Sat May 14, 2011 3:39 am
Sat May 14, 2011 9:39 am
Sat May 14, 2011 7:58 pm
Sun May 15, 2011 8:40 am
Sun May 15, 2011 6:15 pm
Thu May 19, 2011 10:55 pm
Thu May 19, 2011 11:25 pm
Thu May 19, 2011 11:43 pm
Pdub wrote:I would like display technology to move beyond sequential frames or images and display motion the way the human eye perceives it.
ClLUTClH wrote:considering the human eye can't tell much of a difference beyond 60 frames per second.
http://whisper.ausgamers.com/wiki/index ... ye_can_see...Our eyes can indeed perceive well over 200 frames per second from a simple little display device (mainly so low because of current hardware, not our own limits)...
It used to be, well, anything over 30 FPS is too much. Then, for a while it was, anything over 60 is sufficient. After even more new video cards, it became 72 FPS. Now, new monitors, new display types like organic LEDS, and FPDs offer to raise the bar even higher. Current LCD monitors response rates are nearing the microsecond barrier, much better than millisecond, and equating to even more FPS.
If this old United States Air Force study is any clue to you, we've only scratched the surface in not only knowing our FPS limits, and coming up with hardware that can match, or even approach them.
The USAF, in testing their pilots for visual response time, used a simple test to see if the pilots could distinguish small changes in light. In their experiment a picture of an aircraft was flashed on a screen in a dark room at 1/220th of a second. Pilots were consistently able to "see" the afterimage as well as identify the aircraft. This simple and specific situation not only proves the ability to percieve 1 image within 1/220 of a second, but the ability to interpret higher FPS.
Thu May 19, 2011 11:58 pm
Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:14 am
SkyLine03LT wrote:Vsync will force 60fps. And I want more lolIf nothing helps I'll probably turn it on...