Blur Busters Forums

I have done some searching and I've found some threads about this subject, but a lot of the information is very old.

What is the current status of Software BFI in Windows?

If a guy wanted to see what a 240Hz display could do with a software BFI (for 120Hz BFI effectively), is that thing? Also, I know that LCDs don't have fast enough response time for BFI to work as well as it does on OLED, but I have read of some success stories... specifically with running older games (RetroArch, Mame, Etc.).

Ideally, I would like an option that can be applied universally in Windows. On the desktop, in 2D games, in 3D games, etc. Is that possible?

Feel free to list any applications (even emulators) that have Software BFI built in, but I am especially interested in any that can be used somewhat universally in Windows, or at the very least applied in most\all games.

I found this thread, but I hope there have been some developments on this subject elsewhere over the past year.

Also interested in this. In my case more interested on the Mac side, but hopefully there are some cross platform solutions.

I have a Sony XW5000ES projector and I'm primarily interested in using BFI for older/film-sourced movies. The projector has a laser-based light source with full dimming available for during black input. I'm hopeful that this will work with BFI to fully blank the laser and preserve color/contrast/etc while losing only overall image brightness. I currently use the projector at lowest light output, so I figure with BFI I can max out the laser and get an acceptable brightness.

You can use DesktopBFI in Administrator Mode and run it in REALTIME mode for Windows applications.

There will need to be better options, such as a windows indirect display driver.

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑

30 Aug 2023, 23:50

You can use DesktopBFI in Administrator Mode and run it in REALTIME mode for Windows applications.

There will need to be better options, such as a windows indirect display driver.

I just tried DesktopBFI on my new LG 240Hz 1440P IPS monitor and it definitely works, but I get crazy image retention, which I have seen mentioned elsewhere. Is there a simple fix for this? Reading about it briefly it seems like it would require using odd refresh rates at the very least.

Or a phase-swap black frame (like the "LCD Saver" option of the upcoming Retrotink 4K). TestUFO Flicker Test uses this (www.testufo.com/flicker) to prevent image retention as well.

DesktopBFI doesn't do this yet, so someone needs to change the source code to add more BFI flexibility, including 240Hz variable persistence software BFI, ala www.testufo.com/blackframes#count=4&bonusufo=1

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2023, 22:31

Or a phase-swap black frame (like the "LCD Saver" option of the upcoming Retrotink 4K). TestUFO Flicker Test uses this (www.testufo.com/flicker) to prevent image retention as well.

DesktopBFI doesn't do this yet, so someone needs to change the source code to add more BFI flexibility, including 240Hz variable persistence software BFI, ala www.testufo.com/blackframes#count=4&bonusufo=1

We really need someone to take up the task of programming a configurable driver to do this on PCs.

Chief Blur Buster wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2023, 22:31

Or a phase-swap black frame (like the "LCD Saver" option of the upcoming Retrotink 4K). TestUFO Flicker Test uses this (www.testufo.com/flicker) to prevent image retention as well.

DesktopBFI doesn't do this yet, so someone needs to change the source code to add more BFI flexibility, including 240Hz variable persistence software BFI, ala www.testufo.com/blackframes#count=4&bonusufo=1

This is kind of a weird thought, but would it theoretically be possible to have a blur reduction post processing effect that could insert black (or dark) in specific locations in a frame, while boosting brightness in those areas in the next frame to compensate? If all the AI-powered wizardry behind DLSS 3.5 were also attempting to reduce motion blur, it seems like there could be a ton of potential there.

The reasoning behind this would be improving clarity of motion where needed, while also minimizing the impact on the brightness and contrast of a scene. If you look around online you'll find a relatively tiny percentage of people using BFI or strobing because of the huge impact on brightness and color quality. Imagine full brightness "HDR" effects of sunlight or bright lamps in a game on an OLED monitor, while parts of the scene that could benefit from motion blur reduction are effectively being strobed + lightboosted to improve motion clarity while minimizing the impact on color\contrast.

A driver or game-level setting to choose the level of blur reduction could be implemented... for example:
*Whole scene blur reduction (maybe with a slider for strength, like the persistence slider in the Strobe Utility) with effectively zero performance impact, but with a larger impact on overall scene quality\brightness.
*Game-specific blur reduction for pre-programmed things like objects\characters\vehicles\etc. to save some performance while having minimal impact on the overall brightness of a scene.
*Auto detecting pixels with the most contrast or most movement across a number of frames... probably more compute-expensive without as much of a benefit, though could give good quality.
*HDR based (or just overall scene-brightness based) blur reduction, where the less brightly lit areas can actually be dimmed with varying levels of black frames rather than just darkening pixels... possibly a good balance between performance and quality.

