Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Hardware & Software > Software players

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 25th May 2009, 22:09   #1221  |  Link
mark0077
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,055
I have disabled the 120hz feature on my Samsung Series 9 TV. I just couldn't stand the noise and inability to properly interpolate frames. It seemed to be better at certain types of content than others which actually made the movie look more jittery than the original..... in the case of the Samsung I have to say its a bit of a gimmick. I wonder is taking things upto 600hz an extension of that gimmick. I saw a few photos taken of some of these 100 and 120hz tv's and the interpolated frames of a simple rotating triangle ended up being a blobby mushy circle type thing.

I will most certainly be leaving it off on this TV anyways, can't ever see them being very good without very powerful processors..., but would love to see some really good software interpolaters... the Trimension one looked pretty amazing when it was integrated with some old WinDVD versions.
mark0077 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th May 2009, 22:48   #1222  |  Link
honai
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Trimension in WinDVD effectively halved the vertical resolution. ;-)

By the way, what marketing doesn't tell you for these new 120/600Hz displays is that they actually do the same, i.e. they reduce screen resolution from 1920x1080 to something along 800 lines so that the DSPs can actually handle the sheer amount of data. On my Panasonic (w/ "Intelligent Frame Creation") the loss of resolution is clearly visible, that's why I turn it off except for SD TV feeds.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th May 2009, 23:27   #1223  |  Link
mark0077
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by honai View Post
Trimension in WinDVD effectively halved the vertical resolution. ;-)

By the way, what marketing doesn't tell you for these new 120/600Hz displays is that they actually do the same, i.e. they reduce screen resolution from 1920x1080 to something along 800 lines so that the DSPs can actually handle the sheer amount of data. On my Panasonic (w/ "Intelligent Frame Creation") the loss of resolution is clearly visible, that's why I turn it off except for SD TV feeds.
Oh didn't know that Well yeah for my Samsung I have put it into PC Mode @ 60hz. I cannot stand any of the "enhancements" that these TV's do (even with the 120 hz feature disabled and at 24hz) that end up ruining the image. Just hoping when OLED's become mainstream, we will see some models that justdisplay what they are being fed with no trickery, so we can use software like madVR and others to do all of the complicated stuff.
mark0077 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th May 2009, 23:30   #1224  |  Link
Mark_A_W
3 eyed CRT supporter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Or-strayl-ya
Posts: 563
But at 60hz you're getting 3:2 judder for movies.
Mark_A_W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th May 2009, 23:33   #1225  |  Link
tetsuo55
MPC-HC Project Manager
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,317
refresh rate difference are a real pain.
I too have my tv in PC60 mode.

I use my HTPC for gaming, tv shows and movies.
This mixed content uses every refresh rate ever invented,

If i use 60 i get microjudder due to the pulldown, if i use 24, 25 or 30 i still get microjudder for the other content and the desktop/games are terrible.

So 60hz with pull down judder is the best solution for now
tetsuo55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th May 2009, 23:41   #1226  |  Link
Mark_A_W
3 eyed CRT supporter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Or-strayl-ya
Posts: 563
You can use Reclock to change refresh rate automagically. (And we'll see what madshi comes up with.)
Mark_A_W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 00:32   #1227  |  Link
mark0077
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark_A_W View Post
But at 60hz you're getting 3:2 judder for movies.
Oh I know, but believe me when I say, the 3:2 judder in pc mode is far less obtrusive or noticible than the trickery that these so called top of the range LCD's are doing.

I got so used to seeing untouched unalterered images for so long from PC LCD's that I could see the difference immediately. I can hardly notice 3:2 judder, doesn't bother me in the slightest when the picture quality is so good. I am in the same boat as tetsuo but for different reasons, 60hz is pretty good for me for all 24fps content. To me 24fps is such a low frame rate anyways that this tiny bit of added judder is nothing major but I would obv rather proper untouched 24hz, unfortunately not with Samsung anyways.

