ASUS/BENQ LightBoost owners!! Zero motion blur setting!

Druneau said:
You guys are going to make me buy a benq and an nvidia card lol.. not good.

I just got my tempest OC tuesday haha.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat -
My OC Tempest arriving today (120hz IPS, like Catleap 2B)

I'd be interested to know how 120hz IPS compares to the ASUS/BENQ LightBoost monitors (i'm assuming these are TN)

summary of what i'm seeing so far:
ASUS/BENQ are like 9/10 or 10/10 compared to CRT (Motion Blur)
However the Asus is a little dim in LB mode and the BENQ has a maroon color tint in LB mode (hopefully can adjust tint in video card settings)
While the 120hz Catleap/Tempest are like 6/10 ? compared to CRT (Motion Blur)
Does the fact that it is an IPS make the colors / contrast / viewing angle / overall picture quality superior?
If the picture is much better i might be able to live with a little motion blur
 
Strafer said:
I'm in the same boat -
My OC Tempest arriving today (120hz IPS, like Catleap 2B)

I'd be interested to know how 120hz IPS compares to the ASUS/BENQ LightBoost monitors (i'm assuming these are TN)

summary of what i'm seeing so far:
ASUS/BENQ are like 9/10 or 10/10 compared to CRT (Motion Blur)
However the Asus is a little dim in LB mode and the BENQ has a maroon color tint in LB mode (hopefully can adjust tint in video card settings)
While the 120hz Catleap/Tempest are like 6/10 ? compared to CRT (Motion Blur)
Does the fact that it is an IPS make the colors / contrast / viewing angle / overall picture quality superior?
If the picture is much better i might be able to live with a little motion blur
Click to expand...

You are correct - the IPS will always have better viewing angles and better colors. Going for these fast TN benq/asus monitors with lightboost entirely comes down to motion blur. Of course you'll also lose pixels by moving from a catleap/tempest. It comes down to what's important to you. Color isn't so important to me, but pixels are. So for me it would have to be 3 in portrait or stick to IPS.
 
i wish you could control the backlight to bring it to 60hz! would have been motion blur free moment for ALL LCD owners.
 
qwidmeyer said:
Are you sure that vsync with triple buffering is needed? I would think it would be a hindrance that introduces input lag.
Click to expand...
it depends on the game. Sometimes VSYNC off worked better in some games. Sometimes VSYNC on+Triplebuffer works smoother. Choose the setting that is best.

For fast Arena style fast twitch, you get less human brain lag with zero motion blur. At 120Hz, a frame is 8ms, but you react 100-200ms faster if you're getting zero motion blur and can identify faraway/tiny enemies without stopping moving first to identify them.

When running at >240fps (e.g. source engine games), turn off VSYNC will probably be much more fluid since the tearlines are so tiny at that framerate, they stop getting noticed.
On the other hand, a theoretical pefect clockwork sync with VSYNC on, will always be smoother than VSYNC off. However, the perfect clockwork synchronization does not always happen, so VSYNC off will look smoother in many games.

For competitions, VSYNC _OFF_ is usually best, but (at least from a GPU-to-eyeballs, which now factors the human brain in reaction time lag) you can have less lag with 120Hz+LightBoost+VSYNC ON, compared to 60Hz+VSYNC OFF due to faster reaction time (less brain lag) due to zero motion blur. The difference in lag of VSYNC on/off in some games is far less than the reaction time lag caused by motion blur. So test both settings, choose the setting appropriate for a specific game, since the input lag difference now becomes a molehill relative to the mountain caused by CRT-style-clarity gaming. Close combat will benefit more from VSYNC OFF (motion blur matters less), while Arena style games will benefit more from zero motion blur (where 4ms-8ms extra lag is often no longer felt because of the zero motion blur effect, and the zero motion blur becomes more important in rapidly fragging far-away enemies before being fragged)

The human brain has a slower reaction time when it sees motion blur. Especially in superfast-moving Arena-style fast twitch FPS competition. This human brain can sometimes far outweigh the difference between VSYNC on/off. The brain lag is easily at least 100-200ms for motion blurred faraway objects. Especially when you have to shoot tiny faraway things that are trying to shoot you too.

CRT gamers that still keep their displays even today due to zero motion blur, are very familiar with the faster reaction time. It is easy to even prefer CRT+vsync-on even over LCD+vsync-off for this very reason. The same applies to LightBoost, which now brings CRT-like gaming to LCD's.

The bottom line: Do Not Be Afraid To Test Both VSYNC ON/OFF and see which produces less "GPU-to-eyeballs" lag (including improvements to brain reaction time caused by zero motion blur, including microstutter flaws by game programming for a specific VSYNC setting, etc)
 
Last edited:
Strafer said:
I'm in the same boat -
My OC Tempest arriving today (120hz IPS, like Catleap 2B)

I'd be interested to know how 120hz IPS compares to the ASUS/BENQ LightBoost monitors (i'm assuming these are TN)

summary of what i'm seeing so far:
ASUS/BENQ are like 9/10 or 10/10 compared to CRT (Motion Blur)
However the Asus is a little dim in LB mode and the BENQ has a maroon color tint in LB mode (hopefully can adjust tint in video card settings)
While the 120hz Catleap/Tempest are like 6/10 ? compared to CRT (Motion Blur)
Does the fact that it is an IPS make the colors / contrast / viewing angle / overall picture quality superior?
If the picture is much better i might be able to live with a little motion blur
Click to expand...
Depends on what kinds of games you play. Fast twitch online games benefit hugely from CRT-style (provided by LCD LightBoost). Or are you doing a slower exploration/adventure game, or Civilization/Simcity games? (You'll appreciate the color quality of IPS).

Also, IPS 120Hz has slightly more motion blur than non-LightBoost TN 120Hz LCD
Gotta pick your poison. For me being used to C, regular 120Hz is NOT "a little motion blur" -- it's still a blurry mess in Arena-type games compared to CRT. Just half as blurry a s 60Hz.

Hopefully someday, we will get 1440p+IPS+LightBoost. Probably not for several years, alas.
 
Let's say I buy a programmable strobe light. And just place it in a strategic place in the room/near the lcd.

Can we speculate/entertain the idea it could be possible to reduce perceived blur by any amount? (even if it would be a tiny amount). I understand it would not affect the LCD at all, but maybe the flashing would screw enough with our eyes (and then induce major seizures :D).

Off the top of my head I'm assuming the LCD would always appear very dim.
 
dopple said:
i wish you could control the backlight to bring it to 60hz! would have been motion blur free moment for ALL LCD owners.
Click to expand...
This would be very flickery like a 60Hz CRT. But there's no reason it can't be done.

nVidia simply locked the LightBoost strobing to frequencies compatible with their 3D shutter glasses. It's probably only a small firmware hack modification to a computer monitor's electronics. (Does anyone know what chips are used in Asus and Benq? Are these standard microcontrollers that can be hackable? Maybe DDC control?)

For Crysis I really want LightBoost at 85Hz, but with the strobe lengths used at 120Hz. That way, 85fps@85Hz will have exactly the same amount of motion blur (I.e. none perceived) as 120fps@120Hz. A single GTX 680 won't do 120fps in Crysis steadily. If I could run at a lower framerate, I'd gain the zero motion blur effect with a less powerful GPU. That's the single biggest advantage of being tempted to hack a monitor for a lower strobe rate. We'd do the firmware hacking on the Benq because that will need extra brightness, if we knew what chips the Benq used. Make LightBoost run at all refresh rates. May need to lengthen the blanking interval between refreshes to give enough time to let pixels settle.

CRT gamers who compare side by side, are familiar that 60fps@60Hz CRT has less motion blur than 120fps@120Hz LCD (non-lightboost)
 
Druneau said:
Let's say I buy a programmable strobe light. And just place it in a strategic place in the room/near the lcd.
Can we speculate/entertain the idea it could be possible to reduce perceived blur by any amount? (even if it would be a tiny amount). I understand it would not affect the LCD at all, but maybe the flashing would screw enough with our eyes (and then induce major seizures :D).
Click to expand...
This won't work. You need to put the strobe lamp _BEHIND_ the LCD glass & then synchronize the flashes to the VSYNC (with a small time offset to allow pixel persistence to die down).

The LCD glass panel is optically equivalent to a piece of stained glass with tiny pixel-sized panes. You can put any backlight behind it, if it is diffused well enough (a solid rectangle of bright light, like an xray transparency film viewing surface). So theoretically, an ultrahigh-frequency xenon strobe lamp and a piece of translucent white plastic (diffuser), all set up behind the LCD panel, could become your homemade LightBoost light for a disassembled LCD monitor.

But xenon isn't fast enough to flash at 120Hz cheaply and brightly without overheating. LED's, fortunately, is - they have virtually no strobe-inflicted wear & tear even when flashing at 1000Hz for 10 years. Even a 1985 dot matrix red marquee in a store window still works today. If you want to build a home-made LightBoost, you need LED, watch my blog at www.scanningbacklight.com (scroll down to see my homemade Arduino plans for a strobe backlight modification of an LCD display). The plans are now delayed to a bit later to early 2013, while I experiment more with hacking out-of-box (LightBoost) displays....

I did some studying and understand sample-n-hold (LCD) versus impulse-driven (CRT).
Please see Science & References for an explanation of the science & physics of motion blur, and how it's reduced/eliminated by short samples (flashes).
 
Last edited:
Hi all, I just wanted to confirm that this method worked on Benq xl2411t.

24 in PixPerAn http://i.imgur.com/vnNYC.jpg [tried running at 25, but my reaction isn't all that great] Still, a huge improvement over my ips which hits the wall at 12.

Wanted to know what do you guys get with an Asus VG278H monitor?

And one more question: whats fastest way to disable/enable lightboost in 2d mode? I'm asking this, because my pc can't push 120fps in latest games :( and as far as i understand theres no use of this hack at 60fps.
 
mdrejhon said:
This won't work. You need to put the strobe lamp _BEHIND_ the LCD glass & then synchronize the flashes to the VSYNC (with a small time offset to allow pixel persistence to die down).

The LCD glass panel is optically equivalent to a piece of stained glass with tiny pixel-sized panes. You can put any backlight behind it, if it is diffused well enough (a solid rectangle of bright light, like an xray transparency film viewing surface). So theoretically, an ultrahigh-frequency xenon strobe lamp and a piece of translucent white plastic (diffuser), all set up behind the LCD panel, could become your homemade LightBoost light for a disassembled LCD monitor.

But xenon isn't fast enough to flash at 120Hz cheaply and brightly without overheating. LED's, fortunately, is - they have virtually no strobe-inflicted wear & tear even when flashing at 1000Hz for 10 years. Even a 1985 dot matrix red marquee in a store window still works today. If you want to build a home-made LightBoost, you need LED, watch my blog at www.scanningbacklight.com (scroll down to see my homemade Arduino plans for a strobe backlight modification of an LCD display). The plans are now delayed to a bit later to early 2013, while I experiment more with hacking out-of-box (LightBoost) displays....

I did some studying and understand sample-n-hold (LCD) versus impulse-driven (CRT).
Please see Science & References for an explanation of the science & physics of motion blur, and how it's reduced/eliminated by short samples (flashes).
Click to expand...

Already read all of that, and fully understand.

I was just inquiring about any alternate methods to reduce blur.

Does the blur reducing method have to directly affect the pixels. Or is the end goal something that tricks our brain sensors into perceiving what we see differently.

Is a strobing backlight "THE" only solution? While probably one of the most efficient/easily implemented. I would think there are alternate ways of reducing perceived blur.

I could just as well close my eyes 8ms and keep them open 0.33333ms 120 times a second. Probably would get hard after a while.
 
For this to work, do you need an IR emitter to allow enabling of the 3D option? I don't have a 120hz monitor, but seriously considering one now.
 
One day maybe the LCDs will be able to update the pixels in under 1ms... so for the rest of the time 7 or 15ms we would have the same picture, I'm guessing this would also look pretty good.
 
Transsive said:
One day maybe the LCDs will be able to update the pixels in under 1ms... so for the rest of the time 7 or 15ms we would have the same picture, I'm guessing this would also look pretty good.
Click to expand...

Without strobing that would simply be stutter hell. You would need well over 120hz with an instant pixel change (OLED <0.01ms). Our eyes need to be fooled into seeing fluid motion via some kind of strobing, be it lightboost, crt or plasma.
 
Jautis said:
Hi all, I just wanted to confirm that this method worked on Benq xl2411t.

24 in PixPerAn http://i.imgur.com/vnNYC.jpg [tried running at 25, but my reaction isn't all that great] Still, a huge improvement over my ips which hits the wall at 12.

Wanted to know what do you guys get with an Asus VG278H monitor?

And one more question: whats fastest way to disable/enable lightboost in 2d mode? I'm asking this, because my pc can't push 120fps in latest games :( and as far as i understand theres no use of this hack at 60fps.
Click to expand...

Pixel Persistence Analyzer (PixPerAn) Readability Test Results 120hz: Wow just wow! Speechless.........

-Highest readable tempo without Lightboost (LB) was 7 and even that was blurry and my eyes where straining to read it.

-Highest readable tempo with Lightboost was 30 (Only could read the first 5 letters) my eyes balls just can't move that fast

So when i first turned on LB and tried the last failed tempo of 8 again (which was blurry non-sense w/o LB)and was shocked how crystal clear it was. Kept going up until i reached tempo 24 and completed the test successfully. But at this crazy fast tempo my head was hurting at all the right to left motion that my head was doing to keep up with this speed. Next I turned it up to the insane tempo of 30. The speed is so fast my eyes have trouble keeping up with the letters, but when i finally train my eyes to lock on the letters THEY WERE CLEAR! I could only get the first 5 letter out and correct, due to the insane speed of tempo 30. Maybe a trained eye like Vega can get out all the letters, but for me to be able to read 5 letters states that yes this LB hack makes my VG278H monitors have Zero perceivable motion blur.