I'm inclined to think this would be a significant undertaking for the programmers involved, but the pace at which things like DLSS, FSR and XESS are improving in quality is kind of staggering, so I would not say that this is out of reach. Obviously it couldn't work perfectly in absolutely all situations... like if the object is as bright as the sun but has sharp details around it that would benefit from blur reduction, it would either be blurry or darker than intended no matter what. But then, there are shortcomings and worst-case-scenarios with most other rendering technologies.

I think the HDR\brightness based dynamic BFI method I mentioned above has the most potential with the least insane amount of game-specific programming\learning required.

This would mostly benefit OLED, but could be somewhat beneficial to high Hz LCDs as well.

Any thoughts on this? It just popped into my head after thinking about how insanely complex (and almost unbelievably fast) the current post processing techniques are. To me, this seems a lot less complicated than generating actual frames without much latency, but I'm definitely not qualified to make such generalizations.

Ozzuneoj wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2023, 00:35

This would mostly benefit OLED, but could be somewhat beneficial to high Hz LCDs as well.

Any thoughts on this? It just popped into my head after thinking about how insanely complex (and almost unbelievably fast) the current post processing techniques are. To me, this seems a lot less complicated than generating actual frames without much latency, but I'm definitely not qualified to make such generalizations.

Bro, OLED displays do not have motion blur, it is minimal there. gtgoled = 0.03ms. This is faster than any existing panels.

F1zus wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2023, 18:03

Ozzuneoj wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2023, 00:35

This would mostly benefit OLED, but could be somewhat beneficial to high Hz LCDs as well.

Any thoughts on this? It just popped into my head after thinking about how insanely complex (and almost unbelievably fast) the current post processing techniques are. To me, this seems a lot less complicated than generating actual frames without much latency, but I'm definitely not qualified to make such generalizations.

Bro, OLED displays do not have motion blur, it is minimal there. gtgoled = 0.03ms. This is faster than any existing panels.

Sorry, but I think you need to look more at the purpose of this website. If OLED didn't need blur reduction (which is needed because of our EYES, not because of the type of display), there would be no reason for Blur Busters to exist anymore. We'd all just be waiting for OLED to get cheaper.

https://blurbusters.com/faq/oled-motion-blur/

That is a very old article, but the information still applies to the absolute latest OLED panels. Eye tracking motion blur created by watching a sample-and-hold display (OLED, LCD, etc.) simulate motion is the entire reason why BFI is implemented on OLED panels by manufacturers (like LG's OLED Motion Pro).

To quote from the page above:

Solution to Motion Blur

The only way to reduce motion blur caused by sample-and-hold, is to shorten the amount of time a frame is displayed for. This is accomplished by using extra refreshes (higher Hz) or via black periods between refreshes (flicker).

Also, just look at the OLED section of the forums... what do you think these conversations are about?

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=11719

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=12342

Ozzuneoj wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2023, 00:35

This is kind of a weird thought, but would it theoretically be possible to have a blur reduction post processing effect that could insert black (or dark) in specific locations in a frame, while boosting brightness in those areas in the next frame to compensate? If all the AI-powered wizardry behind DLSS 3.5 were also attempting to reduce motion blur, it seems like there could be a ton of potential there.

Non-sequential refresh creates artifacts, sadly.

Whether interlace artifacts, tearing artifacts, contouring artifacts, or other kinds of artifacts by pixels being refreshed at different times than others. There's a few TestUFO motion tests to demonstrate the problem of artifacts caused by refreshing different pixels at different times, including www.testufo.com/interlace and www.testufo.com/stutter#tearing

A good compromise is variable-persistence where brighter pixels takes longer to decay (like CRT phosphor) but that requires subrefresh control. If done digitally, we need many digital refresh cycles (e.g. 8+) per refresh cycle. e.g. 60Hz software-based CRT simulation on a 480Hz display. For most, doing 480fps at 480Hz is best, but if you're trying to give retro frame rates (e.g. 60fps 60Hz) good treatment, brute refresh rate helps a lot, in being able to do fine-granularity simulations like those you described to a certain extent, but large ratios of input:output Hz is required, such as 8:1 or 16:1 or 32:1 with some very good algorithms, to avoid artifacts.

Also, different GtG speeds for different colors, can cause other kinds of artifacts (weird ghosting effects)

Software based CRT electron beam simulators are being incubated within Blur Busters, but it may not be until 480Hz+ OLEDs for them to look decent enough;