The 7.3 has a 40 pin header. The pico has two rows of 20 pins. I’m not clear how to connect the two.
The Inky Impression is for a Raspberry Pi. The Inky Frame has an Pico-W onboard.
Thank you for the reply. Attached is a pic of my 7.3 Inky Impression next to a Pico. There is no onboard Raspberry Pi.
Exactly. You have to buy one. I recommend at least the Pi Zero W 2.
So does that mean I can’t use the Pico with the Inky?
“The Inky” is not the correct wording. “The Inky Impression” can’t be used with a Pico, only with a Pi. “The Inky-Frame” is for the Pico.
These are two different product-lines:
- Inky Impression: these are for a Raspberry Pi
- Inky Frame: these are for an (onboard) Pico-W
I see. Thank you for the clarification.
Is the only difference between the Inky Frame and the Inky Impression the onboard Pico and software? In other words, if I plug a Zero into my Impression, can I turn it into a Frame?
And, I guess back to my earlier question, is it possible for me to connect a Pico to my Inky Impression?
The displays are almost identical. You could use jumper wires to connect the correct pins. You should read the schematic of the Inky-Impression and compare this with the schematic of the Inky-Frame, then you know which pins to map.
One difference is an additional memory-chip on the Inky-Frame. The Inky-Impression does not need this chip, since even the entry-level Pi has much more memory than the Pico.
From software-side the programs on the Zero (Impression) are definitely different than programs on the Pico. On the Zero, you use normal CPython and the PIL (Python-Image-Library) to create an image that you then display. On the Pico you can use C++ or MicroPython and you manipulate low-level graphical functions.
Thanks again. Looks like you’ve taken care of the wiring. This should work, yes?
or this?
Yes, my HAT works fine with the Inky-Impression 5.7" and should also work with the 7.3". I did not know about the HAT from The Pi Hut, thanks for the link. Looking at the mapping, this also looks fine.
Added bonus: if you dump the Pico-W and use the Waveshare ESP32-S3 Pico, you get much higher speed and much more memory. Downside is that you cannot use the Micropython-version of Pimoroni with all their examples. One of the reasons I use CircuitPython.
I may start a new thread on this, but were either of you able to get the Pico 2W working with the Inky Impression 7.3”? The Inky-Frame with onboard Pico 2W was sold out, and I have a lot of spare Pico 2Ws. So I was hoping I could jumper the Pico 2W to the Inky Impression 7.3” and then download the Inky Frame micropython firmware (Release Version 1.26.1 · pimoroni/inky-frame · GitHub) and have the Inky Impression working. It doesn’t seem to work. Here’s the error I get when I try to run main.py:
MPY: soft reboot
Traceback (most recent call last):
File “”, line 5, in
File “inky_frame.py”, line 44, in
OSError: [Errno 5] EIO
and when I try to run one of the examples like daily_xkcd.py:
MPY: soft reboot
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 8, in <module>
File "inky_frame.py", line 44, in <module>
OSError: [Errno 5] EIO
I do have a couple of those PiHut Pico to PiHATs at home but I’m on the road for the holidays and only have the Picos and jumper wires. It is possible that I’ve mis-wired something as well.
Mostly wondering if it is even possible to run the Inky-Frame firmware on the Pico 2W and have that work with the Inky Impression 7.3” at all or if the Pico 2W is somehow incompatible with the Inky Impression.
The Inky-Frame version of the 7.3" uses a different hardware-layout than the Inky-Impression. E.g. the busy-pin is connected to a shift-register instead of directly to the board. So just with wiring you will have problems because the MicroPython firmware just expects the correct hardware.