Zero motion blur, amazing!!!

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

  1. mdrejhon

    mdrejhon Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yep, very similar. It is extremely faint and looks similar to the faint sharp edges during 3D crosstalk. I have a similar effect on the VG278H too. Still allows an ASUS VG728HE to have more than 80% less motion blur, as I've written earlier from PixPerAn tests. Many, many times fainter trails than without LightBoost. I don't see any trailing effect at all on my BENQ XL2411T though.

    If that's all it is, I'd say don't bother switching from VG278HE to VG278H, especially if there's no purple tint in the afterimage like someone got.
     
  2. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    35
    hmmm....well my "E" version cost me £380. I found a "non E" version for £425 (an additional 11% cost). Hmmm....the plus is that i do get the 3D glasses and emitter too which means i won't need the emulator (the cause of the slow down problem atm but not exactly un-work-aroundable. But then, what of the fact that i'm buying a year old (despite brand new) monitor. Is the H really exactly the same in terms of colour, brightness, etc vs the HE apart from less visible ghosting with pink tone to it? mdrejhon, you mentioned that someone who had both said the HE was noticable worse right? Which would incline him/her to stick with their H version i assume. But then i guess how credible/reliable is this observation and how many people have responded the same way with the same level of severity. I would really like to get it if there is a somewhat noticable improvement to this already subtle ghosting, etc.

    edit: just found out the H only has edge backlighting where as the HE has full panel backlighting. Any visual difference to be found by this difference? Perhaps overall brightness or backlight leakage, etc? Also looking at white on my screen with lightboost is a little pink towards the top part of the display more so, even with colour corrections.

    ....on another note...

    Using lightboost in 2D feels like cheating, lol. I'm being serious, it has such a genuine advantage be it racing, flying, first-person shooters (just look at my scoreboard pic on page 5).

    I run around corners in bf3 and i can instantly tell if someone is friendly or enemy in all the chaos and you see the enemy have a delayed reaction to realising your their enemy, lol, it's hilarious to see and experience....then double tab in the chest before they can even act on their delayed realisation.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2013
  3. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Hahaha wow, more amazing results DrR1pper. I really hope we get more people sharing their results, as I (and im sure almost all of us, even the ones who havent experienced it yet) have been waiting MANY years for this.

    I always wondered why I could "focus" and be more in the zone on plasmas than on lcds, never realized it was due to the huge technological advantage that plasma has over LCD/LED regarding motion clarity, pixel response time, etc etc. No wonder all the geeky hardcore movie nuts that want to watch movies in their purest, "as originally intended to be seen" form get plasmas (also due to black levels advantages and others).

    Now, with a 23-27" lightboost monitor (and even more so on a super low input lag one), we are at a total advantage over any other traditional "sample & hold" aka non-stroboscopic LCD/LED/Plasma/OLED monitor, but really it's not that we have gained an advantage, it's more like, we are now playing the game "normally" as it's supposed to be seen and played, whereas others are dis-advantaging themselves by the limitations of non-stroboscopic (aka lightboost) monitors.
     
  4. Thomas

    Thomas Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thx for the answers, Mark. helped a lot.

    But i still have another question. How does this infect the input lag? i have an lg-tv with an option called "True Motion". Every manufacture has its own name for it, eg Panasonic calls it "intelligent frame creation". This should make the image a lot smoother.

    This seems to be nearly the same technic lightboost is using...am i right? Im asking because, when i play on my lg-tv, there's a massive inputlag. Will there also be this kind of input lag with the method described in this thread?

    thx in advance.
     
  5. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
    Maybe you could take similar photo...

