Crosstalk more a problem than Ghosting itself ? [ DyAc Strobing Crosstalk Issue ]

[AddictFPS]

Anonymous316387

Right, i missed it, thanks ! 5.1ms max is a good trade for a bit of color precision, Rtings say about default color: "The ViewSonic XG2431 has great out-of-the-box accuracy."

I wonder max. ms XL2546K and XL2566K with different Black eQualizer levels, also with default color to get a reference. Maybe this answer why Zowie TN owners not complain to much about black smearing, if they massively use it.

Yes, for single player there are better options than TN, but if max. priority is the lowest MPRT in the market, these 3 monitors are amazing. But if you don't like strobing, and you want compensated image quality and MPRT, XG2431 non-strobed is a very good choice. OLED 120Hz 8.33ms is decent, and new OLED 240Hz 4.16ms MPRT is a dream.

For me the only oled deal breaker and why I don't want it:

- The price
- Low brightness
- Weird sub-pixel ( WBGR ? ) who make text and crosshair look weird/bad
- Danger of burn-in

+1

Yes, WRGB would be more acceptable, but WRBG it's very strange. Desktop text can be enhanced with tools, but as you say, crosshairs, ingame text, etc... is just out of standard. I think this is a hard brake to popularize OLED monitors.

We are already well served with implicit limitations of the nature of this tech. Touch something basic as the subpixel matrix, logically the majority answer NO

[Anonymous316387]

...the XL2566K I had sent it back because in the end the 360hz is useless for Apex Legends and adds latency.

How can higher refresh rate add latency?

As I said, on Apex Legends, I mainly play it.

For example Apex Legends is limited to 300fps max and even with the biggest configuration, you can have a hell of a FPS drop.

Putting a 360hz screen with a framerate limited to 300 which, on top of that, will have drops well below this logically creates latency.

You can try for yourself, on a game, put your screen at 360hz and put in 60FPS with graphics, you will have a funny feeling (because you go from -~4ms 360hz to +16ms~ with the 60FPS lock)

A screen that is supposed to be running has a high hertz rate if it has too low FPS it will create input lag.

This is not how latency (input lag) for monitors works.
Higher refresh rate will always have lower latency.
For example, 240 fps at 360hz will have less input lag than 240 fps at 240hz due to more refreshes per second.

Maybe you are referring to screen tearing or jitteriness when fps is far below refresh rate. Like during a frame spike or 1% low or when fps dips, your game might stutter and feel laggy. This is more so on the GPU/CPU side than display.

If you have a 270hz, but you put a restriction at 165fps, you will have a higher latency ( input lag feeling, in game ) than if you do 270hz=270fps and it is logical.

On top of that, Zowie even said (on Youtube I believe) that on the XL2566K, if you don't do +300fps and you have an inconsistent framerate, you shouldn't take the XL2566K (because it increases the latency and also for strobing to add too much crosstalk)

I'm not talking about stuttering or tearing but a feeling of lag which remains logical.

i'm sorry i think you misunderstood me, I'm not necessarily saying that it's the "screen" that adds input lag (thanks to my bad English) but that if you lock (via RivaTuner for example) 165fps on a 270hz, you will indeed have a feeling of "input lag" higher, because you will make fewer frames, fewer frames = higher "latency".

[Anonymous316387]

So you advise to play in 100hz with the XL2566K to have no crosstalk? but...doesn't that make sense?

There are two different causes of duplicate images on a strobed LCD; low frame rates (like CRT 30fps at 60Hz) and strobe crosstalk (caused by LCD GtG too slow to finish between refresh cycles)

1. Refresh rate headroom reduces strobe crosstalk and duplicate images.
Lower Hz on a fast-scanning panel = can create more time for LCD GtG to finish between refresh cycles unseen by human eyes. Here's a video of what a strobe backlight can do, as a screen refreshes slowly top-to-bottom. Here's our famous LightBoost video from a decade ago:

phpBB [video]

2. Doing framerate=Hz is easier at lower Hz, reducing double images further.



The duplicate image problem can cause the monitor to feel "artifically laggy". This is why, in some cases, a single-image effect at a perfect framerate=Hz

There's a continuum of slightly less and less strobe crosstalk the lower Hz you go. 350Hz will have literally 1% less crosstalk than 360Hz, and then keep going down, 340Hz, 330Hz, 320Hz, etc, until you're able to do ultra large Vertical Totals that more successfully hides LCD GtG between refresh cycles.

Now view www.testufo.com/crosstalk and you see duplicate image effects, if the screen is panning fast enough;



QFT 100Hz is a 100Hz mode that refreshes in 1/240sec or 1/360sec. During QFT 100Hz on a 240Hz panel, you can have 4.2ms of panel-refrehsing and 6.8ms of panel-idling. Not all pixels refresh the same time, see videos at www.blurbusters.com/scanout for videos too. And when the panel finishes scanning out, you still need time for LCD GtG (pixels fading from one color to the next) to finish. The strobe backlight can be kept completely turned off longer after a refresh cycle, to let LCD GtG finish before flashing the backlight. You can have perfect CRT motion clarity at 100Hz on a 240Hz-360Hz LCD, which is why ViewSonic XG2431 is one of the best strobed panels on the market;

Now, ToastyX CRU is needed to create a custom low Hz mode that scans-out at maximum velocity, because normal low-Hz modes are laggy by default. A low-Hz mode that scans out at max-Hz velocity (with long idle periods between refresh cycles to more completely hide LCD GtG between refresh cycles)

Also, if you want TestUFO-smooth in Apex Legends, you want a framerate=Hz sync technology such as VSYNC ON. But VSYNC ON is laggy, so you may need to use a custom framerate=Hz sync technology such as RTSS Scanline Sync, but you need to target a framerate that only consumes ~50% of the GPU, and that can cause you to need to use ~120-180fps in a game like DOTA2, to get perfect TestUFO-smooth DOTA2 pans perfectly as smooth as www.testufo.com/map -- zero jitter, zero double images, etc.

If you prefer VSYNC OFF, then you need overkill framerates far beyond Hz, to prevent the annoying strobe-amplified jitters/stutters.

Wow that's a very complex way of explaining things! thank you for this message it is very interesting, I know the basics of how strobing/crosstalk works.

However, I don't really agree on the example of Framerate Equals Hz = No Crosstalk, on paper, yes ! but i think you forgot to specify that this is almost impossible without tweaking and for me the CRU utility look like the same complexity as making a very advanced OC processor or RAM ( Sorry if I'm wrong but that's the impression it gives me ), I love the complexity and the utilities but when it goes too far, I'm not interested, I want that from the start the product works well in stock without going too far in tweaks and having to learn tons of pages to know how this or that works.

For 90% of monitors that offer "strobing" let's take an XL2546K for example, it's clearly a good student as far as strobing is concerned (even if indeed, I prefer the XG2431 which performs much better!)
However, when you do UFO tests (with the Blur Buster Utility) with the best possible parameters (without tampering with CRU, software that I didn't know and that I don't necessarily want to bother with although I can understand that some people like to go that far!)

