Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.games.doom (
More info?)
Proprclr wrote:
> Smola <spam@supersmola.net> wrote in message news:<MPG.1b6876e51b38407a989eb9@news.iskon.hr>...
>
>>In article <orkqf05fjha6j7op70hgp1jusjiiu0no5s@4ax.com>, bk039
>>@freenet.carleton.ca says...
>>
>>>On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:34:31 +0200, Smola <spam@supersmola.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article <TR_Kc.11$33z1.1@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>,
>>>>do.not.email@yo.mamas.hairy.ass.com says...
>>>>
>>>>>since when was 29-30 fps slow?
>>>>
>>>>Well, since 50 is a minimum.
>>>
>>>The actual minimum FPS is 30. This number is not magical, but is high
>>>enough to allow for smooth enough animation. (Besides, that number is
>>>lower than the reaction time of most humans.) Project IGI is a great
>>>example of this: it only has 30 FPS, but it does not vary as most games do.
>>>
>>>In most cases, the FPS shown for games is only an average. It does not
>>>contain information on how much the FPS jumps around, how often it drops
>>>below the critical FPS mark, and so on.
>>
>>Well, I just remember reading somewhere that for arcade games the 50 fps
>>should be the minimum. When I look back at playing Quake2, 30-35 fps was
>>never enough for me.
>
>
> I don't know about anyone else, but frame rates over 35 or so FPS
> seems to have a "glassy", unnatural look to it. 30 seems to be
> the "magic number" for me, when it comes to realism.
There is nothing about a higher 'FPS' that would 'detract' from realism.
More likely is there is some other factor with generating the images that
go INTO the 'higher FPS' that causes the effect you perceive.
The human eye/brain combination does a lot of 'interpretation' and causes
things one might think are irrelevant to sometimes have dramatic effects.
As just one example, the eye/brain makes 'predictions' about movement,
which is one reason why fixed frame rate video appears as smooth motion.
But if the frame rate is not constant, like some versions of 3/2 pull down,
a fast moving object will appear as TWO objects because the brain thinks,
based on movement in the previous frames, that it should be 'here' when
it's still 'there', so the 'there' observation gets perceived as another one.
Not saying that's what you were seeing but if, for example, to get the
'higher' frame rates the game simply inserts a few additional frames of the
same image, appropriately interspersed to make up for the needed extra
frames, then the eye/brain will not see it as 'natural' because the
movement rapidly stop/starts every time an extra frame is inserted.
>
> (notice how live or video taped NTSC footage seems to have a higher FPS
> than the "real world?". am i the only one who notices this?
I have no idea what you mean by a "higher FPS than the 'real world'".
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram