Yep - 60 fps means the image (in theory) can be changed 60 times in a second. If it takes up to 10 milliseconds (10/1000 of a second) for the screen to get the cells stabilized to show the image that's 60 lots of 1/100 second that the cells may not be stabilized in every second
Even at 30fps, with a 10Ms response time, that's still about 1/3 of each second that the image is not stable Depending on the screen's physical properties, and what's being shown, that may not be an evident problem, it may be an almost subliminal problem, or bad enough that the viewer is aware of the flicker effect. Consider - how little (and infrequently) the displayed image of a windows MSWord, or Excel session change. If the signal is changing more quickly than the pixels can respond, then the pixels pretty much do not reproduce the signal at all. That's with a constantly changing image - if the image is mostly static, then the static bits will probably be OK almost certainly on a LCD screen, and probably on a Plasma display. (Plasma energises the cell to generate the light, LCD tend to alter a mask/filter of the backlight) Re 1920x 1080 on a 19" screen - it depends on the number of cells on the 19" screen, and how near you are to the screen - there are many 19" screens that only have 1280 cells in each row of the display and few 'wide aspect' 19", or even 21" screens are more than 1366 x 768 - the poorer 'HDTV' resolution So - yes - on a 19 " screen you would not see the difference The difference (extra clarity and fine detail) becomes apparent when you view it on a screen with a full 1920 x 1080 complement of cells, and an acceptable response time. As I mentioned in earlier threads - I've got a 19" Hansol display that physically does just over 1600 x 1200 ( number of phosphor dot sets on the screen along, and down), but is limited to 1280 x 1024 because the electronics are the same as those for the 17" screen, and only up to that screens capability In other words - at the highest resolutions the Hansol 17" screen gives a better image than the Hansol 19" screen! JimB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl Houseman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 6:48 PM Subject: Re: Deal on Monitor > You lost me on that 600ms calculation. 600ms = 0.6 second. > > Response time is the time it takes a pixel to respond to a change in signal. > > If the signal is changing more quickly than the pixels can respond, then the > pixels do not faithfully reproduce the signal. > > 60 fps means the possibility of a completely new frame and new signal every > 16ms. If the response time is slower than 16 ms then the pixels can't keep > up. > > Movies are 24 or 30 fps. > > As far as HD signals of 1920x1080 displaying to lower native resolution > screens, on a 19" monitor you're not going to see the difference. > > Carl > -- ---------------------------------------- To Change your email Address for this list, send the following message: CHANGE WIN-HOME your_old_address your_new_address to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note carefully that both old and new addresses are required.
