Zero motion blur, amazing!!!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Spinelli, Feb 18, 2013.

  1. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    Level 30?!?!? W-T-#! lol. Black magic I tell you!

    My only reason for wanting a new monitor is for the wizardry of light boost and the 120hz is just a bonus. :p

    I really can't wait for it to arrive to experience it for myself....feel like a kid on Christmas eve.
     
  2. smithaz

    smithaz Registered

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    1
    What is Ctrl+T
     
  3. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    Nvidia default hot key to disable/enable 3d on the fly. It's at the driver/nvidia control panel level so not game specific but universal.
     
  4. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    32
    Level 8 at 144 hz, but level 30 with lightboost LOLOL!!!! HOLY!!!

    CRT lovers, or any gamers im general, believe the amazing hype!!! You can finally move on from your CRTs.

    Of course CRTs still dominate LCDs in terms of pure colour accuracy, but I'm pretty sure 98% of gamers have perfect colour accuracy relatively low on their requirements list relative to motion clarity, input lag, screen size, resolution, weight, entire monitor size etc

    . The fact that I even helped just 1 person is great! :)

    I recommend you read some of the links I posted, some of the monitors/driver versions require a bit more work to get running properly.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2013
  5. Novis

    Novis Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    4
    Yeah, you seem pretty convinced.

    Perfect CRTs? Is your view that flickering CRTs are perfect???

    CRT started off with slow phosphors and LCD panels pretty much follows the development CRT went through. Even if last generations of CRT had great response times it wasn't impossible to get motion blur on them. It just depended on whether the media viewed was created with motion blur or not.

    That leads us to the next point. For almost 100 years movie makers have known that adding motion blur to movies gives better and more fluid visual experience. Now you are saying they have been wrong all the time. Interesting...

    Sure, excessive trailing and ghosting is not a good thing but that is far from being motion blur. Having perfect pixel response somewhere around half the refresh time would more or less give you frame interpolation and double the effective frame rate. Doubling the frame rate is a bad thing?

    Taking one experiment that have little relevance in real world usage of a monitor and draw the conclusion that motion blur is always bad is in best case premature. Instead of believing everything you read on the net as ultimate truth and quoting articles out of context I challenge you to use your own brain for a minute and think for yourself. I could pretty easy demonstrate that if you show that scrolling text example at 1 fps you could read the text at several times the scrolling speed without any problem. Would that be better, running games at 1 fps? Definitely not! You have to translate if the result of an experiment would have any positive effect in real world use.

    Visual movie quality is always a compromise. Trading better sharpness against less motion blur may be advantageous in some few cases but surely not when you want fluid video motion. I would definitely classify racing games as the latter. The right amount of motion blur will always be best for highest visual quality.


    No, it did not convince me. A perfect motion blur would give you a better impression of fluid motion and would be more visual pleasing. Excessive motion blur that generate overlapping frames would not.

    Is correctly generated motion blur bad? No. Can you have too little motion blur? Yes.
     
  6. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    Firstly, any motion blur should come from only the game/movie, be it intentionally induced with post effects or naturally occurring due to the overly rapid motion of the scene in and not because of a display's inability to transition the pixel almost instantly.

    Secondly, movie makers are having to add motion blur to achieve better fluidity in the visual experience due to the low video frame rate standards in use. Having the images blurred can help with the transitions from one frame to another appearing more seamless with this approach when the fps is low. However, watching a video at 60fps on a perfectly motion blurless 60hz display would not have you notice any fluidity problems as the fps is high enough. An example in the movie industry of the recently released 48fps (doubled fps) for The Hobbit at certain venues that can produce it have had reviewers and audiences alike all saying the same thing, that for the first 20 minutes was a really hard time spent adjusting your eyes to the increased clarity and total lack of motion blur at 48fps without any induced motion blur post affects as well. They likened it to actually being on set, in the movie as if watching a documentary and that it seemed "too real" which destroyed the movie magic. You go to the cinema/movies for escapism and part of that escapism is due to post effects. For example, the hue and saturation of a movie like "The Hobbit" are vastly edited for that movie/hollywood experience. They add all sort of clever wizardry that I haven't got a hope of understanding but the fact remains that to give a "Hollywood" feel these post effects (including motion blur) are required. It's all kinda cool really.

