Blur Busters Forums

Would using a scanning backlight affect that at all?

The Sony TV I'm using just now does not have any crosstalk at all (2D) so perhaps the fact that it has a full array backlight which is scanned rather than being an edge-lit monitor that is strobed is the reason for it?

I can't use strobing for more than an hour, I get weird eye discomfort. If they ever invent a flicker free strobing, then I will worship it.

monitor_butt wrote:I can't use strobing for more than an hour, I get weird eye discomfort. If they ever invent a flicker free strobing, then I will worship it.

A 400hz flicker free OLED would be equivalent, if not better, in motion blur to the best strobed LCD.

I cannot await the OLED monitor boom thats eventually coming. 144hz OLED with adaptive sync will already have clearer motion than anything anyone here has seen. (factoring in the shitness of a dimm TN with matte screen, the static blurriness of a CRT, not to mention the idiotically small screen and all the artifacts you get if you choose strobing over variable refresh rates on current LCDs)

I find the combination of smoothness, tear free experience of 144 Hz G-Sync on the 27" Acer Predator to be the best gaming experience at the moment.

Yes, G-Sync mode doesn't have the motion clarity of ULMB but ULMB comes at severe cost that doesn't outweigh the overall 144 FPS/Hz G-Sync package.

ULMB:

Can easily feel stutters do to no FPS/Hz matching
Dim
Lower image quality
Lower Hz
To get a tear free experience requires V-Sync = ON
Input lag


With 144 Hz G-Sync you eliminate all of those above problems for a slight reduction in motion clarity.


Of course the holy grail would be strobing backlight G-Sync. Or pulsing OLED G-Sync.

Vega, what's sad is, the only reason ULMB is dim is because ULMB does not increase the current to the backlight LED's like the older Lightboost and Benq Blur reduction both do (they both increase the current to make up for the loss of overall lumens from the strobing). And while image quality is still an issue, it's pretty shocking actually just how -low- the overdrive artifacts are in the old VG248QE's lightboost mode, compared to literally everything after it. I mean, nothing now or recent comes close to how good Asus Lightboost was, both crosstalk wise, the lack of overshoot (there's only a tiny bit) and at the time, no one knew that you could tweak the overdrive gain in Lightboost mode by changing OD gain in the service menu. You could combine that with lowering the contrast to 0 (with an OD gain of 0D) to make the image almost perfect, but of course at even bigger contrast hit.

When strobing works with gsync at the same time though.....

Edmond wrote:A 400hz flicker free OLED would be equivalent, if not better, in motion blur to the best strobed LCD.

Nope. Wrong.

A 400Hz flicker free OLED would be the same as an LCD utilizing a 1/400sec strobe duty cycle.

The length of a visible refresh (whether strobe duty cycle or a full-persistence refresh) determines the motion blur.

A 400Hz flicker free display creates 2.5ms of persistence. So a strobed display with less than 1/400sec strobe duty = under 2.5ms strobe flash per refresh = will have less motion blur.

Mathematically, at 1 pixel of motion blur during 1000 pixels per second, a 400Hz flicker free OLED would create 5 pixels of motion blurring during 2000 pixels/second motion (1 screen width per second movement). You would not be able to easily e street name labels in the Test UFO Panning Map Test on a 400Hz flicker free display. To read the street name labels, you would have to reduce it to under 1-2 pixels of motion blurring, so that would require at least a 1000-2000Hz display. At that point, only then, it finally becomes as sharp as a piece of paper being scrolled sideways in front of you.

There is a good thread in the Area 51 forum that explains why 400Hz is not enough to eliminate motion blur on a flicker-free strobe-free display.
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=333

Glide wrote:Would using a scanning backlight affect that at all?

The Sony TV I'm using just now does not have any crosstalk at all (2D) so perhaps the fact that it has a full array backlight which is scanned rather than being an edge-lit monitor that is strobed is the reason for it?

Try the TestUFO Alien Invasion test on your Sony TV. Strobe crosstalk is much easier to see on solid backgrounds, and high-contrast edges, during framerate-refreshrate matched situations.

Chief Blur Buster wrote:

Edmond wrote:A 400hz flicker free OLED would be equivalent, if not better, in motion blur to the best strobed LCD.

Nope. Wrong.

A 400Hz flicker free OLED would be the same as an LCD utilizing a 1/400sec strobe duty cycle.

The length of a visible refresh (whether strobe duty cycle or a full-persistence refresh) determines the motion blur.

A 400Hz flicker free display creates 2.5ms of persistence. So a strobed display with less than 1/400sec strobe duty = under 2.5ms strobe flash per refresh = will have less motion blur.

Mathematically, at 1 pixel of motion blur during 1000 pixels per second, a 400Hz flicker free OLED would create 5 pixels of motion blurring during 2000 pixels/second motion (1 screen width per second movement). You would not be able to easily e street name labels in the Test UFO Panning Map Test on a 400Hz flicker free display. To read the street name labels, you would have to reduce it to under 1-2 pixels of motion blurring, so that would require at least a 1000-2000Hz display. At that point, only then, it finally becomes as sharp as a piece of paper being scrolled sideways in front of you.

There is a good thread in the Area 51 forum that explains why 400Hz is not enough to eliminate motion blur on a flicker-free strobe-free display.
http://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=333

Thank you for the clarification.

But i must say i was going by this picture:


It looked to me like practically the strobing results is around 2ms pixel persistance (@1000pixel motion).
Thats why i thought a 400hz (or 500hz) flicker free OLED would deliver the same 2ms.
I have not seen 1ms persistance vs 2ms persistance in real life, although i have one of them 22" CRTs, but i dont have a strobed LCD.

But i get the feeling i would take the 2ms over the 1ms persistance, in order to get variable frame rate and no flicker. The total motion clarity of that would seem like the no-compromise solution to me.

Edmond wrote: But i get the feeling i would take the 2ms over the 1ms persistance, in order to get variable frame rate and no flicker. The total motion clarity of that would seem like the no-compromise solution to me.

There is a big compromise. To get those 2ms of persistence you'd need 500fps (it'd be a variable persistence monitor too ). I prefer being able to set persistence to my liking and then using one refresh rate or another depending on my needs.

Of course, having a 600Hz OLED with optional strobing at any refresh rate would be great. I say 600Hz because it's multiple of 24, 25, and 60 fps.

Chief Blur Buster wrote:

Glide wrote:Would using a scanning backlight affect that at all?

The Sony TV I'm using just now does not have any crosstalk at all (2D) so perhaps the fact that it has a full array backlight which is scanned rather than being an edge-lit monitor that is strobed is the reason for it?

Try the TestUFO Alien Invasion test on your Sony TV. Strobe crosstalk is much easier to see on solid backgrounds, and high-contrast edges, during framerate-refreshrate matched situations.

No crosstalk that I can see.

That's why I'm wondering if that's due to the fact that it's using a scanning backlight rather than a strobed backlight.
The TV has a 10x7 grid of LED zones, so it can scan the screen rather than being edge-lit and only being able to switch the backlight on/off.

That way it can be synchronized with the LCD panel, instead of either waiting the full 16.67ms for the panel to be updated, or strobe sooner and show crosstalk.