My friend is convinced 30fps is all the human eye can see. Is he a moron?

bemaniac

bemaniac

bemaniac

Soldato
Joined
30 Jul 2006
Posts
3,084
Location
4090 on 850w = BOOM
Hi, so I'm talking about why I prefer gta5 on the pc for the fluid 60fps and my friend is telling me 30fps is all anyone can detect and that it is the limit of human eyesight and motion detection?

I for sure can tell the difference massively and want to know how others feel.
 
A quick google indicates that latest retinal studies estimate 140fps to be the average that the human eye can see.
 
in tests with fighter pilots, they were able to identify pictures of enemy fighters down to 3.33ms (300fps), even the normal human range is 200-250fps

in other tests, they've found that the eye vibrates at around 80hz in order to expose more cones and rods to light and create a kind of super resolution - extracting more information from a scene by making maximum use of fewer receptors that you would otherwise need, so even just for a scene to look realistic it should be at least this frame rate

24fps is the absolute minimum to be perceived as movement, and even then movies rely on massive amounts of motion blur to hide that
 
Of course there is a difference between 30fps and 60 fps. There's even difference between 60fps and 100fps. And between 100fps and 144fps albeit a little one.

Before 60hz+ monitors became popular, people used to think there's no perceivable difference between 60fps and anything higer than that. Obviously this turned out to be wrong. But 30fps and 60fps? Everyone always knew there's a huge difference!

Your friend must be really ignorant if he refuses to accept this fact.
 
Baffles me why anyone could think this... especially when a quick Google search would clearly prove otherwise. Not only is your friend a moron, he's lazy.
 
facepalm_picard_gif_i4.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom