Phalanx said:
Dumb arses? i fail to see how reading one article compared to the multiple articles I and probably hundreds of other users have read justifies addressal as a dumb arse.
I've just tried it for myself, I can't see a difference above 70 fps in Quake 3 (this was a jump from 70 to 150).
In CS 1.6 I can notice a huge difference between 30 and 60fps
people who say you cant cant see anything more than 72fps as
you mentioned it....
it's ironic you say that, nearly every topic i've read (including an article written by a bonified researching FPS geek) says that anything above 72/73 fps (hz) we can't notice a difference.
....are regurgitating the same crap told to them by other people who don't know better. Hell, that article even mentions 72fps being a *supposed* limit at one time or another. With 100hz lcd's on the horizon, we'll see what people say then....
It used to be, well, anything over 30 FPS is too much. (Is that why you're here, by chance?)
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.
with your lcd (i assume thats what your using) stuck at 60-70hz refresh im not at all suprise you cant see a difference. But thats not to say your eyes can't detect the differences.
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.
that's a simple enough test. remember when your talking about what the human eye can and cant do, dont assume its the eye that's too slow when your refering to images on a screen. thats the biggest mistake people make.
--------------------------
Our limit, is there one?
Until someone proves me, all the scientists, optometrists, and the like wrong, there is no limit to how many frames per second our human eye can see. Theoretical limit yes, proven limit, NO.
Think for just a second how dumb it would be to push the limit on video displays, devices and the like if our eyes couldn't tell the difference between an HDTV and a plain old TV or a Computer monitor and a Plasma display. Ok, in that second how many times do you think your eye "framed" this screen? The number of times the screen refreshed? Nope, the number of times your eye streamed this page to you, it's a number that is potentially infinite, or at least until we understand the complexity of our own mind. Just know that this number is much, much higher than what your monitor is capable of currently displaying to you, that is matching your own interpretation.
Our Brain is smart enough however to "exact" 24 frames into motion, isn't it ignorant to say we can't distinguish 400, or even 4000 into motion? Heh the skies the limit, oh wait, then space...oh wait. Give us more, we notice the difference from 30-60, the difference from 60-120. It is possible the closer we get to our limit, be there one, the harder it is to get there, and there is a theory about this. Someone is across the room. Take one full step towards them. Now 1 half step towards them, then 1 half step of a half step, on and on until your 1 half of each movement you take. Will you ever get there? That my friend is open to debate, but in the mean time, will you take one step towards me?
The Human Eye perceiving 220 Frames Per second has been proven, game developers, video card manufacturers, and monitor manufacturers all admit they've only scratched the surface of Frames Per Second. With a high quality non-interlaced display (like plasma or a large LCD FPD) and a nice video card capable of HDTV resolution, you can today see well above 120 FPS with a matching refresh rate. With some refresh rates as high as 400Hz on some non-interlaced displays, that display is capable of 400 FPS alone. Without the refresh rate in the way, and the right hardware capable of such fast rendering (frame buffer), it is possible to display as cameras are possible of recording 44,000 Frames Per Second. Imagine just for a moment if your display device were to be strictly governed by the input it was receiving. This is the case with computer video cards and displays in a way with adjustable resolutions, color depth, and refresh rates.