Well, we can see that the XL2546K has permanent crosstalk, black trail/smearing too (besides Linus from LTT recently talked about it on Youtube very quickly during a comparison between Alienware 500hz vs XL2566K) and even said " and people prefer that?!”

As you said, having a very low refresh rate helps drastically to reduce crosstalk because Framerate=Hz (mainly for GPU performance reasons!)
But even in 240FPS via Chrome with UFO TEST, I perceived a permanent Crosstalk with parameters that suited me (by the way, even on the Rtings test we can see it...)

Am I too sensitive? in any case, it's much more disturbing ( even at 240fps lock ) than a simple fast image with ghosting (that's my feeling)

But actually, as you said (and I agree) basic, on paper, you need frame=hertz! otherwise it's actually counterproductive but let's talk about reality and video games!

For example, Call of Duty Cold War, Apex Legends, two pretty performance-hungry games, people often use BenQ Zowie DyAc or that sort of thing, it's simple, without physical sync ( G-Sync with Strobing, like the ELMB-SYNC ) the rendering will be infamous and will be counterproductive because the loss of FPS even with very expensive configurations will be substantial, of course I'm only talking about games and scenarios that suit me and I know that 90% of people here (well I think!) mainly plays CS:GO / Valorant / Dota etc so they won't have this kind of problem!

It's just that on a real scenario (and not on paper) with a 13600k and a 3070 (if we don't play everything at low) the strobing on certain games is not interesting because too much drop in FPS and it's a shame that the ELMB-SYNC is not part of the Zowie / XG2431 screens because it would help a lot, especially for the overshoot (even if concerning this, the XG2431 is a very good student)

"QFT 100Hz is a 100Hz mode that refreshes in 1/240sec or 1/360sec. During QFT 100Hz on a 240Hz panel, you can have 4.2ms of panel-refrehsing and 6.8ms of panel-idling. Not all pixels refresh the same time , see videos at www.blurbusters.com/scanout for videos too. And when the panel finishes scanning out, you still need time for LCD GtG (pixels fading from one color to the next) to finish. The strobe backlight can be kept completely turned off longer after a refresh cycle, to let LCD GtG finish before flashing the backlight You can have perfect CRT motion clarity at 100Hz on a 240Hz-360Hz LCD, which is why ViewSonic XG2431 is one of the best strobed panels on the market;

Now, ToastyX CRU is needed to create a custom low Hz mode that scans-out at maximum velocity, because normal low-Hz modes are laggy by default. A low-Hz mode that scans out at max-Hz velocity (with long idle periods between refresh cycles to more completely hide LCD GtG between refresh cycles)"

wow! Always impressive! so much knowledge!
If I understood correctly, the "QFT 100hz" is a mode that is done via CRU which scans at 240fps/hz ? or 360fps/hz and therefore puts 100hz with CRT motion clarity with the latency of a 240/360hz? if so then yes, wtf !

I wonder why the manufacturers do not provide utilities or simpler management of this, without being able to have a professional diploma on how the panels/hz work.

Also, if you want TestUFO-smooth in Apex Legends, you want a framerate=Hz sync technology such as VSYNC ON. But VSYNC ON is laggy, so you may need to use a custom framerate=Hz sync technology such as RTSS Scanline Sync , but you need to target a framerate that only consumes ~50% of the GPU, and that can cause you to need to use ~120-180fps in a game like DOTA2, to get perfect TestUFO-smooth DOTA2 pans perfectly as smooth as www .testufo.com/map -- zero jitter, zero double images, etc.

Thanks for enlightening me for Apex! and unfortunately that's what I thought...I need sync+strobing if I don't want this crosstalk/overshoot...damn!

If you prefer VSYNC OFF, then you need overkill framerates far beyond Hz, to prevent the annoying strobe-amplified jitters/stutters

Yes the problem is that when you say "far" it's really far, isn't it?
Because I tried 240hz strobe + 300FPS lock and I still saw the jitter.
Clearly XL2546K = 240hz strobing, if V-SYNC OFF, I have to do 1/3 above? like 400 frames/s~? or there is no precise calculation?

Because I believe that on Overwatch, 240hz strobing + 600FPS I don't see the jitter.

Anyway, I will correct my profile:

- I have 13600K + 3070 + 5600mhz DDR5

- Apex Legends / Call of Duty and Osu only!

- I love the feeling of physical elmb-sync but I absolutely don't like the feeling of RTSS Scanline with strobing, because even if it's less than the V-Sync On of the Nvidia panel, the feeling is weird... (afterwards yes, you must probably use CRU but I don't want to break my head that far)

- The QFT 100hz mode with the latency of 240hz is super interesting (even if I've never heard of it...) but unfortunately I doubt that I'm interested, I really want 240fps/240hz.

- I hate the strobing of the Zowies which are not powerful enough and gives me headaches (the XL2566K is good, but I don't want a 360hz screen, the games I play require a 4090 to do +300/360fps constantly)

- I'm not a fan of the XG2431's strobing because it has to be dark to be very good (and low brightness is one of the worst things about competitive FPS, so no!) plus it's not elmb-sync. .Please ! do other collaborations in the future for a brighter and ELMB-Sync monitor!

- I need the screen that best manages Overdrive and therefore Ghosting without strobing (the XG2431! that's why I bought one, I can't wait) it will replace my XV272UX which no longer suits me at all.


Thank you for the details, I will surely come back to you for the QFT 100hz mode, it is still interesting.

[Anonymous316387]

That's a GPU-derived latency, not monitor-derived latency.

Now that being said... You can still create a 240Hz or 300Hz QFT mode on a 360Hz monitor, where you have a 240Hz mode that transmits refresh cycles in 1/360sec. This advanced trick can rescue the latency of a ultra high Hz monitor. 240fps 240Hz transmitted in 1/240sec over cable is laggier than a custom 240fps 240Hz QFT mode (created in ToastyX CRU Vertical Total Calculator) transmitting the frames over the DisplayPort cable in 1/360sec apiece, despite refresh rate being only 240Hz.

Remember, cables are simply a serialization of 2D picture data in a 1D data:

Yeah, I really need to come back here later to learn a bit more about CRU and QFT modes when I get the XG2431 again, unfortunately I find it a bit too complicated so I hope I I'll figure that out pretty quickly!

But why doesn't anyone talk about it... it should be shown to more audiences, right?

I find it a pity that this does not become a standard among manufacturers, when will there be a BlurBusterChief brand of screen?!

[Anonymous316387]

Right, i missed it, thanks ! 5.1ms max is a good trade for a bit of color precision, Rtings say about default color: "The ViewSonic XG2431 has great out-of-the-box accuracy.

Well, it's actually the best, isn't it?!

I thought I saw that on the "Black to" the best TN Asus / Zowie it's about 8ms big minimum right?

For the colors of the Native mode of the XG2431 I think it's hilarious to talk about it because the TNs and their colors...xD
In fact you have to make a very bright profile in Native with a good black equalizer settings / 70% of color vibrance with the latest overdrive mode and you will literally have no overshoot with a very bright screen at 5ms ~ "black to"

It's simple, no other 240hz can do that.

