Flicker-based vs Framerate-based Blur Reduction

Ask about motion blur reduction in gaming monitors. Includes ULMB (Ultra Low Motion Blur), NVIDIA LightBoost, ASUS ELMB, BenQ/Zowie DyAc, ToastyX, black frame insertion (BFI), and now framerate-based motion blur reduction (framegen / LSS / etc).
purplemelon1
Posts: 13
Joined: 16 Nov 2024, 04:13

Re: Flicker-based vs Framerate-based Blur Reduction

Post by purplemelon1 » 11 Mar 2025, 22:34

keko wrote:
28 Feb 2025, 17:10
and how many Hz should be clearly seen all 4320 lines of moution resolution.
I can clearly see all 1080 lines on my 600hz plasma if then 600Hz is enough for 4320

You should look at my post of plasma looking the same as 60fps oled.

I think you need to play more with the testufo. Resolution just raises the ceiling of how much detail you can see. How much fps satisfies you is a very different thing from how much you should be able to see.
Which... If you judge me and the other commentator. You'll probably realize you are satisfied with 120fps or whatever. Regardless of if you play a 90s game at 240p or at 2880p (5k)


The correct way to look at it is how much pixels do you want blurred by each frame. But that might be too technical for you. Chief simplifies with the example of a 1080p image with 960 pixels of movement. Well... The area 51 articles should have everything you need


Yeah the more i think about it. You must not be moving your screen if you think you can see the whole screen clearly

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11978
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Flicker-based vs Framerate-based Blur Reduction

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 02 Apr 2025, 22:51

keko wrote:
28 Feb 2025, 17:10
and how many Hz should be clearly seen all 4320 lines of moution resolution.
I can clearly see all 1080 lines on my 600hz plasma if then 600Hz is enough for 4320
Please read Why Are TestUFO Animations 960 Pixels Per Second about why the obsolete "Lines Of Motion Resolution" is junk; it was useful for analog TV, useless for digital variable-resolution era.

Lines of Motion Resolution assumes you have a fixed resolution & Hz reference. Like back in NTSC and PAL era. Or even ATSC. But today you have odd resolutions, odd screen sizes & odd Hz, which creates inability to do apples-vs-apples.

In fact, you can have more than the physical spatial resolution, in lines of motion resolution, due to subrefresh motion blur reduction, which means these types of motion tests become useless, for the laws of physics explained in the above article. With subrefresh strobing, it is now possible to have "8000 lines of motion resolution for 1080p" for an ultra-fast-scrolling test pattern that is less than 1-second to pan from edge to edge. It makes it hard to educate people.

The old Home Theater stuff (I used to work for the Home Theater Industry) has had great inventions, and I worked for many video processor makers (Runco, Key Digital, Faroudja in 2000-2004, and most recently Retrotink 4K), but one of its old carry-forwards of the "Lines Of Motion Resolution" junk is apples-vs-bananas because there's no fixed reference and can't compare between displays easily, as displays are now different resolutions and different Hz.

Even Samsung cited my article in a research paper about obsolete motion benchmarks. I'm in over 30 papers now, and the Coles Notes are at www.blurbusters.com/area51 <-- Textbook reading for display manufacturers.

"Lines of Motion Resolution" = currently useless outdated analog-era stuff. To see why, see www.blurbusters.com/why960
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on: BlueSky | Twitter | Facebook

Image
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!

purplemelon1
Posts: 13
Joined: 16 Nov 2024, 04:13

Re: Flicker-based vs Framerate-based Blur Reduction

Post by purplemelon1 » 05 Apr 2025, 12:04

Chief Blur Buster wrote:
02 Apr 2025, 22:51
keko wrote:
28 Feb 2025, 17:10
and how many Hz should be clearly seen all 4320 lines of moution resolution.
I can clearly see all 1080 lines on my 600hz plasma if then 600Hz is enough for 4320

"Lines of Motion Resolution" = currently useless outdated analog-era stuff. To see why, see www.blurbusters.com/why960
Oh hi chief. By the way you should know that the fortnite and csgo links in why960 do not link to anything anymore.
I was hoping to make some animations myself that you could add for examples in testufo but uhh... No pc.

In the battlefield 3 worlds first 120hz upload from 10 years ago. You can really see how the... (I'm forgetting words) law of persistence works in 2 seperate ways at the same time. Both for the render and for your screen. When you pause under rapid movement. You can really see how a 6 pixel tree gets widened to like 32 pixels.

Well continuing this convo would be appropriate under the content creation sections.

Otherwise you would just be grabbing still screenshots of a game. Which is not really representative of rendered motion blur. You know stuff like quarter animations in the background.a ...

Gee i think you really probably dont have time. Welp. A screenshot of counter strike 2 in rapid motion will do the trick for a while.

Post Reply