User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Static v.s. moving images

Static v.s. moving images

Posted May 26, 2010 11:41 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341)
In reply to: Static v.s. moving images by AndyBurns
Parent article: Swift and predictable reactions to WebM

You'd likely perceive one as "sharper" than the other, even without consciously noting the extra details. Our brains are quite good at such fast, parallel processing.


(Log in to post comments)

Static vs moving images

Posted May 29, 2010 17:21 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link]

You'd likely perceive one as "sharper" than the other, even without consciously noting the extra details. Our brains are quite good at such fast, parallel processing.

Actually, fast is one thing the brain is not. That's the reason that 24 frames per second is ususally indistinguishable from continuous motion.

Parallel, yes.

In this case, the most important feature of the brain is it's ability to track a moving object. It sees the object, not a series of scenes with the object in different places. So watching a ball move across the screen for 2 seconds is as good as staring at a single frame for 2 seconds for noticing how sharp the ball is.


Copyright © 2018, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds