Eyes like a fly. You don't happen to be this guy, do you?

Someone has thrown their toys out of the pram.

Funny, all my life I have been watching stuff with 23.??FPS,25FPS,29.??FPS,30FPS, never noticed anything special about 30FPS. Maybe for games it might be important to get about 60FPS since that would almost guarantee no lag in high action scenes. But on N900 video output, its just perfect, all TVs (PAL) work with 25FPS.

Game fps is a completely different matter from recorded video as (generally speaking) you don't have motion blur, which in turn makes the eye easier to detect the difference between two frames. Depending on the content displayed and format it might take well over 100 fps to make the action perfectly fluid.

I don't know about the statistics, but there's definitely difference by pushing higher framerate out of recorded video. That's why high end tv screens nowadays include motion enhancement processors that interpolates video to higher refresh rates (usually either 100hz, 120hz or 200hz). Purists call the effect of these motion processors 'Soap opera effect' because the higher framerate (60fps interlaced) associated with most soap operas and the lack of motion blurs.

Hehe

Thats because digital displays like LCD and Plasma introduce motion blur where there was not motion blur to start with on the recorded footage.

Its particularly bad in LCD because traditional LCD tech had a backlight that is always on (Plasma actually turns the pixels on and off much like a CRT). So the LCD boys run the displays at higher and higher refresh rates (not frame rates) , throw in some interpolation and upscaling, and before you know it the picture looks artificial and processed. But they smoke an mirror to the consumer on WOW high refresh rates are the Muts Nuts.

In particular it created a contrast problem, cause if you switch the pixels on fast enough, the backlight looks like its permanently showing through. So to solve this they introduce LED backlighting, that allows them to switch parts of the backlight off in dark scenes, but now the image looks even more processed.....sigh.

its just a shame that there is now the race of Mhz much like the megapixel wars on cameras.

As usual you cant substitute for highest quality source material to start with and then process it with care and attention.

sorry, but thats ********. I am not even going to try to explain why

BAH! 30 fps smooth? Since when? lol ....


100 fps is smooth, but will never happen as long as ISO sensitivity of sensors are as shitty as they are today.

I do agree that at cinema the picture looks like a fast slide show... especially the opening scenes with the Universal (or whatever) company logos. After few minutes, I kind of get used to it and it doesn't bother me any more.

Just my personal experience/opinion... YMMV