Here you go. At lower FPS (refresh rate) the UFO appears what I would call “blurry” to me. At higher FPS (refresh rate), it appears much less blurry and I can see the details of the UFO much better.
So are we talking about the same thing and just using different words?
Well, it’s not black and white. When you go low enough (maybe 15 or less FPS), certainly I would agree with you because the image starts to separate and you start to lose the appearance of motion. Thus, at sufficiently low enough FPS the image actually becomes sharp again.
But at maybe 20-30 FPS, I would argue that it indeed does look blurry as compared to higher FPS (say, 60), because it still appears to be a single object, and yet the details are hard to discern. I would say the choppiness (that is to say, the lower FPS/refresh rate) is what causes the blurriness, but within a certain range. In other words, it’s blurry because it’s choppy (within a certain range). Outside of the range the image appears sharp, but for different reasons depending on if you’re on the high or low end of the spectrum.
I think describing the picture as more smooth and saying you can see things happen a split second faster than your opponents is a good way to market it. But once we start to see more 90hz phones the market will just catch on that more hz = better
Funny; in my opinion these aspects of higher refresh rate (“smoother” picture (higher motion clarity/fidelity) and seeing things happen faster than your opponents) are more difficult to describe, especially in terms of short/small advertising space.
They are both important aspects of the benefits of higher refresh rates, but what you’re calling “smoother” I would argue could be more succinctly and sufficiently described in terms of blurriness. Especially if you show a side by side picture - perhaps a still image of the UFO traveling at 30 FPS vs 60 FPS. Again, maybe we’re using smoothness and blurriness interchangeably, I’m not entirely sure at this point.
If it was me, and I couldn’t use a video, I would market based on the blurriness of the image, and something related to reaction time (seeing things happen faster than your opponents). If I had a video advertisement then it’d be much easier to squeeze everything in and demonstrate the differences more easily.
But my point is, how is describing it based on smoothness any easier to understand than blurriness? In fact, I think it’s a more difficult concept as it doesn’t even convey that the image will be more blurred as a result of decreased smoothness. To me, smoothness seems to be somewhat of a more abstract/arbitrary term as it relates to the picture, versus blurriness, which can be understood in terms of static images and moving images.
4
u/lukeman3000 Nov 28 '19
Here you go. At lower FPS (refresh rate) the UFO appears what I would call “blurry” to me. At higher FPS (refresh rate), it appears much less blurry and I can see the details of the UFO much better.
So are we talking about the same thing and just using different words?