    [​IMG]

    Look at the corners....added darkness around the corners all contributing to that movie feel.

    Gizmodo review has a great quote..

    You can read more about it here The Hobbit: An Unexpected Masterclass in Why 48 FPS Fails

    Which comes back full circle to the point that were talking about the gaming experience and not the movie experiences which your points are completely valid for. :p
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2013
  7. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    32
    What the hell are you talking about?? Do you even read the thread?? No one EVER, mentioned anything about motion blur from a graphics option in a video game to attempt to make things at certain times look more realistic, or purposely put into a movie or whatever. NOONE is discussing that here,or even mentioned that in any way shape or form. We are talking about the blurring/trailing/ghosting/artifacting that naturally comes from all LCDs.

    Novis are you kidding me right now? Yes strobing/flickering can be nioticed with a too low refresh rate, but what is your point? We are at 120hz with 1 ms strobes, 95% of people dont get eyestrain from that.

    Have you read the thousands and thousands of pages of threads and forums, and articles about LCD pixel response times/blurring over the, hmmm LAST 10 YEARS??? Have you researched on strobing technology? Do you know that many medical business, and other high end businesses still use CRTs due to the advantages of strobing and perfectly clear motion imaging? Did you know that they are now selling $10,000 LCDs to these same medical facilites, and that these super high end LCDs use strobing technology? If letters are scrolling across your screen at a relatively slow speed and you cant read it even at 144hz due to motion blur how in God's name is that realistic???? Grab a peice of paper with some writing on it, move it across left and right in front of you, is it blurring so bad that you cant make out the letters? Why are companies trying to get rid of lcd motion blur and now have 1ms monitors, when before they used to be horrible at like 10-20 ms grey to grey response times?

    Im guessing the motion blurring of a football being thrown across the screen, or a hockey puck on an LCD is realistic too? So all these people that buy Plasma TVs over LCD due to CRT like response time of Plasmas/no motion blur are just idiots that are having a much less realistic viewing expeirence?

    120hz, 144hz, true motion this, flow motion that, these are NOT to make the picture clearer especially during fast movement???? Are you high??

    Are you kidding me that you are arguing that the blur induced by lcd slow pixel response/refresh times is a realistic thing? Are you on crack? What is your problem? You just come to argue with me everytime I mention anything about monitors. I suggest you do your research, your clearly just trolling if you are arguing that one of the biggest fundamental problems of any LCD is actually supposed to be there and a good thing. You're acting straight up retarded now, thats enough!! Go read a book and stop trolling like an idiot.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2013
  8. Satangoss

    Satangoss Registered

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    7
    My old CRT was ugly, small, heavy and uneasy.. but damn, ZERO ghosting on the screen at all... I remember when I bought my first LCD, my first reaction was consider throw it through the window with its awful ghosting... even being a 2 ms LCD Monitor.

    I hope this new technology effectively rid this effect away...
     
  9. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    32
    Check all the links I posted, its amazing, the results that even hardcore CRT lovers are getting is amazing, absolutely destroys even regular non-strobed 144hz lcds.

    KeiKei from this forum has tested it out with RFactor 2 (as I mentioned in my Original post). He agrees it is amazing and much better than even regular non-strobed 144hz mode. Watch the text scrolling video too :).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2013
  10. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
    There's zero motion blur in nature so that's what I want from my monitor when driving racing sim. Nothing else is needed to be said about the issue here. :)
     
  11. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
  12. Golanv

    Golanv Registered

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,041
    Likes Received:
    9
    Its like watching tv evangelists that are really really good, or the best infomercial in the world.
    I want one now. :( ...or three
     
  13. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    "They can be....for a low price of just $399.99 each and if you tell all your friends you bought them from meeeeeeeeeee! :D
     
  14. Novis

    Novis Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    4
    I think I have to disagree with you here. From my own frame rate experiments comparing CRT and LCD at 60 Hz, on the CRT it is possible to detect more clearly each frame of an animation. The only reason for that is the slower response time on a LCD creating motion blur. That was the only conclusion I could draw explaining the superior video smoothness of the LCD.

