On 17/07/2024 01:01, Mark Filipak wrote:
On 16/07/2024 19.40, MacFH - C E Macfarlane - News wrote:
On 17/07/2024 00:02, Mark Filipak wrote:
To match human persistence of vision, the refresh rate of individual
pels actually needs to be no greater than 10 or 12 refreshes per second.
Only the dots that change need be refreshed and only to the extent that
they change. Of course, if sub-dots are electrically dynamic instead of
electrically static, then TVs need to have some sort of dynamic refresh
that's opaque to the input. Bulk screen refresh at the input is
undesirable because it would flash at 10 or 12 Hz.
I'm afraid all the above para is bollocks.
You're absolutely correct. It's not really persistence of vision (as in
afterimages), but everyone calls it "persistence of vision".
I think you've misunderstood me: after-images are a different phenomenon
and "everyone calls it 'persistence of vision'" is merely a restatement
of the widespread belief in the myth; however, there is no such thing,
thus your para above, being based on a belief in it, is without
foundation, and therefore, as perhaps I rather unkindly put it but it
has the advantage of clarity, bollocks.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-user mailing list
ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
