|
|
|
|
|
|
by layer8
821 days ago
|
|
|
You need shorter pulses than 10 or 5 milliseconds to reduce motion blur down to the level of CRTs. 100 Hz would only be sufficient if the BF takes up > 90% of the time, instead of the usual 50%. What causes motion blur is the frame being held for a period of time. BFI merely reduces that time by half. On CRTs, each pixel is only held for 100 microseconds or so. |
|
|
For the LG CX OLED (https://tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/lg_cx_oled) (oddly one of the only OLEDs that have BFI) we can see they have no problem pulsing the pixels on on for only 3-4ms (https://tftcentral.co.uk/images/lg_cx_oled/bfi_120_high.png) (5ms divisions), resulting in these images (which I can't tell how representative of a human are because I don't know if the camera exposure matches human vision and the camera is probably wobbling at such high speeds, adding more blur than a human would see which is why these pursuit camera pictures are always blurry to hell - IIRC all those LCDs from the last 6 years with half working BFI aren't actually blurry, they are just buggily implemented so they have the top of the screen and/or bottom showing double images, each image is crisp, just doubled):
https://www.tftcentral.co.uk/images/lg_cx_oled/pursuit_120hz...
https://tftcentral.co.uk/images/lg_cx_oled/pursuit_60hz.jpg
If you just take a 240Hz OLED and blank 3/4 frames to get back a 60Hz image I'd be half surprised if that actually looks blurrier than a CRT.
EDIT: yup, just tested one of my garbage LCDs even on 75Hz with BFI enabled in the monitor menu, the image is perfectly crisp, just there are artifacts everywhere, mainly double images. That wouldn't happen with OLED with BFI (with BFI in the hardware/firmware obviously to minimize the on time beyond just dividing the frame rate).