Do you think the latency changes between black EQ 0 to 20 on the Zowie?
so go ask Rtings to try this! often they listen and perform tests and respond to people's requests so don't wait!

Anyway I tried everything for the XL2546k and it's f*cking fast but I can't see this screen with my eyes, I think it's due to TN but even when I force myself I swear I really don't like this screen, it's like a big poison.

In addition I find that the strobing on the Zowie adds good latency, at least that's what I felt (even at high FPS rates)

[Chief Blur Buster]

However, I don't really agree on the example of Framerate Equals Hz = No Crosstalk

It is possible that you misunderstood what I said, because I never said that.

There are two independent reasons;

(A) Duplicate images from multiple-impulsing. This is NOT crosstalk.
This applies to everything including CRT and perfect OLED BFI. This type of duplicate image is never caused by crosstalk, but you can solve it by framerate=Hz. Whatever duplicate images remain at perfect framerate=Hz, is definitely caused by strobe crosstalk. You can turn off strobing and see this duplicate image effect via software-based BFI. Go do it, turn off strobing, and click on this: Duplicate Images From Software-Based Multi-Strobed BFI. Since strobing is turned off, it's impossible to have strobe crosstalk, yet double images still exist. If you do not understand this science, you need to re-read what I wrote, and then re-reply correctly again.

(B) Strobe crosstalk, caused by LCD GtG being too slow between refresh cycles.
Since it's easy to confuse strobe crosstalk with duplicate images caused by framerate-Hz mismatch, you must always go framerate=Hz before you begin troubleshooting strobe crosstalk, because of the two different causes of duplicate images.

You can have (A) without (B)
You can have (B) without (A)
You can have both (A) and (B) superimposed on top of each other.
But you can't troubleshoot (B) without fixing (A) first before fixing (B).

So questions:

1. Do you understand that these two causes (A) and (B) are different?

2. Do you understand why you need framerate=Hz to properly troubleshoot strobe crosstalk (because the two separate causes of duplicate images will superimpose on top of each other, making it hard to troubleshoot strobe crosstalk)? It's not possible to troubleshoot strobe crosstalk easily/properly without making sure you eliminate the other cause of duplicate images.

3. Turn off strobing. Do you understand how duplicate images can still occur without hardware-based strobing, via this custom TestUFO animation that works on any unstrobed LCD/OLED? You can even get this double image effect on an iPhone/Android screen too this way! They're not strobed screens, and thus, it's not strobe crosstalk at all.

4. See? Not all double images on the screen are strobe crosstalk.

Are you able to scientifally-understandingly say "Yes" to all the above?
If you don't understand (1) or (2) or (3) or (4) fully, please specify the line-item you don't understand and I will be happy to explain in further detail.

Now that being said, very few displays can go 100% strobe crosstalk free. The few I've seen so far is XL2566K (at 100Hz or less), XG2431 (at 100Hz or less), Oculus Quest 2 (VR), and Valve Index (VR). There probably a few others, but less than 1% of LCDs can go perfectly strobe crosstalk free.

If you prefer VSYNC OFF in esports, sure, fine, fine, but you still need to temporarily fix (A) by temporarily turning VSYNC ON, before troubleshooting strobe crosstalk (B), before going back to VSYNC OFF. The fact remains is strobe-crosstalk troubleshooting temporarily requires framerate=Hz, before you remove framerate=Hz again (if you prefer VSYNC OFF). That's the game of troubleshooting, if you don't understand that part, then you need to re-read my post again from the correct unconfused perspective;

If you enjoy strobing and you enjoy CRT tubes, you may need to do item (A) and item (B) concurrently, at the same time. But yes, you will be bound by the limitations of the specific display. The fact remains, is you cannot properly troubleshoot (B) without fixing (A) first, because (A) interferes with troubleshooting (B). Regardless of whether the strobe crosstalk is fixable or not, you still need to isolate it, before you can correctly call what you see "strobe crosstalk" being "strobe crosstalk".

But double images are not always strobe crosstalk. That's why when you say "However, I don't really agree on the example of Framerate Equals Hz = No Crosstalk" your post makes no sense. For all crosstalkless displays (CRT tubes, OLED BFI, and ultra-carefully-calibrated LCDs), then your only cause of double images is item (A) in the complete abscence of (B). Therefore, fixing (A) fixes all remaining double image effects (which is not strobe crosstalk). Which is why your reply made no sense to me.

____

That being said, I should warn:

Not everyone likes strobing, and I even personally prefer brute framerate-based motion blur reduction. That's why I have a Corsair Xeneon Flex 240Hz OLED on my desk. You can get clearer motion on 240fps 240Hz OLED, than you can on an unstrobed 360Hz LCD.

But it will be a while before strobing becomes (semi) obsolete. Mathematically, to match a CRT tube, will require approximately 1000fps 1000Hz at GtG=0. And some frame generation technology such as reprojection, to generate the needed 1000fps 1000Hz without unobtainium GPUs.

However, strobing is a super-important tool for our giant amount of legacy low-framerate content, and current contemporary frame rates. Everybody's preferences varies a lot.

Right Tool For Right Job.

[Anonymous316387]

It is possible that you misunderstood what I said, because I never said that.

This image clearly said that, and that's why i disagree at first before you tell me that image duplication isn't necessarily crosstalk

Duplicate images from multiple-impulsing. This is NOT crosstalk.

It's nice to take the time to explain to me under several scenarios, however you must absolutely tell you that not all of the people who are here will have the knowledge that you have on this subject so be indulgent.

If you do not understand this science, you need to re-read what I wrote, and then re-reply correctly again.

I'm not you, i need to learn at first ! not everyone can understand this complex stuff or at least not as quickly as you, some also don't want to read +500 lines of super complex text ( why not a simplified video format so that the more people know more easily?) but ok, apparently image duplication is a different problem than "crosstalk"

But you can't troubleshoot (B) without fixing (A) first before fixing (B).

So how do you reduce duplicate images? I don't seem to have seen a post that talks about it, well you just told me that it exists and that the duplication that I perceive is not necessarily crosstalk, I understood well but therefore, how to reduce or remove image duplication?

1. Do you understand that these two causes (A) and (B) are different?

Now, yes.

2. Do you understand why you need framerate=Hz to properly troubleshoot strobe crosstalk (because the two separate causes of duplicate images will superimpose on top of each other, making it hard to troubleshoot strobe crosstalk)? It's not possible to troubleshoot strobe crosstalk easily/properly without making sure you eliminate the other cause of duplicate images.

Yes, i think !

3. Turn off strobing. Do you understand how duplicate images can still occur without hardware-based strobing, via this custom TestUFO animation that works on any unstrobed LCD/OLED? You can even get this double image effect on an iPhone/Android screen too this way! They're not strobed screens, and thus, it's not strobe crosstalk at all.

Mmmh...not really, sorry, it's a part that confuses me i admit!

If you don't understand (1) or (2) or (3) or (4) fully, please specify the line-item you don't understand and I will be happy to explain in further detail.

The 4 is not necessary, however why don't you explain how we can see the difference between crosstalk and "image duplication" when it looks pretty much the same thing then?
How do you manage to see the difference between two technically different but visibly similar things, can't wait to find out.
You can detail on (2) and (3)! but why not make it a pinned post? (or you have already done it) but sorry to say, i'm not used to this kind of "old" website, I find it confusing.

I just come here to discuss and give my real opinion (without going through complexity) moreover, it is not necessarily because we do not know 100% all the details of a subject that our opinion is not valid (I just wanted to clarify this)

Now that being said, very few displays can go 100% strobe crosstalk free. The few I've seen so far is XL2566K (at 100Hz or less), XG2431 (at 100Hz or less), Oculus Quest 2 (VR), and Valve Index (VR). There probably a few others, but less than 1% of LCDs can go perfectly strobe crosstalk free.

Interesting.

If you prefer VSYNC OFF in esports, sure, fine, fine, but you still need to temporarily fix (A) by temporarily turning VSYNC ON, before troubleshooting strobe crosstalk (B), before going back to VSYNC OFF

So to have less crosstalk and less image duplication on Strobing scenario is V-Sync On + Good strobing settings? / "QFT ?" 100hz mode via CRU, if I understand correctly?
So yeah, I'm not interested, that's not going to make me play better or more comfortable because that's not what i'm really looking for.

The few I've seen so far is XL2566K

Yeah, if you want to spend more than 600 euros on a screen that will be stuck at 100hz ( with fast response time thanks to CRU ) in TN just to get the "cleanest" image possible, I have nothing against it, but that's absolutely not what I'm going to do!

if you don't understand that part, then you need to re-read my post again from the correct unconfused perspective;

It's difficult but I finally understood, I especially understand that strobing as I said from the beginning is promising but is not the solution ( for me ) as such because too much constraint.

But double images are not always strobe crosstalk. That's why when you say "However, I don't really agree on the example of Framerate Equals Hz = No Crosstalk" your post makes no sense. For all crosstalkless displays (CRT tubes, OLED BFI, and ultra-carefully-calibrated LCDs), then your only cause of double images is item (A) in the complete abscence of (B). Therefore, fixing (A) fixes all remaining double image effects (which is not strobe crosstalk). Which is why your reply made no sense to me.

It's ok no worries but yes, not everyone has your knowledge

and I even personally prefer brute framerate-based motion blur reduction. That's why I have a Corsair Xeneon Flex 240Hz OLED on my desk.

Interesting, I was convinced that you only swear by strobing, so what do you think of the XG2431 then?

You can get clearer motion on 240fps 240Hz OLED, than you can on an unstrobed 360Hz LCD.

Yes, well, that, on the other hand, is completely logical.

However, strobing is a super-important tool for our giant amount of legacy low-framerate content, and current contemporary frame rates. Everybody's preferences varies a lot.

Mmmh, i have not the same opinion even if it is true that "for the moment" and for the LCD's, it is true that "technically speaking" it helps but as specified above, by adding the concerns of crosstalk, if we REALLY want 240hz (and not a custom 100hz mode) with super low latency, lots of smooth images at 240fps without crosstalk, without overshoot (because we don't talk about that, but for me, lots of screens are the compromise between fluidity and a lot of overshoot or a little latency and no overshoot, except the XG2431), no image duplication, no latency/input lag, no FPS drops (in the end it also depends on the game! resolution too! limitation of engine frames) in short, too many constraints, that's why there are too many variables to have a "technique" based on a single experience that applies to all games.

I tried the XG2431 in very good condition, I had very little image duplication, very little crosstalk etc (ok I did not try the mode with CRU and with the Scanline of RTSS, of course!) but I could see that he was an excellent stock student for strobing except that for me, I don't find that enough, the brightness is a deal breaker and you will therefore have to explain to me why I always play better without strobing.

After all, as you said, technically speaking, we need strobing today especially for LCDs but like you, I prefer to manage motion blur natively without strobing.
I play better like that, more comfortable, that's why my choice is: better management of ghosting / latency and overshoot without strobing which brings more comfort than anything else, in the end I come to the same conclusion than my title, strobing is more disturbing than natural ghosting.

I have two small questions for you, why the section of screens recommended by BlurBuster only resolves to BlurBuster certified screens?
That is to say that according to you there is nothing "good" apart from the ViewSonic XG2431 or as usual i did not understand anything (come on, seriously i'm not as stupid as that )

it would be nice if you had a list of 1080p/1440p recommended for motion blur every year , good management of overdrive/overshoot, you don't do it for lack of time/because RTINGS have a comparison table in place on their sites?
If people on this site could take care of it that would be cool, the forum is alive but the main site is fairly neutral, isn't it?

Are you a gamer? do you play at a high level on competitive games or do you just worry about the technical side as an extreme enthusiast?
Because it's true, how do you manage to write such big lines all the time here, it's crazy, it takes a lot of time, doesn't it?

Anyway have a good day.

[Chief Blur Buster]

It is possible that you misunderstood what I said, because I never said that.

This image clearly said that, and that's why i disagree at first before you tell me that image duplication isn't necessarily crosstalk

This image was taken on a CRT tube, and is not strobe crosstalk.

You have to realize that this image focuses on framerate-based duplicate images, not crosstalk-based duplicate images.

Misrepresenting an existing image of mine intentionally to disagree with me, eh?

Good own goal...

Unless (since I notice you are in France) you're disagreeing with something else caused by a translator mistake (e.g. English->French translator) -- not my fault if Google Translate (etc) is incorrect, sadly.

I'll repost that this screen-technology-independent image is only about framerate-based duplicate images, during eye-tracking situation:

(A) Duplicate images from multiple-impulsing. This is NOT crosstalk.
This applies to everything including CRT and perfect OLED BFI. This type of duplicate image is never caused by crosstalk, but you can solve it by framerate=Hz. Whatever duplicate images remain at perfect framerate=Hz, is definitely caused by strobe crosstalk. You can turn off strobing and see this duplicate image effect via software-based BFI. Go do it, turn off strobing, and click on this: Duplicate Images From Software-Based Multi-Strobed BFI. Since strobing is turned off, it's impossible to have strobe crosstalk, yet double images still exist. If you do not understand this science, you need to re-read what I wrote, and then re-reply correctly again.

The image does not cover any other causes of duplicate images, such as strobe crosstalk.

Any strobe crosstalk will only be additive to this - e.g. add a 5th image to a 4-image framerate-based duplicate images, or add a 3rd image to a 2-image framerate-based duplicate images. Since you cannot tell apart strobe crosstalk away from framerate-based duplicate images, logically you have to filter the two apart. The best way to filter framerate-based duplicate images is simply to make sure framerate=Hz, then that literally guarantees what's left over is crosstalk-based duplicate images.

This image, will be what you see during eye-tracking moving objects on an impulsed display. There can never be less than that count of duplicate images -- and strobe crosstalk is only additive to the count.

Load www.testufo.com while strobing. You'll see that the half-framerate UFO has at least double images, and quarter-framerate UFO has at least quadruple images. If you move a strobed 3-framerate www.testufo.com towards the top, center, bottom edge of screen, you may see the count of UFOs increase and decrease because strobe crosstalk is worse. But the crosstalk images is sometimes impossible to reliably tell apart from the framerate-based duplicate images. That's why you need to temporarily go framerate=Hz before troubleshooting strobe crosstalk, but that advice only applies if you're using strobing. So whatever remaining duplicate images will be less bad than originally, even if you go back to framerate-mismatch-Hz. For example, let's say, you have 60fps at 240Hz but you're getting 6 duplicate images (because of bad strobe crosstalk). Then you temporarily fix (A) framerate=Hz and you recalibrate your crosstalk on a best-effort basis. It looks good. Then now you go back to 60fps at 240Hz, you may get only 5 duplicate images (framerate-based duplicate images plus reduced strobe crosstalk).

Yes, you might hate strobing, but you don't have to incorrectly strobesplain a "2+2=5" for other people who love strobing, the correct scientific way to eliminate error margins when calibrating something. Framerate-based duplicate images can superimpose additively on top of strobe-crosstalk-based duplicate images. You can't tell them apart. So that's an error margin into each other. You temporarily remove one error margin by fixing (A) going framerate=Hz temporarily, for the duration of strobe re-calibration, then (B) adjust strobe tuning to minimize strobe crosstalk, and then you can undo your fix to (A) if you have a priority such as lower input lag (instead of theoretical best possible motion quality), and still have better quality without (A). But that's only if you love strobing. Still, you have to correctly understand what I'm trying to say, because what you're doing is literally forcing a "2+2=5" on me, and that's a foul etiquette here.

Also, remember intermediate framerates (e.g. 37fps or 53fps or 99fps or 203fps or whatever), will have an erratic number of duplicate images that just looks like very uncomfortable jitter. I can make my video games as perfectly smooth as TestUFO, but only with games that can do framerate=Hz, but that adds lag. However, lag isn't important for a lot of solo gameplay situations when your only other option is head-splitting motion blur headaches (caused by turning off strobing). But if you don't have that problem, and you prefer to avoid strobing, then by all means, strobing is not the solution for you in particular. That's fine. But trying to misrepresent real science with mis-opinion instead of asking for clarification questions.

You should have lead the way with questions earlier, like "Does this framerate-related duplicate images also include strobe crosstalk?" and then you would have gotten a delightfully nice explanation. Instead, you chose to fight me with 2+2=5, and I will respond accordingly.

[Chief Blur Buster]

Are you a gamer? do you play at a high level on competitive games or do you just worry about the technical side as an extreme enthusiast?

High end casual gamer. Water cooled tower rigs, 5Ghz, RGB bleep, a Corsair Xeneon Flex, etc.

But I don't really play competitively. However, as a deaf individual, I see motion blur much more clearly than most people do, and I have been the motion blur hero for people who are even much more sensitive to motion blur than you and me. There's people here who get headaches from both ghosting/blurs, to the point that they have to turn on strobing or else. (It's also why strobing is more important in VR than non-VR, there's no non-strobed VR headsets that don't give you headaches).

But people in esports generally know me well. I've provided a lot of free inventions (www.testufo.com/inventions) to the public -- which helps troubleshoot their users' high Hz displays. My indie inventions of my hobby-turned-business, powers over 500 content creators who use my free inventions to test their displays -- e.g. RTINGS motion blur measurement technique -- RTINGS acknowledges my invention. So does a few other sites -- e.g. LinusTechTips, TomsHardware, and all the smaller indies like TFTCentral/PCMonitors/etc.

Because it's true, how do you manage to write such big lines all the time here, it's crazy, it takes a lot of time, doesn't it?

I am born deaf. So I'm all about visuals and temporals -- I'm known as the display-temporals expert.

I have two small questions for you, why the section of screens recommended by BlurBuster only resolves to BlurBuster certified screens?
That is to say that according to you there is nothing "good" apart from the ViewSonic XG2431 or as usual i did not understand anything

There are a lot of good screens that are other than Blur Busters Certified screens.

- The program is voluntary; manufacturers can send their monitors to Blur Busters to certify their strobing features, much like AMD certifies FreeSync and NVIDIA certifies G-SYNC. Blur Busters Approved is a strobing-certification program.

- There were more manufacturers lined up, but the pandemic pretty much put that off. At the peak, there was 7 lined up, until March 2020 happened. Ouch. Needless to say, I had difficulty putting food on the table for a while.

- Also some manufactuters aren't interested in getting certifications. Not all manufacturers send their G-SYNC compatible VRR screens to NVIDIA for official "G-SYNC Compatible Logo" certification. Benq XL2566K would easily become Blur Busters Approved (with minor changes such as reducing the 100Hz minimum strobe to 60Hz, and enabling an OD Gain tuning feature) if BenQ had sent their XL2566K for certification.

- Blur Busters Approved 1.0 and 2.0 mainly focusses on certification of strobe features; to make them more flexible than the even-crappier strobe options elsewhere on the market, e.g. NVIDIA ULMB only lets you strobe very few refresh rates. If you like customizable strobing, there's few options.

Sadly, the marketing campaign for Blur Busters Approved -- as a limited budget indie hobby-turned-business -- got absolutely wrecked by the pandemic. Blur Busters Approved as a strobe-certification program, got kind of interrupted by the pandemic.

Given your signature line saying "strobing is not the solution" (which I agree that it is not useful in all contexts but is absolutely necessary for some users in some contexts) -- as well as your profile also saying your anti-strobe nature:

antistrobe.png (9.96 KiB) Viewed 2586 times

Using your hate of strobing to falsely spin previous posts of mine, to create a false disagreement, is pretty bad sportsmanship of you... As an indie hobby-turned-business, and having difficulty easily becoming a YouTuber easily because I am born deaf and my voice is weird/unintelligible to many, I don't appreciate these kinds of misrepresentation of my content/knowledge.

If it was a misunderstanding, then fine - but it's best to read up on the textbook articles at www.blurbusters.com/area51 and correctly ask for clarifications (e.g. "Is this image about item (A) or about item (B)?") rather than trying to misrepresent facts.

But taking advantage of the limited amount of space in the universe for number of words (e.g. images that doesn't contain 1000-word explanations), and spinning it into a wilful intentional misunderstanding/misrepresentation, and creating an angle of false disagreement based on an insisted wrong-interpretation of an image -- then you're just wasting my time that I could use to try to improve monitor technologies.

it is ironic we are talking about strobe features in a context of hating strobing. If you hate strobing, then you probably don't need to focus on the strobing certification (e.g. Blur Busters Approved) anyway. Even if it's much better than other strobing, it's still only a pick-poison (better strobing vs worse strobing). If you hate strobing, then judge XG2431 from its non-strobed merits, rather than from wanting advanced strobe calibration.

Keep in mind some people even get headaches from motion blur more than from flicker, and that's why people come to Blur Busters, as a beacon for eliminating motion blur, and that's why we classically focus on strobing-based motion blur reduction. There are even some people who still get more headaches from blur than flicker even at 60fps threshold -- but the threshold of what is pick-poison varies hugely from person to person. Everybody sees differently; different people nitpicks differently.

If you can do brute-framerate-based motion blur reduction, then fantastic. Here's the motion blur comparision chart for you:



This chart becomes true if GtG is hidden (whether by GtG=0 or by GtG hidden by strobing). If you want the motion clarity of 480fps 480Hz, with a low framerate at low Hz, you want to strobe-flash at 1/480sec once a refresh cycle. SO you can have 60fps 60Hz with the motion clarity of non-strobed 480fps 480Hz, thanks to a backlight flashing for 1/480sec.

Law of physics completely prevent display motion blur of low framerates from being less than frametime on a non-strobed display.

But this is Blur Busters, and one of the world's best ways to eliminate motion blur has historically been strobing (impulse-driving) a display. Hundreds of strobed displays are absolutely terrible and atrocious if you've ever seen as many monitors as I have. Only a few (e.g. BenQ displays) do a good job, but BenQ is one of those parties that hasn't submitted for the certification logo programme. It is a flat fee per certification, and no per-unit commission (except via Amazon affiliate sales).

One may ask, can you purchase 1ms MPRT without strobing? You can't yet.

1ms MPRT(0%->100%) without strobing, can only be achieved via successful fully-visible 1ms frametimes, which would require 1000fps 1000Hz 0ms GtG if you want a completely flickerless display. Another great article I have is The Stroboscopic Effect of Finite Frame Rate Displays. Remember, don't forget there are 4 different display artifacts that can occur depending on whether or not your eyes are moving or not, and whether or not the onscreen image is moving or not;

There are certainly two ways to reduce display motion blur, and one of them is not strobe-based.

(A) Strobe-based motion blur reduction; and
(B) Brute framerate-based motion blur reduction with sample and hold with fast GtG

I will be publishing more articles (1000Hz Diaries) in the coming months to cover the non-strobe alternative for blur busting for people who hate strobing, but for gigantic motion blur reductions, still requires strobing.

There are lot of useful things to reply to in your post, but I wanted to address these things first.

[Chief Blur Buster]

3. Turn off strobing. Do you understand how duplicate images can still occur without hardware-based strobing, via this custom TestUFO animation that works on any unstrobed LCD/OLED? You can even get this double image effect on an iPhone/Android screen too this way! They're not strobed screens, and thus, it's not strobe crosstalk at all.

Mmmh...not really, sorry, it's a part that confuses me i admit!

So there you go, you just invalidated your whole disagreement completely -- with that.

If you wish, load this URL Duplicate Images via Software BFI on all your sample and hold displays you own. Your smartphone, your tablet, your laptop LCD, your TV. If the display is strobe-free, PWM-free, and is sample and hold, there is still a double image effect on the 2nd UFO during sufficiently fast motion.

Your eyes are analog movement, so your eyes have moved in between the temporally-different repeat-same-frames (between the black frames -- added by software-based black frame insertion). That cause a duplicate image from repeat-impulsing.

The 4 is not necessary, however why don't you explain how we can see the difference between crosstalk and "image duplication" when it looks pretty much the same thing then?

Exactly. You can't realistically tell them apart without being a display engineer. That's why if you are a person who loves strobing, but needs to troubleshoot strobing, you need to fix item (A) by going framerate=Hz before you fix (B) strobe crosstalk.

How do you manage to see the difference between two technically different but visibly similar things, can't wait to find out.

You can't. That's exactly why (if you're a person who loves strobing and wants to continue using strobing) you must go framerate=Hz temporarily while troubleshooting strobe crosstalk.

I said that exactly because framerate-based duplicate images can superimpose on top of crosstalk-based duplicate images. You can't troubleshoot (B) without temporarily fixing (A), exactly because you can not tell them apart. That's why.

If you don't temporarily fix (A) before troubleshooting (B), you will have difficulty fixing (B) crosstalk because the framerate-based duplicate images are interfering.

You can only guarantee what double-images you see is definitely strobe crosstalk, by first temporarily guaranteeing framerate=Hz. That way, you're not confused by double images that you can't tell apart between "framerate-mismatch-Hz" based duplicate images, versus strobe-crosstalk-based duplicate images.

There's an advanced strobe crosstalk FAQ at www.blurbusters.com/crosstalk and that is a very old FAQ that is 10 years old -- and it still acknowledges that things can be muddied up by framerate-mismatch-Hz duplicate images.

If you want to see framerate-based duplicate images, watch www.testufo.com#count=4 with strobing turned on. Sometimes you will get 1 or 2 extra images because of strobe crosstalk, e.g. 60fps at 240Hz might have 5 or 6 UFOs instead of 4. But you can't tell which one is framerate-based duplicate images and which one is strobe-crosstalk-based duplicate images.

You can detail on (2) and (3)! but why not make it a pinned post? (or you have already done it) but sorry to say, i'm not used to this kind of "old" website, I find it confusing.

I am born deaf. I have difficulty being a youtuber. I use a blog system instead.

I already published it at www.blurbusters.com/1000hz-journey if you want to read more about (2) and (3).

BTW, you can see a very old high speed video of a strobe backlight at www.blurbusters.com/lightboost/video

There are several articles at www.blurbusters.com/area51

As you arleady noticed, many of them piggybacks off thousands of pages of research (from universities, SID.org, Arxiv.org, etc) into 10-page webpages. If you want me to go shorter than that, quote one paragraph or quote one image, and then ask me questions about it, rather than misrepresenting the image.

If you prefer VSYNC OFF in esports, sure, fine, fine, but you still need to temporarily fix (A) by temporarily turning VSYNC ON, before troubleshooting strobe crosstalk (B), before going back to VSYNC OFF

So to have less crosstalk and less image duplication on Strobing scenario is V-Sync On + Good strobing settings? / "QFT ?" 100hz mode via CRU, if I understand correctly?
So yeah, I'm not interested, that's not going to make me play better or more comfortable because that's not what i'm really looking for.

You're still misunderstanding.
The advice only applies if you want to keep strobing. When troubleshooting strobe crosstalk, you need to temporarily fix (A) while troubleshooting (B) before undoing (A).

There are tradeoffs. Doing "framerate mismatch Hz" can have less lag, but doing "Framerate perfect match Hz" can have better motion quality. You can't have both. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The problem is that the best motion quality is always framerate=Hz. A single stutter can create major headaches in virtual reality, which is why all VR games in humankind is always VSYNC ON, because framerate=Hz is more accurately simulating real life. There's a bit more lag in VR (~10ms-ish) because of the "framerate=Hz" gospel in VR programming. But this doesn't apply to championship esports, where ultra low lag is more king. Motion blur reduction is simply icing on the cake, for those who have more problems with non-strobed.

But clearly, you're not one of the people who wants strobing, so why are you disagreeing with correctly true strobe-specific advice? You're just becoming pseudoscience, and we are not a psuedoscience forum nor a "fake science" forum; we have often banned people who kept spreading/insisting on incorrect science;

and I even personally prefer brute framerate-based motion blur reduction. That's why I have a Corsair Xeneon Flex 240Hz OLED on my desk.

Interesting, I was convinced that you only swear by strobing, so what do you think of the XG2431 then?

Right Tool for the Right Job.

XG2431 is currently one of the world's best strobed LCDs, for strobe lovers. Majority of strobed LCDs are extremely crappy, and XG2431 reduces a lot of strobe complaints by:

• Reduced strobe crosstalk for motion clarity closer to CRT motion clarity;
• Easy High Quality Pre-Tuned Strobe (60, 100, 120, 144, 240 Hz) via monitor menu!
• Retro Friendly Strobe (60 Hz) for consoles, TV, and emulators! (MAME, RetroArch, YouTube, TV, etc)
• Strobe any Hz in 0.001Hz increments. No preset refresh rate limitation!
• Strobe any video or television source, not just GPUs!
• Optional Strobe Utility support (see below);
• Optional Large Vertical Total support (via Custom Resolution Utility) for strobe crosstalk reductions;
• Optional Quick Frame Transport support (via Custom Resolution Utility) for low lag strobing.

Thus, XG2431 is amazing for things like emulators and 60 years of legacy 60fps 60Hz content. If you're just using it for esports and you hate strobing, then XG2431 may not be your dream monitor.

There is no way to have less than 16.7ms of motion blur at 60Hz without flicker (aka strobing), there's no way to reduce low-Hz motion blur without strobing -- it's a law of physics violation. It's impossible to fix some kinds of low-framerate without some form of strobing, unless you love interpolation (e.g. adding fake frames to movies -- e.g. converting 24fps movies to 120fps+ via an "interpolation" algorithm). Some people love interpolation, and I can respect that. But interpolation is typically laggy, and so interpolation is not a universal motion blur mitigation. (Reprojection can be, as reprojection is a less laggy frame-generation technology -- but that technology is mainly used in virtual reality to fix low framerates to make sure VR is strobing at framerate = refreshrate = stroberate correctly).

You can get 0ms GtG but you can still have lots of motion blur at perfect 0ms GtG, because 0ms GtG is not 0ms MPRT. There are two different pixel response methods, Pixel Response FAQ: GtG versus MPRT.

I tried the XG2431 in very good condition, I had very little image duplication, very little crosstalk etc (ok I did not try the mode with CRU and with the Scanline of RTSS, of course!) but I could see that he was an excellent stock student for strobing except that for me, I don't find that enough, the brightness is a deal breaker and you will therefore have to explain to me why I always play better without strobing.

Not all gamers will play better with strobing; and sometimes it's not about input lag, sometimes it's about people who get headaches from display motion blur that are bigger than flicker-based headaches. Many people are bothered by flicker. But some other people get bigger headaches from display motion blur. That's why all VR headsets in humankind use strobing, because of the headache complaints of non-strobed VR.

This is because VR exercises eye movements and display movements much more aggressively:
(A) Stationary eyeballs, stationary images on screen
(B) Stationary eyeballs, Moving objects on screen
(C) Moving eyeballs, stationary objects on screen
(D) Moving eyeballs, Moving images on screen

These are just things that needs to be scientifically worked around, and I've written about this (eye stationary vs tracking) in many articles including The Stroboscopic Effect of Finite Frame Rates.

For example, in a game such as CS:GO, most esports players use item (B). Most esports players stare stationary most of the time at the crosshairs in the middle of the screen. You're mostly immune to display motion blur when you're only doing item (B) in a video game, and strobing is useless to most esports players.

But a Quake 3 Arena game often exercises item (D) more often (which strobing helps). One of the Rainbow Six esports champions uses strobing, for example, but Rainbow Six is not the exact same kind of game as CS:GO. And some other games do not have a crosshair.

For example, if you play SEGA Sonic Hedgehog, you will often be doing item (D) like eye tracking the panning screen, and seeing all the display motion blur when the whole screen scrolls.

Now, in VR, head turning = VR screen scrolling. VR exercises a lot more of (A)(B)(C)(D) so a larger number of people get motion blur headaches, and that's why all VR screens now use strobing at the moment, because we don't have enough refresh rate (e.g. 1000fps 1000Hz) to largely eliminate motion blur without the need for strobing tricks.

Strobing is a useful bandaid for legacy frame rates, especially for content that forces item (D) moving eyeballs, moving images -- try viewing www.testufo.com/eyetracking#speed=-1



What this demonstrates is that images behave differently depending on what you're doing:
(A) Stationary eyeballs, stationary images on screen
(B) Stationary eyeballs, Moving objects on screen
(C) Moving eyeballs, stationary objects on screen
(D) Moving eyeballs, Moving images on screen

If you are looking at the first UFO in the animation, you're doing item (B). If you are looking at the second UFO in the animation, you're doing item (D). Just because you only play games that force you to do item (B), doesn't mean other people are doing item (D). Different game players do different things with their eyes on their displays, and some people benefit from strobing massively more than others.

Now some games will only exercise one of the above, other games exercise two of the above; and some people will abberate differently from a different person. Some games force a human to do all of (A)(B)(C)(D). Virtual reality (e.g. holodeck) will be the most extreme situation, amplifying the most extreme "must have strobing or I get massive headaches" necessity in a larger percentage of human population.

(A) VR: Standing still in virtual reality, staring straight ahead (Stationary VR scene)
(B) VR: Turning your head in virtual reality without moving your eyeballs (VR scenery scrolls past your view)
(C) VR: Standing still in virtual reality, but moving your eyeballs (Moving eyes around the VR scene).
(D) VR: Walking around or turning head in virtual reality while eye-tracking objects that moves to different pixels of the VR screen (navigating and exploring VR scene).

So, this is why strobing became necessary in VR, because more humans do (A)(B)(C)(D) at random different times; and motion sickness was traced to the cause of motion blur caused by low frame rates (since you can't fix low frame rates without strobing). Even 240fps 240Hz nonstrobed has a guaranteed 1/240sec motion blur.

Strobing is certainly the only solution for some people on some use cases;
While strobing is not the solution for other people on other use cases.
Clearly, strobing is not the solution here, for you.

After all, as you said, technically speaking, we need strobing today especially for LCDs but like you, I prefer to manage motion blur natively without strobing.
I play better like that, more comfortable, that's why my choice is: better management of ghosting / latency and overshoot without strobing which brings more comfort than anything else, in the end I come to the same conclusion than my title, strobing is more disturbing than natural ghosting.

