Unoffical empeg BBS

Quick Links: Empeg FAQ | RioCar.Org | Hijack | BigDisk Builder | jEmplode | emphatic
Repairs: Repairs

Page 4 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#328968 - 19/01/2010 19:27 Re: Avatar [Re: wfaulk]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
I just don't remember anyone I've known using the same scan rate displays and computers as myself back in the day complaining about flicker or headaches caused by their displays. Were we too young? Don't know.

1/3 of calls could be a pretty low number or percentage of incidents. I don't know how many Nokia monitors were sold nor how many calls you received. wink But you must have seen offices of hundreds, if not a thousand or more displays all running at 60Hz, no? Besides, 1/3 of calls still puts the number in the minority. Which only helps substantiate my claim of "for most people" - 66% is well into the "most" camp.

Brighter display = longer persistence of image = less perceived flicker. At least that's what I've always learned. Other strains are caused by looking at a dim display. Try it yourself. I can adjust display brightness at my fingertips, and a dim display gives me eye strain very quickly. This has nothing to do with flicker of course, which is what I was saying initially.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#328969 - 19/01/2010 19:31 Re: Avatar [Re: wfaulk]
Tim
veteran

Registered: 25/04/2000
Posts: 1525
Loc: Arizona
Originally Posted By: wfaulk
Your argument that "60Hz is far fast enough for most people not to notice" has no basis in reality. Just because your eyes are too slow to notice the flicker doesn't mean that you are the norm.

Originally Posted By: hybrid8
Brightness plays a big issue as well, so make sure you're not staring a stuff that's too dim for too long.

Actually, you've got that backwards. If you want to reduce perception of flicker, your background lighting should be as bright as possible in comparison to the relatively dim monitor. The flood of additional light will make the relatively low flicker of the monitor less perceptible.

I was under the impression that it was fluorescent lighting that caused the really bad flicker in 60hz CRTs. It was explained to me as the 120hz flicker from the fluorescent lights interfered with the 60hz CRT and cause the flicker to be much more noticeable. This gets really bad if the lighting is old and drops to the main circuit's frequency (60hz). It wasn't as bad in areas that have incandescent lighting instead.

Top
#328971 - 19/01/2010 19:36 Re: Avatar [Re: Tim]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
Originally Posted By: Tim

I was under the impression that it was fluorescent lighting that caused the really bad flicker in 60hz CRTs.


This I can believe. No one I knew was using their computers in an office environment "back in the day." And by the time I was using colour CRTs in an office, we were on fast electronic ballasts. Now if you can see fluorescent flicker on a properly working and well built electronic ballast, you're super-human.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#328973 - 19/01/2010 19:49 Re: Avatar [Re: Tim]
drakino
carpal tunnel

Registered: 08/06/1999
Posts: 7868
Originally Posted By: Tim
I was under the impression that it was fluorescent lighting that caused the really bad flicker in 60hz CRTs. It was explained to me as the 120hz flicker from the fluorescent lights interfered with the 60hz CRT and cause the flicker to be much more noticeable. This gets really bad if the lighting is old and drops to the main circuit's frequency (60hz). It wasn't as bad in areas that have incandescent lighting instead.

Thats what I remember as well. I tended to notice monitors at work at 60Hz giving me problems much more then a 60Hz CRT at home. That includes a 27 inch CRT monitor that I used frequently at home.

Top
#328974 - 19/01/2010 19:52 Re: Avatar [Re: hybrid8]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
1/3 of calls still puts the number in the minority

Are you yanking my chain?

Assuming not, let me explain the situation. Not all people who called had problems with refresh rate. Not all people who called had their video output running at 60Hz. Not all people who called had 21" monitors. And, most importantly, most people wouldn't call computer monitor tech support with a complaint about their eyes burning.

I know very little about Amigas, so I'll quote Wikipedia here:
Quote:
AGA also lacked flicker free higher resolution modes; being only able to display 640x480 at 72Hz flicker-free operation. 800x600 mode was left useless as it could only operate at a flickering 60Hz.

(For others like me, "AGA" was apparently the most advanced graphics chip put in an Amiga.) Based on the time and the specs, I would expect that the largest monitor intended to be used with that system was 15".

If you still have one, hook it up and look at it through the corner of your eye. To most people, it really does flicker badly.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#328976 - 19/01/2010 20:04 Re: Avatar [Re: wfaulk]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
My Amigas were all pre-AGA and couldn't even display 640x480, only up to 640x240. That is without the specialty add-in board I had for primarily editing of still images. In any case it was also limited to 60Hz, not the fancy 72 of the AGA models (the Amiga 1200 and Amiga 4000)

Unfortunately I don't have any CRTs other than my TV (32") anymore. I also don't have any incandescent bulbs which I used to use exclusively years back.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#328978 - 19/01/2010 20:09 Re: Avatar [Re: wfaulk]
Dignan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
I really am surprised you're arguing this, Bruno. I guarantee you that I could go a "blind" comparison between a 60Hz monitor and something like a 72Hz. The difference is incredible.

The other thing you're not thinking about is that most people with CRT monitors didn't/don't KNOW that they can improve it. They probably just assume that that's the way the computer is and they live with it because they have to. There's plenty of people who live with Clippy and Norton too, but they're just as ecstatic when I tell them I can fix those.

*edit*
in addition to Bitt's comparisons between monitors and TV, I'd point out that you watch a lot more motion on TV, so any flicker would be less noticeable. If you mentioned that, Bitt, sorry I forgot it. You just had so many good points as to why we're right wink :p


Edited by Dignan (19/01/2010 20:10)
_________________________
Matt

Top
#328980 - 19/01/2010 20:13 Re: Avatar [Re: Cris]
andym
carpal tunnel

Registered: 17/01/2002
Posts: 3996
Loc: Manchester UK
Originally Posted By: Cris
Andym was sat just a couple of meters away and didn't get that, so it's my eyes not the projection.


Which is interesting because last time I had my eyes tested I was told my convergence was crap. Although apparently it can be exacerbated by stress and I was little frazzled at the time, so maybe I'm all better now!
_________________________
Cheers,

Andy M

Top
#328982 - 19/01/2010 20:17 Re: Avatar [Re: Dignan]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
We'll have to chalk it up to my eyes having been developed in a secret lab to be perfectly in tune with a 60Hz scan rate then. And when I said I "didn't know anybody" I wasn't talking about the clueless drone office worker of the time. Everyone I knew back in the day was at least partially a computer junkie of some kind. smile We're talking hundreds of ppl btw.

On my Nanao I could only tell the difference when I WAS doing something with motion.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#328985 - 19/01/2010 20:30 Re: Avatar [Re: andym]
Cris
pooh-bah

Registered: 06/02/2002
Posts: 1904
Loc: Leeds, UK
Originally Posted By: andym
Which is interesting because last time I had my eyes tested I was told my convergence was crap.


I don't get my eyes tested, so I can't tell you how bad/good they are. I did have them tested 5 years ago, and was told he could give me glasses but I could manage fine without them. At that point I figured that was a total waste of money, and until I start bumping into things I won't be going back.

Everyone's eyes are slightly different distances apart, right? Do you think this has any bearing on how good the effect is for that individual? There has to be many many factors like this that could cause problems with 3D films.

And a brief comment on the off topic thread here, I had my Amiga 500 plugged into a 14inch portable TV, now that thing flickered like a bitch at any output smile When I got my first PC monitor 72Hz was better for me, but my mate at the time couldn't tell the difference and saw no flicker at either. Everyone is different I guess.

Cheers

Cris.

Top
#328986 - 19/01/2010 20:32 Re: Avatar [Re: hybrid8]
Cris
pooh-bah

Registered: 06/02/2002
Posts: 1904
Loc: Leeds, UK
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
We're talking hundreds of ppl btw.


Trying........so.........hard......not......to.........comment........ smile

lol

Cheers

Cris.

Top
#329056 - 21/01/2010 03:07 Re: Avatar [Re: Dignan]
gbeer
carpal tunnel

Registered: 17/12/2000
Posts: 2665
Loc: Manteca, California
Originally Posted By: Dignan
Not sure why you put that in spoiler tags smile

I understand the depth of field issues with 3D,


Doesn't seem fair telling someone who hadn't seen the movie what to look out for. Forcing them to spend the whole movie being distracted by what could/should be unnoticeable.
_________________________
Glenn

Top
#329058 - 21/01/2010 09:26 Re: Avatar [Re: gbeer]
andy
carpal tunnel

Registered: 10/06/1999
Posts: 5916
Loc: Wivenhoe, Essex, UK
Originally Posted By: gbeer
Originally Posted By: Dignan
Not sure why you put that in spoiler tags smile

I understand the depth of field issues with 3D,


Doesn't seem fair telling someone who hadn't seen the movie what to look out for. Forcing them to spend the whole movie being distracted by what could/should be unnoticeable.

How can the 3D depth of field issue be made unnoticeable ? It is an intrinsic part of 3D.

Unless you have eye tracking for each viewer and a separately generated image that somehow simulates a reduced depth of field then the depth of field issue is always going to be there.
_________________________
Remind me to change my signature to something more interesting someday

Top
#329074 - 22/01/2010 00:01 Re: Avatar [Re: gbeer]
canuckInOR
carpal tunnel

Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
Originally Posted By: gbeer
Originally Posted By: Dignan
Not sure why you put that in spoiler tags smile

I understand the depth of field issues with 3D,


Doesn't seem fair telling someone who hadn't seen the movie what to look out for. Forcing them to spend the whole movie being distracted by what could/should be unnoticeable.

You mean like those little reel-change blit marks in the corners?

Top
#329080 - 22/01/2010 01:05 Re: Avatar [Re: canuckInOR]
gbeer
carpal tunnel

Registered: 17/12/2000
Posts: 2665
Loc: Manteca, California
Originally Posted By: canuckInOR

You mean like those little reel-change blit marks in the corners?


I've never noticed those. If I had I most likely would have ignored them as flaws in the negative.

With respect to pointing out things to people that are not necessarily obvious.

I don't care for noise canceling headphones, primarily because they create a kind of tension that I find annoying. After wearing a pair for 20 mins I feel the same as if I'd been listening to white noise.

When I've pointed this out to fans, typically a few days later, I'm told that they had stopped using them for the same reason.

So, Are you doing someone a favor by telling about that, or not?
_________________________
Glenn

Top
#329632 - 01/02/2010 14:35 Re: Avatar [Re: gbeer]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
Red Letter Media review of Avatar in two parts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJarz7BYnHA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLzKwTcGO_0&feature=related

This is the same guy who did the 7-part Phantom Menace review a while back.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#329635 - 01/02/2010 17:51 Re: Avatar [Re: hybrid8]
Dignan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
Ugh, I really hate the delivery. Like, really hate it. It completely gets in the way of what are some interesting insights about halfway through (when he starts talking like a reviewer and stops with the annoying stuff).

Not to defend the movie too much, but technically it wasn't "the" military, was it? I was under they impression that they were essentially an organized group of hired guns, paid for by the corporation. "The military" as he says it implies governmental oversight, but the leader of the troops in Avatar reported to a company man. I guess that wasn't as funny.

In summary, I couldn't stand the guy and stopped listening after about 6 minutes (don't know how I got that far).
_________________________
Matt

Top
#329636 - 01/02/2010 18:11 Re: Avatar [Re: Dignan]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
The delivery is the best part of the whole schtick. It's what makes a potentially otherwise dry dissection into something you can smirk at while watching it. His points have so-far been valid for every review I've watched (this one, Phantom Menace and a couple of Star Trek ones). BUt mostly I watch it for how dead-pan (and twisted) the presentation is.

Anyway, let'e not add any spoilers about Avatar to the thread, I still haven't seen it. But I do want to. It will probably be on the small screen though as I don't think I'd like to have anyone take care of my daughter while my wife and I go out to a movie. Though we're stepping out this Saturday to go hear Kevin Smith speak. wink
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#329637 - 01/02/2010 19:52 Re: Avatar [Re: hybrid8]
tanstaafl.
carpal tunnel

Registered: 08/07/1999
Posts: 5546
Loc: Ajijic, Mexico
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
The delivery is the best part of the whole schtick.

Uhhh... yeah. What Bruno said. (Never thought I'd ever say that! smile )

tanstaafl.
_________________________
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"

Top
#329645 - 01/02/2010 21:33 Re: Avatar [Re: tanstaafl.]
Dignan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
The delivery is the best part of the whole schtick.

That's the thing, I don't like any part of the schtick. It's not a funny schtick. It's annoying.

And I didn't give any spoilers. I didn't say anything that he didn't say in his review, unless you count correcting him.
_________________________
Matt

Top
#329651 - 01/02/2010 23:49 Re: Avatar [Re: Dignan]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
Fair enough, you don't like the reviewer's comedy. I wouldn't have posted it if I hadn't found it funny though. BTW, I only said let's not add any spoilers, not that any had already been added. wink

The movie is cliche in many respects, certainly derivative and formulaic, but it still looks good for what it is. And the review doesn't disagree with that either (I watched the whole thing).
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#329660 - 02/02/2010 06:50 Re: Avatar [Re: Dignan]
Roger
carpal tunnel

Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5683
Loc: London, UK
Originally Posted By: Dignan
Not to defend the movie too much, but technically it wasn't "the" military, was it? I was under they impression that they were essentially an organized group of hired guns, paid for by the corporation.