On one side note there was a minimal ghosting effect with the letters. Similar to the 3d ghosting effect. The test letters are black print, the test background is white, and the ghost behind it was a very light grey/white. The ghosting was not a blur or trailing effect it was a perfect letter, just extremely light and very hard to see. The only ghost letter that was visible was the last in the grouping as im guessing the others ghost into the other black letters. But in no way did the ghosting effect the readability of the extremely fast moving letters.
 
Again, does someone of you have a modified .inf file for the ASUS VG278HE in order to get LightBoost without having this 3D kit?

I have the VG278 (no HE), but it just shows me 120 Hz as I want to test it with 144 Hz (getting LB mode with 144 Hz) :)

Thanks
 
You cannot LB at 144 Hz. The "H" model .inf was posted earlier in the thread somewhere. The 120hz LB motion is so clear you really don't need to use 144Hz.. Not to mention it will be a lot hard to maintain 144+ FPS than 120 at all times.
 
Druneau said:
Does the blur reducing method have to directly affect the pixels. Or is the end goal something that tricks our brain sensors into perceiving what we see differently.
Click to expand...
No, it just has to strobe at the human eye retina photoreceptors.

You could use a:
- Spinning zoetrope (this is a 150 year old version of the same LightBoost effect!)
- Spinning cylinders with transparent holes. Iconoscope cameras from 1920's sorta worked this way.
- Nipikow discs. Google "Farnsworth nipikow" for the early stuff, and www.tvdawn.com
- Even 3D shutter glasses with one of your eyes closed, or the shutter glasses hacked to flicker both shutters at the same time.
- There's modern LED nipikow discs.
- The mechanical LED "waving wand" clocks.
- etc.

This is easy to understand stuff if you are familiar with the stroboscopic effect, and how shorter samples to the human eyes (of ANY kind) turns a blurry image into a sharp image. Very classic example: "zoetrope". Look from above, all motion blur. Look through the slit, a mini "movie" without motion blur. See... People of 150 years ago figured out what I figured out about zero motion blur LCD's and it's shameful there are so many skeptics about zero motion blur LCD and do not understand how it's possible now, thanks to 3D compatible LCD's...

Is a strobing backlight "THE" only solution? While probably one of the most efficient/easily implemented. I would think there are alternate ways of reducing perceived blur.
Click to expand...
No. See above for alternatives. Another method is frame interpolation, aka the motionflow effect seen in HDTV. But that's lots of lag, because it has to lookahead and lookbehind to put fake frames in, so it's useless for videogames.

Stroboscopic effect (of any kind) is the only way to do it in a zero motion blur manner without an input lag added, and without doing an infinite framerate. A 1/1000sec strobe is equivalent in motion blur to a non-strobing 1000fps@1000Hz display (which does not exist). The mathematical relationship is in the Science link I gave...

I could just as well close my eyes 8ms and keep them open 0.33333ms 120 times a second. Probably would get hard after a while.
Click to expand...
Yes, that would work, if you were a robot.
 
Transsive said:
One day maybe the LCDs will be able to update the pixels in under 1ms... so for the rest of the time 7 or 15ms we would have the same picture, I'm guessing this would also look pretty good.
Click to expand...
That is the sample-and-hold effect and is VERY bad for motion blur. Eye-tracking-based motion blur is caused by your eyes continuously tracking across static frames, as each frame "steps forward".
You NEED to use strobing (for strobing), or a higher fps rate (for non-strobing)

Also, 1ms vs 2ms of pixel persistence (for an 8ms-long refresh -- 1/120sec) makes extremely little difference if you don't strobe the backlight or take advantage of an increased framerate. 2ms pixel persistence per frame theoretically makes 500fps usable, while 1ms makes 1000fps usable -- but these framerates are impractical on a computer monitor. If you're doing 1ms vs 2ms pixel persistence while staying at 120fps or even 60fps, you aren't going to notice more than approximately 10-15% improvement. Mathematically, 2ms is only 25% of an 8ms refresh. 1ms is only 12.5% of an 8ms refresh. Going from 2ms to 1ms provides a theoretical maximum of 12.5% improvement in motion blur if you do not increase the framerate, and if you do not strobe the backlight. In reality, the improvement is generally less.
(NOTE: It's possible that BENQ rated 1ms for the XL2411T based on strobing, not the LCD panel. This is fair game, because you're bypassing pixel persistence with the strobe, simply by strobing after the pixel persistence is finished within the same refresh; and pixel persistence is kept in total darkness, unseen by the human eye. So, this may actually be a moot argument, since there may not be such a thing as a true 1ms LCD panel. What's more important is erasing pixel persistence before strobing, on time before the next refresh.)

