Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support ILI9488 3.5" (320x480) displays #147

Closed
TCB13 opened this issue Sep 28, 2021 · 4 comments
Closed

Support ILI9488 3.5" (320x480) displays #147

TCB13 opened this issue Sep 28, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@TCB13
Copy link

TCB13 commented Sep 28, 2021

Hello,

Are there any plans to support for 3.5" (320x480) displays with the ILI9488 chip? Or anyone already did it?

Examples of devices:

Thank you.

@rm-hull
Copy link
Owner

rm-hull commented Sep 29, 2021

No plans to write a driver for it, but if there is a Linux framebuffer driver for this device, you could use https://luma-core.readthedocs.io/en/latest/device.html#luma.core.device.linux_framebuffer instead

@TCB13
Copy link
Author

TCB13 commented Sep 29, 2021

Interesting, so I can get a PIL.ImageDraw out of the core device and use it to draw stuff in the same way I do with supported screens?

Side question, this library seems to support ILI9341 and there's also fb_ili9341 for it. Why is supported "natively" by the library and the other is via framebuffer? Or it all comes down to nobody with the skills and time to implement it on the library needs it?

Thank you.

@rm-hull
Copy link
Owner

rm-hull commented Sep 29, 2021

Interesting, so I can get a PIL.ImageDraw out of the core device and use it to draw stuff in the same way I do with supported screens?

Yes, exactly

Side question, this library seems to support ILI9341 and there's also fb_ili9341 for it. Why is supported "natively" by the library and the other is via framebuffer?

The original ILI9341 driver was quite slow - pushing out a lot of pixels in python on a RPi was "challenging". We made some improvements to the diff to previous framebuffer, so it only drew changes since last time - this immensely improves FPS.

The framebuffer luma driver is universal (and was implemented after the ili9341 IIRC), and obviously there exists a number of different fb kernel drivers, so adding the framebuffer luma impl opened up to more devices.

Also framebuffer driver is likely to be better performance for larger screen resolutions

Or it all comes down to nobody with the skills and time to implement it on the library needs it?

I guess it mostly boils down to that yes, plus needing to acquire a device to test against

@TCB13
Copy link
Author

TCB13 commented Sep 29, 2021

Thank your for the patience and detailed answer. It makes perfect sense now. I'm going to try the framebuffer driver route and see how it goes.

@TCB13 TCB13 closed this as completed Sep 29, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants