• calabast@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      3 months ago

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

    • Ekky@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

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

      • nimpnin@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months 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.

    • Caveman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months 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

    • Venator@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months 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 🤔😅