Last edited by mark0077; 26th May 2009 at 00:36.
mark0077 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 06:59   #1228  |  Link
73ChargerFan
Registered User
 
73ChargerFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by tetsuo55 View Post
85 is not a default standard refresh rate, i should have been more clear:

24, 30, 50, 60. (and all their duplicates)

My CRT monitor is using 85hz too, but i don't watch any media on it.
I'd like support for 16-23 fps, so I can watch Metropolis & Charlie Chaplin films at a reasonable speed.
73ChargerFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 11:17   #1229  |  Link
Casshern
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 220
The 0.10 version is much slower on my 2600 Ati card. The last i tested was 0.3 - inbetween their were some parameters to change the shader model. Are those still in 0.10? Are their any settings to effect speed? Is the LUT faster then using the inbuild conversion math?
Casshern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 12:42   #1230  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,455
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0077 View Post
To me 24fps is such a low frame rate anyways that this tiny bit of added judder is nothing major
once your brain has gotten use to 24p, it will find it just as smooth as anything else! the visual cortex cares for smoothness, so if the frames interval is very stable, it will create the illusion of perfectly smooth motion picture. something you will NEVER get w/ 24@60

but maybe you were simply trying to reassure yourself to not toss that 60Hz-only flat screen of yours?
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 12:46   #1231  |  Link
tetsuo55
MPC-HC Project Manager
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
once your brain has gotten use to 24p, it will find it just as smooth as anything else! the visual cortex cares for smoothness, so if the frames interval is very stable, it will create the illusion of perfectly smooth motion picture. something you will NEVER get w/ 24@60

but maybe you were simply trying to reassure yourself to not toss that 60Hz-only flat screen of yours?
His panel supports native 24p(as does mine), i agree with him for not using it within the current limitations of Pc video
tetsuo55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 12:56   #1232  |  Link
mark0077
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
once your brain has gotten use to 24p, it will find it just as smooth as anything else! the visual cortex cares for smoothness, so if the frames interval is very stable, it will create the illusion of perfectly smooth motion picture. something you will NEVER get w/ 24@60

but maybe you were simply trying to reassure yourself to not toss that 60Hz-only flat screen of yours?
lol well it has all sorts of modes obviously from 24hz upto 60 and I see this "argument" in hundreds of forums (oh you must be blind not to see it, or youd never go back once youv tried 24hz). Yes I notice the judder at 60hz BUT you'd also have to be blind or have some sort of brain blur to think 24hz was anything near smooth in the first place.

To summarize what I mean when I say I don't care so much for the difference between 24hz vs 60hz, to give 24p at 24hz vs 24p at 60hz scores out of 10, with 10 being... well like looking through a pane of glass at the action :P ... (hopefully something that improves over time maybe with 48p or 60p), then I would give 24p at 24hz 5 out of ten and 24p at 60hz 4 out of ten... thats the best way I can explain things to you guys, 60hz isn't a a big deal to many when the motion in the first place is rubbish. The tiny judder at 60hz fits in just nicely with the awfully low frame rate we begin with.

I suggest some of you guys at least try the PC Mode on your displays. Some of you might be surprised at the difference in quality, no added effects or blurring or... well I can't even explain what some of my family members "top of the line" Tv's do the image to ruin it but I tell you, I definitely would settle for 60hz judder anytime i get a TV that adds too many of these effects. Its kind of a similar situation, once you have seen what images your TV can display with all of the trickery disabled in a pc-like mode, you will never go back

Last edited by mark0077; 26th May 2009 at 13:05.
mark0077 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 13:06   #1233  |  Link
yesgrey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casshern View Post
Is the LUT faster then using the inbuild conversion math?
Your card seems to be shader limited, so by using the 3DLUT you could save some shader power... try with both and see.
yesgrey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 13:20   #1234  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,455
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0077 View Post
60hz isn't a a big deal to many when the motion in the first place is rubbish. The tiny judder at 60hz fits in just nicely with the awfully low frame rate we begin with.

I suggest some of you guys at least try the PC Mode on your displays. Some of you might be surprised at the difference in quality, no added effects or blurring or... well I can't even explain what some of my family members "top of the line" Tv's do the image to ruin it but I tell you, I definitely would settle for 60hz judder anytime i get a TV that adds too many of these effects.
watching 23.976@60 makes me feel like I have a brain tumor...that makes my brain "drop" frames

I never use flat screens(I hate them tbh ) and I'm perfectly willing to believe that they apply bogus processing....but a CRT or DLP in 48Hz looks perfectly smooth to me, in the idea that the frames interval is spot-on at 41.666~ ms so it's "smooth", the frames don't hiccup...after a while, your brain will accept it as a fact! motion blur is your buddy after all : http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frame...humans_see.htm

it's been more or less demonstrated that 72fps is the sweet spot where the brain can be completely fooled.
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 13:30   #1235  |  Link
mark0077
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,055
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
watching 23.976@60 makes me feel like I have a brain tumor...that makes my brain "drop" frames

I never use flat screens(I hate them tbh ) and I'm perfectly willing to believe that they apply bogus processing....but a CRT or DLP in 48Hz looks perfectly smooth to me, in the idea that the frames interval is spot-on at 41.666~ ms so it's "smooth", the frames don't hiccup...after a while, your brain will accept it as a fact! motion blur is your buddy after all : http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frame...humans_see.htm

it's been more or less demonstrated that 72fps is the sweet spot where the brain can be completely fooled.
Yeah can't wait for that day Probably going way off topic but I wonder how OLED's will fair when they get released... Would you consider replacing your CRT or DLP with a jumbo high quality OLED. I'm just waiting for an excuse to give this TV to my bro lol
mark0077 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 13:37   #1236  |  Link
FoLLgoTT
And so it begins...
 
FoLLgoTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 64
Real 24Hz with full stroboscope effect is smooth as hell! Only the frame repetitions causes the well known motion blur in our brain. This is because out brain itself interpolates the motion between frames and the repeated image is blended with the interpolated image. With 48Hz you can clearly see always two edges/objects in moving scenes. With 72Hz you see three and so on.
Only with 24Hz stroboscope the motion is absolutely smooth. It is stunning if you see this the first time. It just opens your eyes! Suddenly your eye can follow every motion without any annoying blur! Sadly 24Hz also flickers as hell which makes watching impossible for a longer period of time.

Manufacturers are aware of this problem and build flashing back light in some LCD TV's to produce black insertion frames like CRT's do. But since the biggest difference in motion blur comes with the first frame repeat (every additional repeat doesn't amplify the motion blur much) the problem can only be solved with temporal interpolation.

On one hand I like the smoothness of interpolations like DNM on the other hand the movies are not meant to look like this. I hope there will be cinema with more than 24FPS some day, but this seems to be a very long way...

PS: I recommend to try 24Hz to everyone. Some CRT monitors or projectors can do this. For example Sony CRT projectors.

Last edited by FoLLgoTT; 26th May 2009 at 13:40.
FoLLgoTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 14:08   #1237  |  Link
tetsuo55
MPC-HC Project Manager
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
watching 23.976@60 makes me feel like I have a brain tumor...that makes my brain "drop" frames

I never use flat screens(I hate them tbh ) and I'm perfectly willing to believe that they apply bogus processing....but a CRT or DLP in 48Hz looks perfectly smooth to me, in the idea that the frames interval is spot-on at 41.666~ ms so it's "smooth", the frames don't hiccup...after a while, your brain will accept it as a fact! motion blur is your buddy after all : http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frame...humans_see.htm

it's been more or less demonstrated that 72fps is the sweet spot where the brain can be completely fooled.
Nice link, that filled some of the gaps in what i know about the eye.

It basically says that starting from +/- 500 FPS(of actual footage) the video will be recieved as reality(assuming enough pixels @ distance to viewer)
this 500 is the minimum from the perfect viewing angle, and probably a relatively large distance from a small screen
tetsuo55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 14:31   #1238  |  Link
leeperry
Kid for Today
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,455
not quite 500fps, some say 60 is enough, and 72 is definitely reality to the human brain...it would appear.

well, cinema projectors(since the Lumiere brothers invention) play 24fps@48Hz, the shutter speed is twice higher..as explained on page 12 of that (french) PDF : http://www.derriere-le-hublot.com/do...ion_zinema.pdf

I use Reclock exactly like this on my DLP projector! 24fps @ 48Hz, and I can easily follow any moving object very distinctively

some more food for thoughts, when we discussed this issue on another (private) forum :

Quote:
Our own visual image appears to be continuously updated as long as our eyes are open. We can see what it might be like to have an intermittently updated world image, by using a stroboscope at night. This is sometimes done at discotheques, and it produces some dramatic effects. A dancing person appears as a succession of frozen statuesque attitudes. Obviously, the faster we set the strobe, the more the image corresponds to normal 'continuous' vision.
Stroboscopic vision 'sampling' at the bat's cruising rate of about 10 samples per second would be nearly as good as normal 'continuous' vision for some ordinary purposes, though not for catching a ball or an insect.
Quote:
about the 'eye' seeing 60fps as max and studies memerious referred to. Recent studies have shown that when in a danger situation, so adrenaline is pumping the human brain effectively slows down time. So you can perceive more than you normally would. They done these experiements by having a display device show certain numbers every X seconds. At rest no one could make out what number was being displayed. When thrown out with a bungee cord the subjects could see the number.

The applicability of all this to us watching TV is interesting. I'd say: If you're watching a horror film, adrenaline levels are increased so maybe extra frame rate is useful. If you're watching a comedy, pointless. If you're playing a multiplayer video game and are really pumped up, maybe its useful. If you're watching your hockey team in G7 of the Stanley Cup finals and it's tripple OT, you will be massively pumped so it is useful.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%...l.pone.0001295
Quote:
60fps is the point where science has shown that the brain stops increasing in reaction to stimuli. You can watch 100fps, but your brain will essentially do a pulldown to 60fps on you. They proved this by measuring activity in the brain while people watched different movies. By varying genres, moods, etc they were able to account for regular activity that wasn't effected by the stimuli (think of it as your brains background noise). Then they accounted for the waves that were effected by the stimuli. After different gambits of tests they found that by increasing the framerate of the video that people had a distinct psychological reaction that allowed them to process the information. They noticed that after 60fps however, that the change was diminished and almost non-existant. Thus, it was discovered, through several other retests and peer reviews that it was determined that we see the world at 60fps. This is for 99.9% of the population, there will of course be the small anomalies that can see better, but they are VERY rare. Gamers will swear they can see at 100fps+, but until one of them shows any scientific evidence they are just deluding themselves to explain their $800 video card.

There is ONE Navy study (gamers always sight it) that suggested that combat fighter pilots could sometimes see objects in their field of vision for 1/100th of a second suggesting 100fps is possible. However, even the Navy acknowledges that these results are slightly "Skewed' since combat fighter pilots have to pass one of the most rigorous physicals and have PERFECT vision. No contacts, glasses, LASIK, etc. If you weren't born with perfect eyes you need not apply. The Navy's subjects were also selected because they performed better than anyone else at tracking targets (these are the .1% people). That in addition to the hundreds of hours of reaction drills and tracing targets in simulators, and practice dogfighting they have trained their brain to take in information faster. Even then, this is only a peak level and not sustainable. They also haven't done further testing to discount "luck" or statistical anomaly.

P.S. 24fps was picked for movies because it is the point just above where they human eye discerns individual pictures. Thus it was best because it required the least amount of film. It had nothing to do with quality, it was simply a money decision.

although 24fps was initially chosen for movies for monetary reasons, it is kept today because of its artistic effect that low framerate does have on the viewer.

http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_3.html
and a pretty interesting interview from a film maker : http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...ryid=1043&cs=1
Quote:
Increasing the data-handling capacity of the projectors and servers is not a big deal, if there is demand. I've run tests on 48 frame per second stereo and it is stunning. The cameras can do it, the projectors can (with a small modification) do it. So why aren't we doing it, as an industry?

Because people have been asking the wrong question for years. They have been so focused on resolution, and counting pixels and lines, that they have forgotten about frame rate. Perceived resolution = pixels x replacement rate. A 2K image at 48 frames per second looks as sharp as a 4K image at 24 frames per second ... with one fundamental difference: the 4K/24 image will judder miserably during a panning shot, and the 2K/48 won't. Higher pixel counts only preserve motion artifacts like strobing with greater fidelity. They don't solve them at all.
maybe someone should create a separate thread, so madshi doesn't accuse us of threadcrapp*ng
leeperry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 17:18   #1239  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeperry View Post
maybe someone should create a separate thread, so madshi doesn't accuse us of threadcrapp*ng
Yes, please. madVR will most probably never do any kind of intermediate frame interpolation. So this discussion doesn't really belong here.
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th May 2009, 17:58   #1240  |  Link
TinTime
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 403
Some of these framerate themes were covered in this thread recently.
TinTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
direct compute, dithering, error diffusion, madvr, ngu, nnedi3, quality, renderer, scaling, uhd upscaling, upsampling

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:13.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.