That 200Hz TV does interpolation in the "time"-dimension (inserts three
new frames between each two from the 50Hz input source). The inputs are
standard video-like (HDMI with 1920x1080/60Hz max = single link).

The reason is to smooth out motion (e.g. at camera panning), because on
large screen the 50hz content moves a big distance between frames and
thats bad. I'm working now on a LED matrix screen: when tested scrolling
at 300 hz or 50hz with the same px/sec speed, the one with higher
refresh looks smoother and nicer.

To the contrary, the mentioned (best) LCD monitor can accept a 120hz
source and display it. (and as you calculated, it requires dual-link
connection). I see no confusion..

Daniel

PS. the reason for such a high refresh rate LCD is the further
elimination of blur from switching black-white: the transitions are not
backlit, just the "stable" state, so it requires a flashy backlight.
Doing that on the current 60Hz LCD is not nice.. but on 240+ Hz you wont
notice it and when you do not see the transitions, you think the screen
is just faster/sharper. The same principle as projecting celuloid in
cinemas - it's lit only when stable, the moving phase is masked out :)


Dieter wrote:
> So I'm reading about 200 Hz tvs/monitors at
> 
> http://DansData.com/askdan00043.htm
> 
> and a few questions come to mind.  If a single-link DVI
> maxes out at 1920x1200 60 Hz, then 1920x1200 120 Hz should
> max out dual-link DVI.  So even dual-link isn't fast enough
> for 200 Hz.  A first order wild guess calculation says
> dual-link might be good for 1920x1080 at approx 133 Hz.
> Does HDMI or Displayport have a higher limit than DVI?
> 
> Last time I looked at LCD speeds, they weren't fast enough
> to do 60 Hz properly.  For 200 Hz you'd want the worst case
> change time to be < 5 milliseconds.  The marketing numbers
> they throw around are *not* worst case.  Dan neglects to
> mention this problem.
> 
> Dan's writing is confusing.  First he says that 200 Hz TVs
> "have a genuine 200Hz frame-rate".  Then later he says
> " "200Hz" televisions are not the same as "200Hz" computer
> monitors " and "we'll be seeing complaints from poor schmoes
> who've spent all week trying to make 3D Vision work with their
> new $US2000 "200Hz" LCD TV".  As far as I can see, the
> difference is that TVs include fancy image processing (and a
> tuner).  Surely you can turn off the image processing?
> Or is there some other difference that would spoil shutter
> glasses 3D?
> 
> Speaking of 3D, does anyone have a pair of the recent yellow/purple
> glasses they could run through a transparency scanner?  Given
> the various descriptions of the colors (yellow-amber-brown, and
> blue-purple) it's hard to know what colors to look for to build
> a pair.
> _______________________________________________
> Open-graphics mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
> List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)

Reply via email to