Shades of the British East India Company there, then?
_________________________
-- roger

Top
#329975 - 11/02/2010 02:37 Re: Avatar [Re: Roger]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
Saw Avatar. Phenomenal. I found it easy to look past the holes. It could have gone on another 20 minutes and I would have been quite comfortable watching it.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#329983 - 11/02/2010 08:10 Re: Avatar [Re: hybrid8]
sein
old hand

Registered: 07/01/2005
Posts: 893
Loc: Sector ZZ9pZa
I saw it recently at the IMAX. Great film, great story, liked it a lot. Jerky movement was very distracting for me, quite sure I would have enjoyed it more in 2D.
_________________________
Hussein

Top
#330884 - 08/03/2010 15:04 Re: Avatar [Re: sein]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
Avatar was robbed at the Academy awards. As usual, the Oscars represent political and social trends, having little to nothing to do with film making.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#330886 - 08/03/2010 20:18 Re: Avatar [Re: hybrid8]
tonyc
carpal tunnel

Registered: 27/06/1999
Posts: 7058
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
You didn't like The Hurt Locker at all?
_________________________
- Tony C
my empeg stuff

Top
#330889 - 08/03/2010 22:04 Re: Avatar [Re: tonyc]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
I liked The Hurt Locker. I also liked Up in the Air, The Blind Side, Inglorious Basterds, District 9 and Up. I've yet to watch the other three nominated films.

Avatar was robbed. I'm not a "James Cameron" fan (even though I've enjoyed some of his movies), but he deserved, without question, to win best director, even if Avatar hadn't won for best film. As decent as The Hurt Locker was, it wasn't close to being the top war-time movie I've seen, and it wasn't of the same calibre as Up nor Inglorious, let alone Avatar. Frankly, I would have cut that list down to 5 nominations rather easily.

I mean, if the Academy wanted to give that movie another award so badly, they could have created the "Best Slow-Paced War Picture Directed By a Woman" category. Then I'd agree it was the top of the year.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#330895 - 09/03/2010 00:13 Re: Avatar [Re: hybrid8]
Dignan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
Avatar got just as many awards as it deserved. There's more to directing than special effects. It was a technical achievement. If anyone other than the winner deserved it it was Tarantino.

But I don't really have a problem with the winners. Besides, I don't consider the Oscars or any of these Awards ceremonies to be the last word on what is actually the best.

The only award I took a bit of issue with was with Sandra Bullock, but at least she gave one of the better acceptance speeches of the evening.
_________________________
Matt

Top
#330900 - 09/03/2010 02:15 Re: Avatar [Re: Dignan]
hybrid8
carpal tunnel

Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
Did you watch The Blind Side? Her performance was definitely Oscar-worthy.

I normally don't watch the Academy Awards at all, instead usually letting my wife record them so she can skip through them later. This year I made an exception because I was enjoying my brand new 55" Vizio VF551XVT. I've been recording HD for months, but this was my first weekend with my new TV, having moved up from a 32" JVC CRT.

I'm not going to argue about Avatar's merits, but I'l say that while watching it, I never once thought, "wow, what a technical achievement." That's an insult, the movie was much better than Titanic, IMO - in every way.
_________________________
Bruno
Twisted Melon : Fine Mac OS Software

Top
#330902 - 09/03/2010 04:12 Re: Avatar [Re: hybrid8]
Dignan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12338
Loc: Sterling, VA
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
I'l say that while watching it, I never once thought, "wow, what a technical achievement."

Well that's where we differ once more. That's all I thought for about half the movie.

Quote:
That's an insult, the movie was much better than Titanic, IMO - in every way.

Heh, and you'll never win me over with that argument. I thought Titanic was alright, but I thought that was by far the least deserving movie that year, from the given nominees, to win best picture. Just look at the others:

As Good as It Gets
The Full Monty [I admit, I haven't seen this one]
Good Will Hunting
L.A. Confidential

Of the three of those I saw, I consider them all to be much better movies than Titanic.

In fact, thanks for bringing up Titanic. I actually feel about Avatar a lot like I did about that movie. The characters are all written and played out the same way. I never really know these people. They seem sort of distant to me. I don't connect with them like real people.

Ah, whatever, it's subjective anyway. You liked Avatar, I'm happy. I haven't even seen The Hurt Locker yet. I wasn't arguing for that winning, I was just saying that Avatar wasn't my favorite movie I saw last year. I'm glad you enjoyed it so much.
_________________________
Matt

Top
Page 4 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >