Screens keep getting faster. Can you even tell? | CES saw the launch of several 360Hz and even 480Hz OLED monitors. Are manufacturers stuck in a questionable spec war, or are we one day going to wo…::CES saw the launch of several 360Hz and even 480Hz OLED monitors. Are manufacturers stuck in a questionable spec war, or are we one day going to wonder how we ever put up with ‘only’ 240Hz displays?

  • aaaantoine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    11 months ago

    On one hand, 360hz seems imperceptibly faster than 240hz for human eyes.

    On the other hand, if you get enough frames in, you don’t have to worry about simulating motion blur.

    • DosDude👾@retrolemmy.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      81
      ·
      11 months ago

      I never worry about motion blur, because I turn it off. The stupidest effect ever. If I walk around I don’t see motion blur. Cameras see motion blur because of shutter speed, not the human eye.

      • Petter1@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        ·
        11 months ago

        Umm, well, there is something like motion blur experienced by humans, in fact, your brain creates the time bending effect based on picture 1 and picture 2

        https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2012/12/05/3647276.htm

        There is a trick where you watch a clock that counts seconds and turn your head fastly away and back there (or something like that) and you will see, that the rate of seconds seem to be inconsistent

        See “1. CHRONOSTASIS” https://bigthink.com/neuropsych/time-illusions/

        • DosDude👾@retrolemmy.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          11 months ago

          Alright. I didn’t know, thanks. Though the human motion blur is vastly different to camera blur in my experience. And games that have motion blur look really unnatural.

          • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            More realistic blur smudges things based on how the object is moving rather than how the camera is moving. For example, Doom Eternal applies some blur to the spinning barrels and the ejected shells on the chaingun while it’s firing, but doesn’t blur the world while you’re sprinting.

            • daellat@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              Yup this is called per-object motion blur and is more common in modern games. I’m still not that big of a fan but I’ve heard good things about it from other high framerate enjoyers

          • Petter1@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            I don’t know if there is scientific proof that every human experiences “motion bur” the same way. I would bet not.

        • Fermion@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          On the other hand, humans don’t see in defined frames. The signals aren’t synchronized. So a big part of perceived blurring is that the succession of signals isn’t forming a single focused image. There isn’t really a picture 1 and 2 for your brain to process discreetly. And different regions in your vision are more sensitive to small changes than others.

          A faster refresh rate is always “better” for the human eye, but you’ll need higher and higher panel brightness to have a measurable reaction time difference.

          But hitting really high refresh rates requires too many other compromises on image quality, so I won’t personally be paying a large premium for anything more than a 120hz display for the time being.

          • Petter1@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            I agree, human eyes register only change in light in an analog style way (no framerate more something like waves as I understood) compared to cameras, which register all light on every frame. I simplified that part with the “pictures” because I thought it was more understandable like that I guess better would have been something like „your eyes kinda shut down during fast movements of the head and your brain makes up for that by generating a nice transition“

      • Ms. ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Motion blur in games gives me bad motion sickness and garbles what I’m seeing. I already have a hard enough time processing information fast enough in any kind of fast paced game I don’t need things to be visually ambiguous on top of that

    • Ms. ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      That also depends on the person. Save for really fast moving things I can barely tell the difference between 30 and 60fps, and I cap out at 75 before I can’t notice a difference in any situation. One of my friend’s anything less than 75 gives them headaches from the choppiness.

      • Clam_Cathedral@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah, personally playing games at 30fps feels disruptively laggy at least for the first few minutes. 60 is good, but the jump to 120 is night and day. I was shocked that going from 120 to 240 was just as noticeable an improvement as the last to me, especially when so many people say they don’t notice it much. Hard to find newer games that give me that much fps though.