-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
My friend just told me the eye can only see 30FPS
- Thread starter Fudgepuppy
- Start date
People don't see digitally. When someone says "the eye sees at x fps", the only thing they could be refering to that is remotely accurate is that if you were to take a frame at, say, 30fps and replace it with garbage, only some people would notice. you could call that the rate people see at, but why? looking at a video at 30fps and 60fps still looks different to most (i think anyway) people.
This isn't true.
Even without interpolation, a 120hz display shows movies/TV significantly better as well because 24 fps goes evenly into 120 fps which means you suffer no pulldown. If they were watching actual native 120fps content, then the smoothness of that is leaps and bounds better and noticeable.
Even with motion interpolation, when it's done well it looks really fantastic. If you have a premium TV set, the days of crappy and ghosted interpolation are behind us. If you have a decent 120hz TV set and a great PC, you also have options like SmoothVideoProject which will add motion interpolation to videos you watch in specific video players. With the power of a beefy PC behind it you can get fantastic results.
I was watching an episode of Hannibal with my SO with the interpolation on and they didn't know about it. After we get through the first scene my SO commented "Wow I love how this show is shot. Did you notice how magnificent and smooth the pans were? Everything looks so lifelike and real. It felt like you could really be pulled in to the concert hall." That was coming from a person who in the past commented on not liking the "smoothing" on cheap TV's we'd seen at stores.
I've been a nut about this for years and spent a lot of time on AVSform - I hate interpolation. It's wrong.
I said exactly what you said above - those go into 120 2x, 4x, 5x. They don't make it smoother, it just puts out the frames more times and keeps it true to source material. Same as any Plasma would do. It's when you turn on stupid motionflow to make it different than it was shot that it looks awful.
the 48fps Hobbits were cool because they were shot that way.
DirtyLarry
Member
In all fairness to your friend, perhaps he does not have the best eyesight (*cough* he is blind as a bat *cough*) and perhaps he just cannot process the better performance of more frames per second (*cough* he is not the brightest bulb in the bunch *cough*).
In all seriousness though, some people convince themselves of something even if there is overwhelming proof what they believe is not the truth of the situation. For some it is denial. For some it is simply not knowing any better. For some it is a coping mechanism.
Whatever the case may be with your friend as to why he chooses to believe this myth, more power to him. As long as you do not rely on this friend for advice on any matters that are relevant to living a long, positive life, go ahead and let him bask in the glory of his ignorance with this topic. Now if he starts trying to convince other people he is right and you are wrong, by all means feel free to point out his obvious shortcomings to others.
In all seriousness though, some people convince themselves of something even if there is overwhelming proof what they believe is not the truth of the situation. For some it is denial. For some it is simply not knowing any better. For some it is a coping mechanism.
Whatever the case may be with your friend as to why he chooses to believe this myth, more power to him. As long as you do not rely on this friend for advice on any matters that are relevant to living a long, positive life, go ahead and let him bask in the glory of his ignorance with this topic. Now if he starts trying to convince other people he is right and you are wrong, by all means feel free to point out his obvious shortcomings to others.
You are pulling that out of your arse because an extremely common complaint about 120 hz TVs is that they make everything "look like soap operas."
That this is a thing suggests most people perceive the difference between 60 fps and 120 fps.
Something that's pretty neat for discussion is taking the person's point at face value rather than assuming a worst case scenario.
120 FPS screen probably means a gaming monitor that actually displays a series of ~8.3ms frames.
120hz for gaming would to 60fps very well. I'm more talking about native 24/30 video (which was stated in my post a couple times)
Rodolink
Member
Why such a debate? just look at science
http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm
http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm
No no, I'm talking about 120 FPS gaming on a 120Hz panel. Seems likely that is what the person you quoted was talking about.
yeah, I shouldn't have even quoted them - though I did mention I was talking about a different thing. Just a bad idea on my part.
People have a weird habit of disregarding science if it doesn't align with their personal experiences/biases.
ScepticMatt
Member
No.
The visual system does temporal integration. The integration period defines the highest frame rate we can see. (1/CFF)
If you would flash two times 1/100th of a second apart, you would still only see 1 flash.
