but this is not the case. Both tested devices in this test have the same processor and identical RAM, in addition the Surface Pro 3 actually has to drive a higher resolution display, meaning that it actually exhibits worse performance than the Pro 2 in many areas. With this information, we can clearly place N-Trig as superior in terms of Stroke Delay. However, its important to note that this is not a definitive advantage, as we will see in the  Software section, different programs can perform better or worse with different digitizers.

Winner: N-Trig




Parallax


Parallax is the perceived misalignment of the pen tip and the drawn mark as a result of the physical distance between the pen tip and the pixels of the screen.

If you have a tablet and you don't know what I mean: take it out, open up a fresh drawing and press the pen to the middle of the screen and move your head. If you are using most Wacom devices, the mark will no longer be aligned with pen in the way you thought it was. This means that, if you move your head while drawing, pen marks will start being placed in locations that you do not expect.

Some Wacom devices, such as the Note 12.2, do not have parallax issues as pronounced as, for example, the Cintiq line. But all Wacom devices suffer from parallax to some degree. On the other hand, N-Trig devices do not have this issue because their digitizer technology is very thin. For this reason, N-Trig is the clear winner here.

Winner: N-Trig



Drift & Calibration


It is well known that Wacom devices suffer from drift. Causing cursor alignment issues at the edges and corners of the screen. Since most software is designed so that toolbars and buttons are at the edges and corners, this can be a very irritating issue.

Wacom devices will require regular re-calibration to improve accuracy. However, this cannot fix the edge and corner drift issues, since they are a hardware limitation.

On the other hand, N-Trig devices do not require re-calibration and are equally accurate at all locations on screen. For this reason, N-Trig wins this catagory.

Winner: N-Trig



Software


Software is a big deal for everyone using these devices, after all, it doesn't matter if one seems better than the other if they don't work with your favorite programs. In this regard, N-Trig has made significant strides towards ensuring compatibility across key programs.

The following is no longer true, see below for more information:

However, N-Trig is still not perfect in this regard. There are still a few programs which do not function correctly with N-Trig devices due to the industries historical dependence on Wacom and the Win-Tab driver. N-Trig have released a 64-Bit compatibility driver for Win-Tab, but this means that 32-Bit Win-Tab software will not work correctly unless it was built with the Ink API.

To expand on this point, this means that programs like Photoshop and Clip studio paint will work fine, but ZBrush for example will not. Which means that, if you are a 3D Sculptor, you simply cannot use a N-Trig device for your work.


N-Trig will likely pick up support for more software as time goes by, either the software will be updated to a 64-Bit version or support will be added directly. In any case, at this very moment it is still a problem for 3D artists everywhere. For this reason, Wacom is superior in this category. 


[UPDATE - 20th June 2014]

With the launch of new WinTab drivers coinciding with the release of the Surface Pro 3, all modern N-Trig digitizers can boast compatibility with Wintab software across the board. This includes, ZBrush, Corel Painter, Krita, Paint Tool Sai etc. In addition, more and more art software is being built using the generic tablet pc ink api, meaning that not only can you can use almost all legacy software, and will likely be able to use all future software with an N-Trig solution.

Furthermore, Wacom has a history of driver issues. These are, at best, minor annoyances and, at worst, can cause their products to become unusable for short periods of time due to loss of pressure or total unresponsiveness. In most cases, its not a deal-breaker for these issues to occur and the more severe problems occur very infrequently. However, driver bugs are just something people have grown to accept about the Wacom experience. Things like bugs and isolated issues should not have weight in this comparison, but these are not uncommon occurrences. Almost all Wacom tablet users will complain about driver issues at one point or another.

At this point, it seems inevitable to say that N-Trig wins this category, but there is one final factor that we have yet to discuss. Software built with wintab is optimized for wintab. This means that you are likely to experience (very slightly) reduced performance in software that added support for other devices later. While this is not as irritating as Wacom driver issues, it is still a consideration because it is a constant. I.e. While you may be able to find a fix for your driver issues, the same can't be said for the optimization of software. Digitizer users are at the mercy of software developers in this regard, and will be for a while.

Winner: Draw




Summary


Pressure -  Wacom
Accuracy -  N-Trig
Hover -  Wacom
Delay -  Draw  N-Trig
Parallax -  N-Trig
Drift & Calibration -  N-Trig
Software -  Wacom   Draw

As you can see, the distinction between the two is not so clear cut. Ultimately, your decision will depend largely on your preferences. If it is invaluable to you that your marks simply appear below your pen, then you may want to consider an N-Trig solution. If you are a dealing with mega resolutions you will want a Wacom device. If you are irritated by Calibration or tend to switch tools often, N-Trig.

It is clear to me that the N-Trig vs Wacom debate is often driven more by historical prejudice than unbiased comparison. In my opinion, it is important for people to select tools based on merit rather than bias. Personally I am going to wait an see how the Surface Pro 3s digitizer holds up before deciding that it's the end of the universe.

  • 14
    点赞
  • 34
    收藏
    觉得还不错? 一键收藏
  • 2
    评论
评论 2
添加红包

请填写红包祝福语或标题

红包个数最小为10个

红包金额最低5元

当前余额3.43前往充值 >
需支付:10.00
成就一亿技术人!
领取后你会自动成为博主和红包主的粉丝 规则
hope_wisdom
发出的红包
实付
使用余额支付
点击重新获取
扫码支付
钱包余额 0

抵扣说明:

1.余额是钱包充值的虚拟货币,按照1:1的比例进行支付金额的抵扣。
2.余额无法直接购买下载,可以购买VIP、付费专栏及课程。

余额充值