USSEnterprise
Experienced Member
How many distinct images per second is the brain capable of processing? I really doubt its anything near to what most TVs advertise.
- VCF South West - June 14 - 16, Davidson-Gundy Alumni Center at University of Texas at Dallas
- VCF West - Aug 2 - 3, Computer History Museum, Mountain View, CA
- VCF Midwest - Sept 7 - 8 2024, Schaumburg, IL
- VCF SoCal - Mid February 2025, Location TBD, Southern CA
- VCF East - April 2025, Infoage Museum, Wall NJ
-
Please review our updated Terms and Rules here
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
60-120-240 Hz Television
- Thread starter USSEnterprise
- Start date
paul
Veteran Member
Well, apparently enough such that those features make quite a difference. The brain doesn't have to process the whole image - just a small portion to notice stepping in the motion.
per
Veteran Member
It actually differs from where in the field of view the source of flicker is located, and to the birgthness of both the output and the envroniment. Other factors may also have an effect, like the distance between the display and the viewer. It also varies from individual to individual.
Because of all this, there is no accurate answer to the question, and it can best be described as a multidimensional function including several variables (each containing some uncertanty) and bell-curves. In order to give an answer, the most extreme causes from each factor has to be calculated together in some way (and after all, that will theoretically only be for the extremely few people of the extreme cause).
Because of all this, there is no accurate answer to the question, and it can best be described as a multidimensional function including several variables (each containing some uncertanty) and bell-curves. In order to give an answer, the most extreme causes from each factor has to be calculated together in some way (and after all, that will theoretically only be for the extremely few people of the extreme cause).
Ole Juul
Veteran Member
It's not images per second, but amount of detail transmitted which is important. Double the images per second and you double the pixels transmitted to the user. Simply compare 16mm stills with 16mm movies and you will know what I mean. The stills are crappy but the movie is quite usable. Movies have amazing detail compared to stills. The effect works as long as the frame rate is high enough to avoid flicker - say 24fps or so.
brad162
Experienced Member
It also depends on the technology used, my plasma at 60hz looks better than an LCD at 60hz, and i've put two tv's side by side and had several people say the same thing.
I always buy plasma (even though they get a little hotter) just because the picture is a lot better than any other flat screen technology i've ever used because i actually get true blacks, thus a much, much better contrast ratio.
I always buy plasma (even though they get a little hotter) just because the picture is a lot better than any other flat screen technology i've ever used because i actually get true blacks, thus a much, much better contrast ratio.
per
Veteran Member
Just found this article on exactly this topic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold
This is probably the best discussion of the subject I've ever read: http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm
[edit] Ah crap, I saw this thread in my search results, and I even looked at the date and saw "June," but yeah... 2010. Oh well, hopefully someone finds the page I linked interesting.
[edit] Ah crap, I saw this thread in my search results, and I even looked at the date and saw "June," but yeah... 2010. Oh well, hopefully someone finds the page I linked interesting.
eeguru
Veteran Member
The jump to 120 Hz was all about eliminating 3:2 pull-down when playing movies at broadcast frame rates (sat/cable/terrestrial) which the eye can definitely see and is very very distracting. The 240 leap had more to do with marketing and selling more TVs than visual improvement (though there was some).