    View attachment 6374

    ...so we could compare the effect between HE and E. Tempo was 8 and monitor 120 Hz, Contrast 90% and LightBoost full. Took the image with iPhone4 by moving it across the screen at same speed with the scrolling text. :)
     
  6. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    You definitely don't want to use that, all those tvs with fake 120 hz, 240 hz, 600 hz, true motion this, real motion that, etc are using interpolation, rather than a true stroboscopic method. Interpolation adds input lag, you definitely don't want to use that. I believe there is a Sony tv that has the ability to do true strobing but it's a high end model I think I read, also, strobing at only 60hz (yes, most, if not all these tvs are only true 60hz, despite all the marketing gimmick crap) will be pretty noticeable, on top of that the input lag will be bad on that television (as it is on 90-95 % of televisions).
     
  7. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
    Yep it definately messes colors when switching between LightBoost on and off. I've created separate color profiles for those two but have to change it manually from Windows Color Management (Set as Default Profile) every time mode is changed. Would be nice to have some app or even total automation for changing color profiles with LightBoost. Also would be nice to have some app which would make sure LightBoost is on when appropriate refresh rate is applied - now display settings kind of forget the LightBoost setting every now and then - probably if computer is not used for a while and power saving shuts down the monitor but I'm not sure if it's the reason.

    If you want to try my color profiles then download:

    View attachment 6378

    ...and extract to C:\Windows\System32\spool\drivers\color, launch Color Management, add both profiles with "Add..." button, select profile for current display mode and press button "Set As Default Profile".
     
  8. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
  9. Novis

    Novis Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    251
    Likes Received:
    4
    Mdrejhon, of all the stuff you posted these for me are the most interesting:

    I know about the stuff that the eye need to refocus, but it still doesn't make sense to me. Most "evidence" is provided with cams capture the video image. Images shouldn't be blury then.

    It is easy to see in the high-speed capture that the transition from white-to-black takes about 30% of the screen refresh time. Black-to-white is even worse and takes about one full refresh.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD5gjAs1A2s

    Not much of that transition is visible at all with LightBoost. Giving all credit to the shorter frame time for less blur seems a bit generous.

    Does it? It is totally the other way around for me. Trying to understand if we have drawn different conclusions or if your definition of fluid differ from mine. More fluid as in smoother? The one with more blur is more smooth for me. More fluid as in retaining a better sense of motion? I'm not sure what the difference is, or even when one would be better than the other. More fluid as in less blur? Ok, sure.
     
  10. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    35
    KeiKei, here are my settings for my HE.


    OSD menu:

    - Brightness: 90
    - Contrast: 84
    - R:98, G:93, B:84
    - Smart View: OFF
    - TraceFree = full


    whilst in LB:

    - Contrast: 90
    - LB lighting: 100


    I also made corrections in Nvidia control panel > Adjust desktop color settings to:

    - Gamma: 1.43
    - Digital vibrance: 65%


    These corrections give me what i observed to be the perfect contrast ratio so i can still just see the darkest greys on absolute black in LB mode, on default the grey's below #5 appear completely black with the background (contrast test image below). The OSD settings are adjusted to correct back the corrections made in the nvidia control panel for optimal LB mode contrast and colour, so that i don't need to keep changing them back each time i exit LB mode.

    I have ordered a VG278H, should arrive next week Tuesday at the latest. Will be able to make
    side-by-side comparisons. Will keep you in the loop when it arrives.


    [​IMG]
     
  11. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
    Nice! Very interested to hear your opinions. HE should be better on dark shades and E on LightBoost.

    Did you try regular 144 Hz? Find any differences in simracing?
     
  12. DrR1pper

    DrR1pper Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2012
    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    35
    No, not tried 144 since the tweak and that was only for a few mins in bf3 when I first received the monitor so I can't remember what it was like tbh. But didn't you mention it was not too dissimilar to 120?

    Why do you say the HE should have better dark shades? Is that because of the edge backlighting? This will be interesting indeed. I will take pics with a 1/120th of a second camera of both so you can see the difference next week. Looks like it won't arrive till Wednesday/Thursday now.

    I've already tried the camera on this he at 20 and 30 without needing to chase the letters and it shows exactly what you got with you iPhone. I'll post them with the H ones when it arrives.

    Thinking about it...I might actually be the first person to pictorally compare the difference under the same roof for the Internet.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2013
  13. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
    Can't distinguish the motion clarity between 120 and 144 Hz regular but at 144 Hz the input lag is lower (almost feels as low as 120 Hz LightBoosted). Of course it requires 24 more frames from game engine but on the other hand doesn't have the sharp ghosting. So would be nice to hear how you feel about those two (144 Hz regular and 120 Hz LB) in simracing where motion blur isn't so distracting.

    About the backlight:

    http://reviews.cnet.com/2795-6482_7-399.html

    I was automatically assuming the H version doesn't use local backlighting because of the edge backlighting but that was more of a guess. So I might be wrong here about saying HE should have better dark shades.

    Looking forward for those comparison pictures between H and HE!
     
  14. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Post #70 , sim-racing experience seems very positive. I am going to bring my GT Legends Disk to my friends house next time I go, so I can try it on his Lightboost monitor. I dont know when that will be though.
     
  15. mdrejhon

    mdrejhon Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    We're talking about video games, not about video, although motion blur inside the video can contribute to the blurry feel.

    We're talking about motion blur limitations enforced by the sample-and-hold effect of common LCD's, and eye tracking (pixel persistence on modern TN LCD's is only a tiny fraction of a length of a refresh now). Eye-tracking-based motion blur is a bigger cause of motion blur on modern TN LCD's than pixel persistence itself. They are two very separate things, as has been soundly and widely proven in many different papers over the last ten years, that talk about the LCD sample-and-hold effect. It is widely scientifically known that motion blur issue caused by pixel persistence is a separate problem from motion blur issue caused by eye tracking (sample-and-hold issue). Unfortunately, even a 0ms instant-response screen (one that does not flicker), would have perceived motion blur because of the sample-and-hold effect, only solvable by shortening the frame display length -- either via higher Hz or via strobing each frame for a shorter time period, ala CRT.

    1. See Scientific references
    2. See the Google Search for academic papers; "eye tracking LCD motion blur site:edu"

    Do not forget high speed video can capture the leading/trailing edges of strobes, so video exaggerates the length of a strobe. A 2.4ms strobe can mathematically be captured spread over 4 frames. (0.2ms of first frame, 1ms of second frame, 1ms of third frame, and 0.2ms of fourth frame). A more accurate measurement of strobe length is a photodiode connected to an oscilloscope, which I have actually done.

    (1) It's very clear in PixPerAn tests and there are a huge number of testimonials.
    (2) It's already scientifically proven that perceived motion blur is proportional to the length of the visible frame (for a pure impulse-driven display, for fps=Hz motion, and when excluding motion blur within the source such inside the video).

    That's why CRT 60fps@60Hz has less motion blur than LCD 120fps@120Hz; the length of the time a pixel is displayed for -- thanks to phosphor decay on a CRT (impulse driven) versus the sample-and-hold nature of the LCD. Your eyes are always tracking moving objects on a screen. An LCD displays a frame visibly for the whole period of a refresh. Your eyes are always moving while tracking moving objects on screen, and your eyes are in a different position at the end of a refresh than the beginning of a refresh. The discontinuity between the analog eye tracking motion and the stepped frames, cause the motion blur. (there's no method of displaying moving images without the artificial invented concept of frame rate; a series of static images). Stroboscopically shortening the length of a frame being displayed.

    This is already proven by pursuit camera measurement systems (TV manufacturers buy these to measure eye-tracking-based motion blur on displays). Pursuit cameras tracking objects on ANY display, including LCD's, simulating a rotating eyeball. Motion blur measured by these methods correspond to human perceived motion blur (proof of direct relationship).

    References on pursuit cameras used to measure motion blur on LCD's.
    http://www.westardisplaytechnologies.com/products/motion-blur-measurement-kit-motionmaster/ (example commercially available kit)
    http://oa.upm.es/4239/1/INVE_MEM_2008_59190.pdf (term "pursuit camera method" in section 2)
    http://www.sidmembers.org/idonline/article.cfm?year=2007&issue=01&file=art7 ("smooth-pursuit camera system")
    http://research.nokia.com/files/bergquist_johan_seminar_sidtw_071219.pdf (slide 43, "linearly moving" camera)

    I'm talking about having fast pans that are equally as sharp as stationary images; like real life. Both fluid and smooth simultaneously, all motion blur completely gone; much like looking at a moving advertisement on the side of a bus, or looking at road signs scrolling past -- the display is no longer giving you unavoidable motion blur. With LightBoost (just like CRT), the display ceases to be the motion blur limiting factor. Any further motion blur is now due to human eye tracking limitation (the human eye adds motion blur naturally, just like in real life).

    Yes, it is true you need judder control (120fps@120Hz) in order to gain maximum benefit. Without motion blur limitations caused by the display's sample-and-hold nature (motion blur can be beneficial for hiding minor stutters), the demands for good fps=Hz is raised, to get the full "CRT style" smooth motion effect.

    Some people like added motion blur (either via GPU or via display's own sample-and-hold limitations), which is fine. But not everyone. Some of us want moving images to be as clear as in real life; and any additional motion blur added naturally by our own human eyes; without any further blur thrown our way by an unavoidable display limitation.

    I pay $150 per year for a membership to scientific papers on Society for Information Display (sid.org), that also include papers that talks about motion blur. Some publicly available, and some subscription-only. I would be happy to track hundreds of additional scientific/academic papers that support what I'm trying to say.

    Example of a VERY GOOD paper is also:
    J. Someya, “Correlation between perceived motion blur and MPRT measurement,” in SID’05 Digest, pp. 1018–1021, 2005. (MPRT = Motion Picture Response Time) (Accessible here with SID.org membership)

    This is a paper that discusses the relationship between perceived motion blur and the response time measurements (which also takes into account of impulse-driven). This paper is directly applicable to the motion blur elimination provided by LightBoost. For example, the LightBoost, reconfigured to 10%, results in an actual MPRT measurement of 1.4 milliseconds on a LightBoost display; which is more than 10 times clearer than a sample-and-hold display running at 60 Hz of 16.7ms.

    The 16.7ms value is the length of a 1/60sec refresh. On a 60 Hz LCD with pixel response time faster than the length of a refresh -- such non-flickering LCD's have an MPRT measurements of 16.7ms, no matter how fast the pixels transition (even 1ms and 2ms LCD's have an MPRT of 16.7ms during non-strobed full-brightness 60 Hz mode). The video I created was of a different LightBoost configuration, set to 100% and has an MPRT of 2.4ms. This was before I discovered reducing LightBoost to 10%, resulted in an MPRT value of about 1.4ms -- more than 10 times shorter than a typical 60 Hz LCD, with a "blur trail" more than 10 times shorter in PixPerAn. (Even the PixPerAn motion test car icon text "I NEED MORE SOCKS" text is perfectly visible at Tempo 8 -- I can count the jagged pixel edges even as the graphics races half a screen width per second). This is, easily, a true confirmation of known information in scientific papers of the correlation between MPRT and perceived motion blur. The visual tests in PixPerAn showed 10x clearer -- 10x shorter motion blur at leading/trailing edges -- and directly corresponding to objectively-measured MPRT's (double confirmation both visually and oscillscope measured).

    Also, CRT phosphor decay on a common mediuim-persistence CRT is approximately 1 to 2 milliseconds. See this high speed video comparision of CRT versus LCD. This compares very well with the length of the LightBoost strobes (as measured from an oscillscope).

    These are actual measured values, running on the same LightBoost displays (I own both a BENQ XL2411T and an ASUS VG278H) -- PixPerAn Tests on BENQ XL2411T and ASUS VG278H

    baseline - 60 Hz mode (16.7ms frame samples)
    50% less motion blur (2x clearer) - 120 Hz mode (8.33ms frame samples)
    60% less motion blur (2.4x clearer) - 144 Hz mode (6.94ms frame samples)
    85% less motion blur (7x clearer) - 120 Hz mode with LightBoost set at 100% (2.4ms frame strobe flashes)
    92% less motion blur (12x clearer) - 120 Hz mode with LightBoost set at 10% (1.4ms frame strobe flashes)

    The last two results are double-confirmed (objectively and subjectively): Confirmed by oscilloscope, and confirmed by PixPerAn test motion pattern.

    Yes, yes, motion blur is sometimes good. But sometimes there are moments we don't want motion blur, and thus, we don't want the display to be the limiting factor. LightBoost finally makes
    "perfect clear motion" possible in LCD's (motion blur limitations of display now below human perceptible thresholds during video games running at fps=Hz). This gives a reaction time advantage for competitive FPS gameplay, as you notice enemies faster without needing to slow down moving or stop moving. (e.g. high speed low helicoptor passes in Battlefield 3, or playing fast characters such as Scout in Team Fortress 2, or playing Quake Live where you do lots of fast 180 degree flicks). So there is a benefit to completely eliminating motion blur on LCD, which LightBoost finally does (and brings the CRT effect) for those who are still sensitive to motion blur (especially CRT die-hards).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 25, 2013
  16. mdrejhon

    mdrejhon Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    The lack of motion blur actually outweighs the very minor increased input lag of enabling a strobe backlight. Even professional/competition video gamers agree that there's some kind of balance. One example, is the Samsung strobe backlight has an input lag problem. For example, Matt wrote:
    There are other testimonials I've read already, including competition/pro gamers. Reducing human brain lag (faster reaction time caused by lack of blur) very often outweigh the increased input lag of LightBoost, in fast paced games. The bottom line is who shoots first or more accurately, and reducing motion blur improves both accuracy and reaction time. That said, the Samsung is a very bad example, as the BENQ LightBoost adds no noticeable lag for me.
     
  17. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Also, there has been some testing done by either KeiKei or DrR1pper from this forum, and in their own tests they measured the lightboost enabled monitor to give less of total input lag vs having the lightboost disabled.

    I point to the link on the first page, the part where it says "with hard data to prove it".

    I can't wait to try my friends monitor again this Friday (benq). I'm so pumped to go there just to play games since he has a lightboost monitor, it's kind of sad really haha, but the tech really works that amazingly. Once you try it, then going back to regular non-lightboost just feels so pre-historic, the screen feels like it's smeared with Vaseline and smudge compred to lightboost.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 25, 2013
  18. mdrejhon

    mdrejhon Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's subjective tests, including human brain lag (faster reaction time thanks to lack of motion blur during fast action games).

    The display internal input lag, from video input to displayed pixel, is still higher with LightBoost. It's mathematically impossible to have less input lag with a strobe backlight than without, because a motion optimized strobe backlight, by definition, waits for the pixel persistence to complete (in total darkness) and the backlight is strobed after the pixel transition is complete. My guesstimate is that there's less than one frame of added input lag.

    However, the faster human reaction time (from lack of blur during high speed motion; easier to avoid dangerous obstacles, easier to aim, identify enemies sooner, etc.) far outweighs this tiny/minor added input lag.
     
  19. Spinelli

    Spinelli Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    31
    Yup, makes complete sense. I guess it's one of those cases (like u said due to human brain and reaction time) that something that may technically be inferior on paper, is actually the superior method when other factors are considered and how all that combines to affect the end-user.
     
  20. KeiKei

    KeiKei Registered

    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Messages:
    806
    Likes Received:
    44
    Unless monitor is doing some post processing without LightBoost which would explain lower input lag. Can't think of anything else to explain those results from my input lag measurements on Asus VG278HE (where LightBoost actually made input lag shorter).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 26, 2013

Share This Page