Microsofts Hunert Smoke
Banned
One of the most debatable statistics is whether or not the human eye can see more than 30fps, the correct answer has always been no, but the debate still goes on based on ignorance of how Frame Rate works with computer animations. THE HUMAN EYE CAN'T SEE more than 30.
The reason why tech has caused mass confusion is that people are comparing low quantity animation frames against each other, or bad hardware is at fault. When you do you'll realize that IF any animation has more than 100 solid frames (SiF) of animation, the animation will link up in sync, as long as there's no edits or obstructions. While if there are less than over 100 frames of animation the speed of the render will get through the cycle way too fast which causes a "60fps" image to appear more smooth and at a higher speed. and a "30fps" image to seem slow and choppy. Clunkyness and choppiness has nothing to do with frame rate, that has to do with hardware or software imitation in what is being rendered. When you put pictures and animations next to each other with over 100 frames in animation in a solid clean area, then the hardware in most cases doesn't matter.
Example:
These are two different pictures of a similar animation. The one on the left is 30fps, the one on the right is 60fps. Both of these have over 100 frames per animation, and they are identical.
This shows that the human eye cannot see more than 30fps unless an obstruction is involved which would make one or the other seem faster or slower. But in a neutral space they will always be the same.
For example here is a 30fps vs. 60fps example:
This is a false misdirection. The image shows differences in frame-rates between 30fps and 60fps, however this difference is caused by computer hardware and the software (which in this case would be an older version of game maker). The hardware dials back specs to run at 30 frames per-second OR it cuts the animations down to a number below 100 which the hardware will cycle through faster causing jerkiness. It's similar to the 30 vs. 60 in racing games, the hardware could run that 30fps mode in 60fps, but the reason why games will be at 30fps is for only THREE reasons:
1. The game it too ambitious for the hardware to handle which results in 30fps and chugs.
2. The game dials back hardware to run more smoothly at 30fps than with some hiccups at 60.
3. Animations are cut for 30fps.
But when you have say, a race track that can run at both 30fps and 60fps smoothly with no issues, and there is no dialing back in hardware, that 30fps will not be possible to obtain and will automatically run AS IF it were at 60fps. Why? Because when you get 100 frames of animation with no obstruction, as shown in the first comparison at the top of the page, you CAN'T see the difference. Something has to CAUSE the differences to show up EXTERNALLY. But if in a neutral environment, it will NEVER not be at 60fps to the human eye.
Here's another more complex example of a neutral environment:
Once again this rendering is in a neutral space with 100 solid frames (SiF) or over. Left is 30 right is 60. The Human eye cannot tell the difference if there are no outside factors or external obstructions.
So yes, for games, we won't see this for maybe another generation, but when there are much higher caps than the tools can make, then we will no longer be discussing frame-rates, just like we rarely discuss polygons anymore. Right now, hardware and software have many external obstructions that effects what we perceive as frame-rate that doesn't really exist on its own without errors in hardware and software. Currently, we have tools that allow us to be ambitious beyond the hardware, and that's been a thing for decades. But once the actual specifications cap is much higher than what the tools can produce all games will be running the same outside bugs.
So basically, the Human eye in neutral space cannot see more than 30fps. It can see BELOW 30fps, but not above 30fps. This is also why some optimized games at 30fps can trick many people into thinking its 60. it's all about if the animations are in a neutral space.
Hopefully this wakes up more people and makes you all more aware of some of the misleading perceptions about graphics and animations.
The reason why tech has caused mass confusion is that people are comparing low quantity animation frames against each other, or bad hardware is at fault. When you do you'll realize that IF any animation has more than 100 solid frames (SiF) of animation, the animation will link up in sync, as long as there's no edits or obstructions. While if there are less than over 100 frames of animation the speed of the render will get through the cycle way too fast which causes a "60fps" image to appear more smooth and at a higher speed. and a "30fps" image to seem slow and choppy. Clunkyness and choppiness has nothing to do with frame rate, that has to do with hardware or software imitation in what is being rendered. When you put pictures and animations next to each other with over 100 frames in animation in a solid clean area, then the hardware in most cases doesn't matter.
Example:
These are two different pictures of a similar animation. The one on the left is 30fps, the one on the right is 60fps. Both of these have over 100 frames per animation, and they are identical.
This shows that the human eye cannot see more than 30fps unless an obstruction is involved which would make one or the other seem faster or slower. But in a neutral space they will always be the same.
For example here is a 30fps vs. 60fps example:
This is a false misdirection. The image shows differences in frame-rates between 30fps and 60fps, however this difference is caused by computer hardware and the software (which in this case would be an older version of game maker). The hardware dials back specs to run at 30 frames per-second OR it cuts the animations down to a number below 100 which the hardware will cycle through faster causing jerkiness. It's similar to the 30 vs. 60 in racing games, the hardware could run that 30fps mode in 60fps, but the reason why games will be at 30fps is for only THREE reasons:
1. The game it too ambitious for the hardware to handle which results in 30fps and chugs.
2. The game dials back hardware to run more smoothly at 30fps than with some hiccups at 60.
3. Animations are cut for 30fps.
But when you have say, a race track that can run at both 30fps and 60fps smoothly with no issues, and there is no dialing back in hardware, that 30fps will not be possible to obtain and will automatically run AS IF it were at 60fps. Why? Because when you get 100 frames of animation with no obstruction, as shown in the first comparison at the top of the page, you CAN'T see the difference. Something has to CAUSE the differences to show up EXTERNALLY. But if in a neutral environment, it will NEVER not be at 60fps to the human eye.
Here's another more complex example of a neutral environment:
Once again this rendering is in a neutral space with 100 solid frames (SiF) or over. Left is 30 right is 60. The Human eye cannot tell the difference if there are no outside factors or external obstructions.
So yes, for games, we won't see this for maybe another generation, but when there are much higher caps than the tools can make, then we will no longer be discussing frame-rates, just like we rarely discuss polygons anymore. Right now, hardware and software have many external obstructions that effects what we perceive as frame-rate that doesn't really exist on its own without errors in hardware and software. Currently, we have tools that allow us to be ambitious beyond the hardware, and that's been a thing for decades. But once the actual specifications cap is much higher than what the tools can produce all games will be running the same outside bugs.
So basically, the Human eye in neutral space cannot see more than 30fps. It can see BELOW 30fps, but not above 30fps. This is also why some optimized games at 30fps can trick many people into thinking its 60. it's all about if the animations are in a neutral space.
Hopefully this wakes up more people and makes you all more aware of some of the misleading perceptions about graphics and animations.
