In article <7495777d-626b-394b-be2d-5f2ca5f14...@tqvideo.co.uk>, Tony
Quinn <t...@tqvideo.co.uk> wrote:

> Read this, and see what I mean
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/25/the_future_of_moving_images_the_eyes_have_it/

Thanks for the reference.

FWIW I've started downloading a series where the 1st episode was 25fps at
the higher image 'size' but the second only available at 50fps. So I
compared them and was surprised that I didn't actually notice much
difference in the visible level of detail. But then I do have lousy
eyesight. :-)

I have in the past been quite sensitivie to 'flicker' with ye olde CRT
monitors (for computer use). But I am much less bothered by 'jerky' images
which seem to show up on some 25fps material. (My guess is that this is due
to large blocks being juddered because of the limit on the data rate.)

I remain puzzled, though, but the apparent decision to take away the
*choice* of having the larger resolution at 25fps.

Jim

-- 
Electronics  https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc  http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html


_______________________________________________
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Reply via email to