• calabast@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      We definitely are seeing things faster than 24 Hz, or we wouldn’t be able to tell a difference in refresh rates above that.

      Edit: I don’t think we have a digital, on-off refresh rate of our vision, so fps doesn’t exactly apply. Our brain does turn the ongoing stream of sensory data from our eyes into our vision “video”, but compared to digital screen refresh rates, we can definitely tell a difference between 24 and say 60 fps.

      • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah it’s not like frames from a projector. It’s a stream. But the brain skips parts that haven’t changed.

      • Ekky@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I think i read that fighter pilots need to be able to identify a plane in one frame at 300 fps, and that the theoretical limit of the eye is 1000+ fps.

        Though, whether the brain can manage to process the data at 1000+ fps is questionable.

        • Fester@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m using part of this comment to inform my monitor purchases for the rest of my life.

        • nimpnin@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Both of these claims are kinda misguided. The brain is able to detect very short flashes of light (say, 1 thousandth of a second), and other major changes in light perception. Especially an increase in light will be registered near instantly. However, since it doesn’t have a set frame rate, more minor changes in the light perception (say, 100 fps) are not going to be registered. And the brain does try to actively correct discontinuities, that’s why even 12 fps animation feels like movement, although a bit choppy.

      • Caveman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        I would believe it if someone told me that an individual rod or cone in the eye was 24fps but they’re most likely not synched up

    • Reyali@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      If you want a fun experiment of all the things we see but don’t actually process, I recommend the game series I’m On Observation Duty. You flip through a series of security cameras and identify when something changed. It’s incredible when you realize the entire floor of a room changed or a giant thing went missing, and you just tuned it out because your brain never felt a need to take in that detail.

      It’s sorta horror genre and I hate pretty much every other horror thing, but I love those games because they make me think about how I think.