this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
187 points (99.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35831 readers
992 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 44 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

Basically, yes. Our eyes capture the light that goes into them at 24 frames per second (please correct me if I goofed on that) and the image is upside down.

Our brains turn those images upright, and it also fills in the blanks. The brain basically guesses what's going on between the frames. It's highly adapt at pattern recognition and estimation.

My favorite example of this is our nose. Look at you nose. You can look down and see it a little, and you can close one eye and see more of it. It's right there in the bottom center of our view, but you don't see it at all everyday.

That's because it's always there, and your brain filters it out. The pattern of our nose being there doesn't change, so your brain just ignores it unless you want to intentionally see it. You can extrapolate that to everything else. Most things the brain expects to see, and does see through our eyes, is kind of ignored. It's there, but it's not as important as say, anything that's moving.

Also, and this is fun to think about, we don't even see everything. The color spectrum is far wider than what our eyes can recognize. There are animals, sea life and insects that can see much much more than we can.

But to answer more directly, you are right, the brain does crazy heavy lifting for all of our senses, not just sight. Our reality is confined to what our bodies can decifer from the world through our five senses.

[–] calabast@lemm.ee 64 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

We definitely are seeing things faster than 24 Hz, or we wouldn't be able to tell a difference in refresh rates above that.

Edit: I don't think we have a digital, on-off refresh rate of our vision, so fps doesn't exactly apply. Our brain does turn the ongoing stream of sensory data from our eyes into our vision "video", but compared to digital screen refresh rates, we can definitely tell a difference between 24 and say 60 fps.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 29 points 1 month ago

Yeah it's not like frames from a projector. It's a stream. But the brain skips parts that haven't changed.

[–] Steve@communick.news 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

People looking at a strobing light, start to see it as just "on" (not blinking anymore) at almost exactly 60Hz.
In double blind tests, pro gamers can't reliably tell 90fps from 120.
There is however, an unconscious improvement to reaction time, all the way up to 240fps. Maybe faster.

[–] RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 month ago

It seems to be more complicated than that

However, when the modulated light source contains a spatial high frequency edge, all viewers saw flicker artifacts over 200 Hz and several viewers reported visibility of flicker artifacts at over 800 Hz. For the median viewer, flicker artifacts disappear only over 500 Hz, many times the commonly reported flicker fusion rate.

[–] seaQueue@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

The real benefit of super high refresh rates is the decrease in latency for input. At lower rates the lag between input and the next frame is extremely apparent, above about ~144hz it's much less noticable.

The other side effect of running at high fps is that when heavy processing occurs and there are frame time lags they're much less noticable because the minimum fps is still very high. I usually tell people not to pay attention to the maximum fps rather look at the average and min.

[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I think having higher frame rates isn't necessarily about whether our eyes can perceive the frame or not. As another commenter pointed out there's latency benefits, but also, the frame rate affects how things smear and ghost as you move them around quickly. I don't just mean in gaming. Actually, it's more obvious when you're just reading an article or writing something in Word. If you scroll quickly, the words blur and jitter more at low frame rates, and this is absolutely something you can notice. You might not be able to tell the frametime, but you can notice that a word is here one moment and next thing you know, it teleported 1 cm off

[–] ekky@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I think i read that fighter pilots need to be able to identify a plane in one frame at 300 fps, and that the theoretical limit of the eye is 1000+ fps.

Though, whether the brain can manage to process the data at 1000+ fps is questionable.

[–] Fester@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I’m using part of this comment to inform my monitor purchases for the rest of my life.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

New 1,200 Hz displays? Well, it did say 1,000-plus...

[–] nimpnin@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

Both of these claims are kinda misguided. The brain is able to detect very short flashes of light (say, 1 thousandth of a second), and other major changes in light perception. Especially an increase in light will be registered near instantly. However, since it doesn't have a set frame rate, more minor changes in the light perception (say, 100 fps) are not going to be registered. And the brain does try to actively correct discontinuities, that's why even 12 fps animation feels like movement, although a bit choppy.

[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You're right that is a continuous process, so there's no frame rate as such. 24 fps is just the lowest framerate that doesn't look "framey" in videos, but can go as low as 12 and still reliably perceive it as movement, which is why most stop motion films are done at 12fps.

The amount of motion blur we see on fast moving objects is similar to a 24fps camera with a normal shutter angle setting, but we don't perceive any blur when we turn our heads or move our eyes like a camera at that fps does.

There's also our reaction time, which can vary a lot depending on a plethora of factors, but averages around 250ms, which is similar to 4fps 😅... Or maybe since it's a continuous process it's more like ♾️fps but with a 250ms delay 🤔😅

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I would believe it if someone told me that an individual rod or cone in the eye was 24fps but they're most likely not synched up

[–] HatchetHaro@lemmy.blahaj.zone 36 points 1 month ago

the 24 fps thing is one hella myth. our cones and rods send a continuous stream of information, which is blended with past-received information in our perception to remove stuff like the movement from darting your eyes around.

[–] PrimeErective@startrek.website 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

24fps vision is a lie told by Hollywood so they can save on film

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's the lowest fps they can go without it being horrid, really.

[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 6 points 1 month ago

It is horrid. I get nauseous whenever a low framerate video has any significant motion

[–] leds@feddit.dk 8 points 1 month ago

Also, your eyes dart around and you only see a little patch. You blink. Your brain makes up a nice stable image of the world, mostly consisting of things that your brain think should be there.

[–] Reyali@lemm.ee 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If you want a fun experiment of all the things we see but don’t actually process, I recommend the game series I’m On Observation Duty. You flip through a series of security cameras and identify when something changed. It’s incredible when you realize the entire floor of a room changed or a giant thing went missing, and you just tuned it out because your brain never felt a need to take in that detail.

It’s sorta horror genre and I hate pretty much every other horror thing, but I love those games because they make me think about how I think.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Reyali@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

Ha, I’ve heard of that one so I caught it. I missed 3 of the passes, though!

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago

That sounds pretty interesting. Thanks

[–] FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The 24fps thing sounds wrong. That's not even a cinematic 30.