Midnight Phoenix
Member
In first place, human eye didn't see "frames", but it receive waves. How many "frames" your eye can see is vary from human to human. USA air forces was tested their pilot with gray/white frames, that change at high rate. I don't remember exact number, but pilot was able to distinguish frames at near 220 FPS.
24fps is closest number for our eye, to start create motion, thats why it used in cinema.
I believe this dumb theory about 24 FPS started from hidden 25 frame.
Some people believe that human will be teared apart if he went out to space without space suit.
24fps is closest number for our eye, to start create motion, thats why it used in cinema.
I believe this dumb theory about 24 FPS started from hidden 25 frame.
Some people believe that human will be teared apart if he went out to space without space suit.
Made a WebM version: http://a.pomf.se/pxvezy.webm
...and also this one, with a small addition for the end part: http://a.pomf.se/zwizok.webm
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WVDgPN_Gkk#t=181
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
We do not see in framerates or more accurately the world doesn't move in a locked framerate, if we did it wouldn't be locked and would shoot up way beyond 120fps occasionally and would hang at 30fps most the time.
Thats why nobody is right with what is realistic in game framerate wise, because it depends on what you're seeing.
Thats why nobody is right with what is realistic in game framerate wise, because it depends on what you're seeing.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
One thing that confuses the issue is that having perceptually smoother motion at higher frame rates does not mean that a person can seperately perceive each individual frame. If we're asking how fast you can have successive frames before our brain blends them together then it's going to be a pretty low number.
Lord_Balkan
Member
I am sure that has a big factor in it as well. You are dealing with two distinct senses- sight and touch- both working together.
For me? I can instantly see the difference in those videos. For me, it is pretty massive. For you, it is only slight. That is okay. You aren't blind, and I don't have some magic eyes. This goes back to my point in everyone is different, and is sensitive to framerate differently. Saying blanket statements like "The eye can only see X amount of fps" only trivializes the complex nature of the eye, and seems those kinds of statements only come up when people are being fanboys or just trying to justify a purchase.
Send your friend to www.testufo.com
Sorta, kinda. Depends on the Plasma. There were 600 focus field drive ones and now they have even higher. 2500 FFDs on the GT50, VT50, ST60 etc and 3000 FFDs on the VT60, ZT60.
They basically work like this: http://paytherant.tumblr.com/post/20057368974/panasonic-2012-plasma-2500hz-ffd-explanation-attempt
Which is why Plasmas are so much better at motion resolution than LCD TVs typically are. 60 FPS games are just smooth as silk on my ST60 and there's pretty much no motion blur at all. It is just wonderful to see them in motion. Sadly, 30 FPS games still have a lot of it.
JumpJeff84
Member
I wish! I'd LOVE it for developers to keep the graphics this gen at a more modest level and instead push frame rate. Gimme decent looking games at 60fps and I'm happy
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
The brain probably prefers to blend frames together in the first place, unless other considerations dictate that it's not sensible to do so at that moment. Those are exactly the type of decisions our brain constantly makes about the input it gets. Our eyes send out so much visual data it's impossible to constantly interpret it all as it is, so we're always making assumption that allow us to simplify and reduce the amount of information, and only when necessary do we simplify less.
That's why there's a clear difference between asking "what is the minimum threshold required for the brain to accept a discrete signal as a continuous one?", and "what is the shortest temporal interval the brain can perceive when specifically required to do just that?".
word. I have a 2007 Pioneer 5010, and a Panny 42 ST30.
Corronchilejano
Member
My eyes are 24fps and 144p.
I doubt we percieve things in discrete frames at all. The optical illusions where still images move and our consciousness half second delay, us being able to blend 24 frames means motion is inherent to our system.
Snacks the sober sea lion
Member
Did you tell him he's a fucking scrub/ casual?
KiefbladeMaster
Member
Came here to say this.
Yeah, mine too. Not sure how people can tell the difference between Star Citizen and Wing Commander 2.
salty_Josh
Member
I think we all have this one friend.
Fudgepuppy
Banned
Is there something wrong with my browser because the difference between 25 and 50 is incredibly non existant. The 25fps one desynchronizes in the middle, but other than that they look very similar.
I just came from playing New Vegas in 60 fps so there's nothing wrong with my tv or eyes.
EDIT. Tried it in Google Chrome, much more clear now.