A Blur Busters Holiday 2017 Special Feature
Coming sooner than expected within our lifetimes in the 2020s
\
Read more:
Blur Busters Law: The Amazing Journey To Future 1000Hz+ Displays
1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
- Chief Blur Buster
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11714
- Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
- Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter
Forum Rules wrote: 1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!
Re: 1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
Good stuff. Now we just need to make stuff happen.
Re: 1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
/remindme 2029
Steam • GitHub • Stack Overflow
The views and opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Blur Busters.
The views and opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Blur Busters.
Re: 1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
So will the 1440 240hz monitors released in 2018 be somewhat worse somehow due to the increase in resolution? That part sounded strange.
- Chief Blur Buster
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11714
- Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
- Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
Re: 1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
I didn't use the word "worse". I didn't mention that word in that context
I simply try to explain that the SAME physical amount of motion blur (in inches) is easier to see during higher resolution than during lower resolution.
Picture this, it is easier to see motion blur af 4K quality than at VGA or VHS quality. Low rez is so blurry, additional motion blur doesn't seem to surge as much. But if you begin with the highest resolution, the same amount of motion blur makes a much bigger difference compared to a stationary image.
This also means, tiny amounts of motion blur is easier to notice if the image is higher-def than low-def. Thus, the higher the reaolution, the lower the persistence you need to push motion blur below human-detectable levels.
I'll have to add a small graphic demonstrating this.
Makes better sense?
I simply try to explain that the SAME physical amount of motion blur (in inches) is easier to see during higher resolution than during lower resolution.
Picture this, it is easier to see motion blur af 4K quality than at VGA or VHS quality. Low rez is so blurry, additional motion blur doesn't seem to surge as much. But if you begin with the highest resolution, the same amount of motion blur makes a much bigger difference compared to a stationary image.
This also means, tiny amounts of motion blur is easier to notice if the image is higher-def than low-def. Thus, the higher the reaolution, the lower the persistence you need to push motion blur below human-detectable levels.
I'll have to add a small graphic demonstrating this.
Makes better sense?
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter
Forum Rules wrote: 1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!
Re: 1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
Actually, I would have assumed the opposite. Unscaled (native) low res is not blurry. It's just as sharp. Just more grainy or pixelated. So in my mind, there's no reason for it to mask blur.
So what's left is absolute blur distance. 6 pixels of blur is a longer length in, say 80dpi compared to 200dpi. So if you translate that, you'd have something like 3mm of blur on low res vs 1mm of blur on high res. So with that thinking, high res should have less blur
So what's left is absolute blur distance. 6 pixels of blur is a longer length in, say 80dpi compared to 200dpi. So if you translate that, you'd have something like 3mm of blur on low res vs 1mm of blur on high res. So with that thinking, high res should have less blur
Steam • GitHub • Stack Overflow
The views and opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Blur Busters.
The views and opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Blur Busters.
Re: 1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
Except that for the same motion it will travel a bigger amount of pixels at 200 dpi than at 80 dpi
Monitor: Gigabyte M27Q X
Re: 1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
Oh... right.
Steam • GitHub • Stack Overflow
The views and opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Blur Busters.
The views and opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Blur Busters.
Re: 1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
Makes sense. How will the pixel response time being decreased to .5ms (the other apparently more realistic figure drops as well) impact blur?
- Chief Blur Buster
- Site Admin
- Posts: 11714
- Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
- Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Contact:
Re: 1000 Hz: The Journey Begins
Exactly.Haste wrote:Except that for the same motion it will travel a bigger amount of pixels at 200 dpi than at 80 dpi
5mm of motion blur at 320x200 versus 5mm of motion blur at 1920x1080 (same display size)
You will notice motion blur in the latter much, much, much more easily.
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter
Forum Rules wrote: 1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!