60Fps - is it really that important?

[SvennoJ]

archer9234 said:

SvennoJ said:

Sharpryno said:
That above ^

and the classic UFO test.

http://testufo.com/#test=framerates

People can notice 60fps and 120fps even easier.

People can also notice a 120hz monitor vs 144hz....

There must also be a difference between video and this test, as even at 120 pixels/second text is not scrolling smooth at 30fps. Yet end titles from movies at 24fps don't seem to jump like the text example does. (And yes I have 24p mode on both tv and projector)

This jumping that's going on, is when you take a different FPS material and output it in a higher FPS. This is what happens when film is telecined to 29.97fps. You're adding in fake frames. So a half jump is forced in. Watch a side by side comparaison of Star Trek TNG. You'll see the 24fps film moves smoothly. But the tape master footage at 30fps jerks around, and lags behind.

I know about the telecine process but that's not relevant here. 24 to 30 duplicates every 4th frame, yet 30 to 60 simply doubles every frame. Since LCD doesn't flicker (as long as you don't have LED with PWM) it should look smoother than running the tv in 24fps mode with a movie.
I guess it must be because I'm sitting right on top of the monitor with 60fps scrolling right next to it.

Those tape masters were interlaced too using the 3:2 pulldown mechanic, I'm glad that's in the past. Although on a CRT it worked better than repeating the 4th frame which you get now with movies on TV. Now we have A B C D D, Before A1 A2 B1 B2 B2 C1 C2 D1 D2 D2 (it's actually 2:3 pulldown) which creates less judder.

I grew up in PAL country, there 24fps simply got sped up to run at 25fps. Smooth, yet always odd that movies were a bit shorter in PAL format :)