MIT Studies show 13 milliseconds, or about 77 FPS is the higher end of the average human's ability to process visual stimulation. So anything over 80-90 fps is usually placebo.
G
gabrieltempest282 weeks ago
According to scientists that studied the limits of this at Rockefeller university. The human eye can generally start to blur motion at 60 Hz(a flashing light at 60Hz will appear to be a solid light), but we can still detect changes in that light in as high as 1000Hz in certain human eyes. This work is heavily being used in conjunction with the work from Cambridge university of how many pixels the human eye can perceive (256 megapixels but focused in the center btw) to find the absolute limits of what technology needs for humans
A
abeerbath4072 weeks ago
It’s like around 1000 fps for lights and flashes and 100-250 fps for human eye sight
T
trinidad_apodaca2 weeks ago
I think he forgot a 0...
B
brenocosmos372 weeks ago
Human eye function is based on photoreceptors which don't have a set refresh rate, and also aren't a monolith. Its possible for certain receptors to become over stimulated and respond to light changes slower, but that isn't uniform for the entire field of vision.
christine_woods2 weeks ago
my EYES went from 60 fps, to 5000 fps
L
leon_rogers2 weeks ago
a really good test is looking at a car wheel while driving because of the rotation
B
brianmartin4402 weeks ago
Bro said that like the human brain operates in frames
V
victoire.lucas2 weeks ago
The human eye does see "24 fps" but the rate is so much different then a monitor. The higher the fps on a screen the more often difference between your eyes and the screen will be filled. (Don't judge the way I put this, your eyes see a constant flow, but 24 frames is the speed at which most eyes begin to hit their (close to) cap when it comes to fluent motion. Just because they hit there (close to) cap, doesn't mean the little more frames aren't gonna help.)
M
maríacristina_deanda2 weeks ago
It's unironically true for some people. We are just literally built different
pedrolucas.abreu2 weeks ago
Actually, he's technically right cause the human brain needs a minimum of 15-24 fps to process stuff
C
cynthia.horn2 weeks ago
damn, that’s a beautiful seed!
S
sabrina_king2 weeks ago
For anyone wondering, humans can see well over 250fps
angela.patterson2 weeks ago
They need to make monitors that work like human eyes not with pixels and fps
B
brenda.padilla2 weeks ago
"I made the numbers up for a dramatic effect"
N
normamcconnell2292 weeks ago
This is some shit middle schoolers say during lunch
E
eloisa.cardenas2 weeks ago
Technically speaking, our eyes have a very limited "fps," but the brain fills up the gaps. It's like AI frame generation
C
christopherharper9552 weeks ago
Below 120 it's definitely noticeable. You have to experience higher refresh rate to understand that 30, 60 or even 90 aren't as smooth as you thought
Your eyes gave motion blur, but minecraft doesnt
MIT Studies show 13 milliseconds, or about 77 FPS is the higher end of the average human's ability to process visual stimulation. So anything over 80-90 fps is usually placebo.
According to scientists that studied the limits of this at Rockefeller university. The human eye can generally start to blur motion at 60 Hz(a flashing light at 60Hz will appear to be a solid light), but we can still detect changes in that light in as high as 1000Hz in certain human eyes. This work is heavily being used in conjunction with the work from Cambridge university of how many pixels the human eye can perceive (256 megapixels but focused in the center btw) to find the absolute limits of what technology needs for humans
It’s like around 1000 fps for lights and flashes and 100-250 fps for human eye sight
I think he forgot a 0...
Human eye function is based on photoreceptors which don't have a set refresh rate, and also aren't a monolith. Its possible for certain receptors to become over stimulated and respond to light changes slower, but that isn't uniform for the entire field of vision.
my EYES went from 60 fps, to 5000 fps
a really good test is looking at a car wheel while driving because of the rotation
Bro said that like the human brain operates in frames
The human eye does see "24 fps" but the rate is so much different then a monitor. The higher the fps on a screen the more often difference between your eyes and the screen will be filled. (Don't judge the way I put this, your eyes see a constant flow, but 24 frames is the speed at which most eyes begin to hit their (close to) cap when it comes to fluent motion. Just because they hit there (close to) cap, doesn't mean the little more frames aren't gonna help.)
It's unironically true for some people. We are just literally built different
Actually, he's technically right cause the human brain needs a minimum of 15-24 fps to process stuff
damn, that’s a beautiful seed!
For anyone wondering, humans can see well over 250fps
They need to make monitors that work like human eyes not with pixels and fps
"I made the numbers up for a dramatic effect"
This is some shit middle schoolers say during lunch
Technically speaking, our eyes have a very limited "fps," but the brain fills up the gaps. It's like AI frame generation
Below 120 it's definitely noticeable. You have to experience higher refresh rate to understand that 30, 60 or even 90 aren't as smooth as you thought
Get of the drugs got me 🤣