- PocketBook has launched the InkPoster digital art display at CES
- The battery-powered frame claims to use zero energy most of the time
- It comes in three sizes, but none of them are exactly affordable
Digital art displays are a great way to liven up your home, but most of them can consume a lot of energy in use. Now, though, one company claims to have solved that issue by developing an E Ink screen that slashes its energy consumption – for a price.
Introduced at CES 2025, the PocketBook InkPoster comprises an E Ink Spectra 6 display, which PocketBook says offers “the authentic feel of ink-on-paper with vibrant colors and detailed, bright images.” Since the InkPoster doesn’t contain an LCD panel, that means it also doesn’t use backlighting – as a result, there are no blue light emissions.
Interestingly, PocketBook claims that the InkPoster device consumes no energy when displaying a static image and only requires power when changing from one image to another. As well as that, PocketBook states that the device does not emit any heat in usage, unlike rival LCD-based options.
Instead of being plugged into the wall, the InkPoster is battery-powered and can last up to a year on a single charge. It comes in three sizes, with 13.3-inch, 28.5-inch, and 31.5-inch options available. The 28.5-inch model adds in Sharp’s IGZO tech, which ensures faster image updates. An A1 version is coming later in 2025.
A pricey option
PocketBook says you can access thousands of artworks using the company’s app or display your own images or photos instead. Each InkPoster unit can be used in either landscape or portrait orientation, so they should work with a wide variety of images.
However, there’s a notable catch: the price. The PocketBook InkPoster models don’t come cheap, and you should expect to pay $599 (around £485 / AU$970) for the 13.3-inch model, $1,700 (about £1,380 / AU$2,740) for the 31.5-inch version, and $2,400 (around £1,945 / AU$3,875) for the 28.5-inch edition with Sharp’s IGZO technology.
That makes the InkPoster far, far more expensive than simply using traditional printed and framed images – which, incidentally, don’t require any energy to operate either. Perhaps that might be a better option, despite the lure of the InkPoster’s impressive tech, if you don’t plan on updating the displayed image very often.
Leave a comment