    I think there is not only my own experiment but other programs that can show that motion blur is possible to detect at 60 Hz/fps. Several games have motion blur as option. However, you could easily argue that the games exaggerate the blur effects to be performance effective.

    I think you lost me somewhere half around that circle. I have some problems to interpret your post and understand what you mean. Could you please just explain why there would be a difference in video smoothness experience between movies and games?
     
  15. Novis

    Novis Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    4
    The title says zero motion blur. Is there a difference between motion blur created from media or a LCD panel? Not that much. Can more motion blur be better if you have none to start with? Yes.

    Yes. LCD technology have developed during those 10 years. I think you know that.

    Why do you turn so defensive? All the name calling. Lol.

    My point is that reasonable amount of motion blur is not bad when playing games.
     
  16. Novis

    Novis Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    4
    Not much in the human eye anyway. However, in the eye there is no refresh rate or frame rate either. That's the whole point why motion blur is used to help fool the brain to create fluid motion from a sequence of individual images.
     
  17. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    Though you are right in saying the eye has no refresh rate for sending visual data to the brain, there is a computational point for the brain where if the frame-rate if images being shown to you is below this cognitive bandwidth you will be able to see an unsmooth like quality to the video as if it's flickering through the frames like a slideshow and the lower the fps the more severe this effect becomes until you seeing something that is literally just a slideshow and then eventually down to 0fps where your just staring at a picture.

    If the framerate is below this cognitive bandwidth point then artificial motion blur can certainly help you to not notice this effect as transitions between frames are blended together; sort of same way that Anti-Aliasing blends the pixelised edges to make the transition from pixel-to-adjacent-pixel (akin to frame-to-adjacent-frame) appear smoother. But like the fps limit for no longer needing this effect, when the pixel density of the monitor surpasses a certain point for a specific viewing distance, you won't be able to see the transitions from pixel-to-pixels and so aliasing is far less (if not completely) unnoticeable to you.

    If you had low fps video and absolutely zero pixel response time on the display then you will not see a very smooth video when something is in motion because the individual slides are being presented for too long. If you have a high enough fps that is on par with or greater than your "visual cognitive bandwidth" with absolutely zero pixel response time on the monitor then now you have mimicked what your brain experiences in real-life perfectly 1:1. And then the only way you'll see motion blur is if the object moves quickly enough across your vision/view.
     
  18. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    I can only say that perhaps 60fps is perhaps still a little below this cognitive bandwidth point. I do remember being able to tell between 60hz and 80hz on my old CRT back in the day so i can appreciate that you say you can detect it still at 60 on a CRT.


    I think games exaggerate motion blur (when available) not to make the video feel smoother (though that could cetainly help if the fps was constantly very low and the motion blur employed was designed to be applied to every pixel in the scene) but to emphasise the fact that fast moving objects are indeed going very fast. It's used to apply a more hollywood style finish to the product because this does not happen irl unless the objects are moving extremely quickly relative to your irl visual FOV. I hope you can understand what i'm saying, i don't think i'll have much luck putting it another way, sorry.


    Movies are by standard fixed around 23-30 fps which makes it far more easier to perceive the video playback is flickering through the frames rather than smoothly transitioning through them because the fps sends data that is less than the cognitive bandwidth potential of your brain. When the fps is higher enough which should be the case with games, you don't need nor want motion blur to making the transitions smoother because the fps is already high enough to appear smooth as when you look around in "nature".
     
  19. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
    I know what you mean and I agree that on 60 Hz it probably is better to have some blur. But you should see 120 Hz with your own eyes. There's no need for motion blur at these refresh rates anymore so less blur is actually better. In real life you can choose to look at some fast moving object and it looks sharp. If you have motion blur on monitor then that choice is simply unavailable. I think that's what Spinelli is talking about.
     
  20. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    36
    again +1

    Always so concise. ;)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2013

Share This Page