That's fine and there are many people like you. But not everyone sees the same way. Everyone sees differently. The people who wear eyeglasses wear different kinds of eyeglasses (different lenses for different eye corrections). There's even a motion blindness called Akinetopsia but there are also lots of undiagnosed people who are only semi-motionblind. Likewise, 12% of population is also colorblind (statistics). And you read about people who complain about tearing more often than stutters, and other people who can't tell apart 60fps vs 120fps, unlike you who can. So just like people who hate strobing, there are people who like strobing far better than the natural ghosting/blurs.

Just because you hate ghosting/blurs and hate strobing, is not necessarily indicative of what everyone universally picks-poison over.

As I am born deaf, I am a visual person, and I am far more picky about motion blur. Motionsickness by motion blur is a common problem, and there are many people (including my uncle and mother) who can never play an esports game because of motion sickness. But somehow, they don't get motionsick playing an app called "Alcolve" (a virtual walk through a beach front house) on a Quest 2 VR headset, despite the headset being a flickery strobe. So, many people don't even know they get motionsick by motion blur (which VR fixes by mandatory strobing).

I just come here to discuss and give my real opinion (without going through complexity) moreover, it is not necessarily because we do not know 100% all the details of a subject that our opinion is not valid (I just wanted to clarify this)

Fine, but this is not a "pseudoscience opinion" subforum. This is not a forum about false/fake science, nor a forum that allows you to disagree with real/correct science.

Correct use of "opinion":
This is correct use of an "opinion": "Strobing is not the solution"
What you wrote in your signature is fine. I respect that opinion.
I even agree with it in some cases, but it is also a user preference too.
Strobing is not the right tool for all jobs.

It's the only tool for some jobs (e.g. zero-blur low-framerate scrolling is not possible without a form of BFI/strobing/impulsing/etc).
But there are better tools for different jobs (e.g. lag-free CS:GO by people who don't need the aim-stabilizer benefits etc).

Incorrect use of "opinion":
This is incorrect use of an "opinion": Disagreeing with a proven scientifically correct fact;

Trying to disagree against the mutual co-existence of (A) framerate-based double images; versus (B) strobe crosstalk is equivalent to not acknowledging 3 + 1 = 4 and 2 + 2 = 4 are both true.

Just because the answer is "4", does not necessarily mean you know what original math problem occured to create the number "4".
When you read the number "4" by itself without a math problem, you don't know if that specific "4" was created by "3+1" or was created by "2+2". That's why you cannot tell apart strobe crosstalk from framerate-based double images.

By dictating the opinion you are currently disagreeing about strobe crosstalk versus framerate-based duplicate images, you are doing exactly the same thing as saying "2+2=5". You are disputing real peer-reviewed science. I'm already in peer reviewed science papers, after all.

Trying to continue to insist that 2+2=5 as an opinion, is not a legitimate use of "opinion" around here; and such weaponized wilfully-false willy-fake opinion is discouraged around here.

Otherwise, correctly keeping an open mind, and asking questions instead of trying to use your hate against strobing to wilfilly misinterpret previous images to suit your agenda, masquerading psuedoscience as opinion. That's the kind of thing discouraged around this forums -- we prefer people to ask questions rather than abuse opinions.

Opinions are good when they are healthy opinions, but not when it's like "My opinion is that 2+2=5". Asserting an opinion against guaranteed-correct information, is simply wilful weaponized mis-opinion is discouraged on Blur Busters Forums, and is a waste-of-time disrespect for an indie like me. This is a science-minded forum. While there's a lot of original research going on at Blur Busters Forums (that is later converted to peer reviewed papers, such as how many mentions I have on Google Scholar including by university Ph.D's), disagreeing with stuff that already is proven correct, is just "2+2=5" fakery.

Now if your complaint is simply because I didn't cram a 1000-word explanation in the "Duplicate Images on Impulsed Displays", then that's just an own goal, because writing "2+2=5" doesn't include a 1000-word explanation explaining why "2+2=5" is incorrect.

Now that being said, the time is probably ripe to create a new article about disambiguation of strobe crosstalk vs framerate-based duplicate images. There's so many youngsters, who has never seen a CRT tube doing duplicate images at 30fps at 60Hz, which means just like some kids today don't know how to use a paper map anymore (dependant on Google Maps on smartphone).

So, obviously, some people don't understand the science anymore, and I now have to create new articles in year 2023 that I didn't need to create in year 2012 when some people were still working on CRT desktop monitors, especially in some countries. Perhaps your post is a wake-up call to write new articles due to the large number of people growing up in the post-CRT era, because they no longer understand framerate-based duplicate images (from years of playing on CRT tubes in the past). When kids like me were growing up, they all knew about the double-image effect of 30fps at 60Hz CRT tubes, and the same effect also happens with 60fps at 120Hz strobe.

The duplicate image count (excluding strobe crosstalk component) is (refreshrate)/(framerate), and odd pulldowns (e.g. 3:2 pulldown of 24fps at 60Hz, aka where frames repeat 3 times then 2 times then 3 times then 2 times and so on) will judderily vary the number of duplicate images; so movie motion on CRT tubes were rougher than movie motion at the film-reel movie theater (in USA NTSC area where 60Hz is not divisible by 24fps movie). Lots of people don't know much about this science anymore.

However, when the lack of knowledge of people starts to enroach in "false-opinion-against-real-science" territory like this, it makes me sad for the world how much typing I have to do, and how little time there is in the world.

The best I can ask you, is (1) Be patient; (2) Read and study the material to reduce number of questions; and (3) Any questions that remain, respectfully ask away! (4) If you use a translator, be extra patient because misunderstandings can escalate.

We have many forum members who use a translator when reading forum posts. This is super common around here, so that might be a possible error factor or misunderstanding factor. By viewing your profile, I observe you are in France.

While I can't necessarily assume you are doing such, maybe you are using a translator app for English-to-French and French-to-English. If so, then keep in mind that most software-based Translators are not very good with many scientific papers, which is why Blur Busters can be confusing if you use a machine translator. You might be actually disagreeing with the translator (which may indeed produce scientifically incorrect information), rather than disagreeing with the original English-language text. This is slowly changing, as GPT-4 based translators are doing an (okay-ish) job on translating Blur Busters texts, but most of the online translators use yesterday's AI and are just mediocre translations. Blur Busters writes in more technical language than the average site.

So try to make your reply as small as possible, so I benefit the world more as a whole. It's sometimes a habit of mine to pay too much attention to the forum, instead of doing other "benefit-the-world" things for Blur Busters.

If you grew up in a YouTube world instead of a text-writing blog world, you'll just have to put up with reading texts, but you have to play the respectful-opinion game, not the "disrespectful-misopinion-against-correct-science" game that I perceive that you are doing. It's just a waste of my time. Spend more time tolerating the blog articles, look at a few thousand more different TestUFO tests, get more questions self-answered, and then come back.

Read the existing educational material. Take 1 day of reading other things before replying, and then ask your questions. It's best to take your time.

I wish I was a YouTuber, but it's tough for a born-nigh-completely-deaf indie like me. I try my best.

EDIT: And before you reply please read this forum member's post as an example of a person who needs strobing to solve a health issue.
Right Tool for Right Job.