BTW, Professional Photographers will understand this effect via this equivalence: If you took a picture while panning the camera sideways fast, you'll get more motion blur with a 1/60sec shutter, or 1/120sec shutter. From the scientific papers I've read so far, this is the same equivalent motion blurs as human eyes see for an equivalent sample-and-hold display of the same refresh rate (e.g. 60Hz and 120Hz traditional LCD monitors, equivalent to motion blur of a moving camera with a 1/60sec shutter and 1/120sec shutter respectively; the motion blur created by both is equivalent (with only very minor differences caused by slightly different pixel persistence speeds which are meaningless). The faster you pan the camera, the more motion blur. Likewise, on LCD displays, the faster the image moves, the more motion blur. You need a shorter shutter speed on the camera (e.g. 1/1000sec) to eliminate motion blur while taking a picture while moving around your camera. Likewise, strobing a backlight for 1/1000sec will have the same motion blur elimination effect. Thus, for a strobed backlight lasting 1/1000sec per refresh frame -- moving images have the same clarity as the motion blur found inside equivalent camera photographs taken with a 1/1000sec camera shutter, for equivalent camera-pan movement speeds.

P.S. The semantics/concept of "frame rate" is an artifical invention necessary to make it possible to record/display moving mages (beginning with the invention of movies). The human eye has no concept of a discrete framerate.
 
Last edited:
Druneau said:
Let's say I buy a programmable strobe light. And just place it in a strategic place in the room/near the lcd.

Can we speculate/entertain the idea it could be possible to reduce perceived blur by any amount? (even if it would be a tiny amount). I understand it would not affect the LCD at all, but maybe the flashing would screw enough with our eyes (and then induce major seizures :D).

Off the top of my head I'm assuming the LCD would always appear very dim.
Click to expand...

Party_hard!.gif


Interesting idea none the less :D
 
Cr4zy said:
For this to work, do you need an IR emitter to allow enabling of the 3D option? I don't have a 120hz monitor, but seriously considering one now.
Click to expand...
No, people were able to do some hacks here via registry (nVidia settings) and/or monitor INF files (VESA DDC override). Though many of the newer LB monitors already have emitters built in.
 
Vega said:
Yes, got it working. Testing it out now with chrome smooth scroll, but the scrolling is jittery and stuttering up and down. Not sure why it is doing that. Confirmed monitor is in Lightboost mode (it states it in the menu), all options besides contrast are grayed out.
Click to expand...

I'm on a crt now and vertical scrolling text (this forum) is jittery - kinda jumps jerky like down instead of smooth scroll
Firefox is much smoother though
May be a chrome thing (noticed this a long time ago when chrome first was coming out)
 
I've seen smooth scrolling other ways, and it works flawlessly with the LB Benq. It is a Chrome problem indeed.
 
Strafer said:
I'm on a crt now and vertical scrolling text (this forum) is jittery - kinda jumps jerky like down instead of smooth scroll
Firefox is much smoother though
May be a chrome thing (noticed this a long time ago when chrome first was coming out)
Click to expand...
Chrome can update at 120fps. FireFox has a 60fps framelimit (quite annoying). You need to use a third party smooth scrolling utility such as Chromium Smooth Scroll extension makes it scroll at 120fps -- it only works using the mouse wheel, not the scroll bar -- you enable that steering wheel icon and adjust settings. Text is more crystal sharp under Chrome than FireFox on my system. That said, Chrome runs poorly on some systems, make sure chrome://gpu shows that everything is enabled... Sometimes tweaking chrome://flags improves performance.

Remember
(1) Install Chromium Smooth Scroll,
(2) Enable the steering wheel icon after you install this;
(3) Use the mousewheel, not the scrollbar.
Then it scrolls more smoothly than FireFox on my system.
 
Last edited:
Mark Rejhon said:
Is that the VG278HE without the emitter? Try installing the monitor INF file, I heard that people were able to get it to work without the glasses.
(My VG278H has the shutter glasses emitter built in)

Let us try to help you out, without forcing you to get a shutter glasses emitter!
Click to expand...

VG278H with emitter. It's not working on PC and PS3.

When used with an external emitter Lightboost isn't working for me either. Maybe because the OSD Lightboost and 3D IR Mode options are greyed out and it's not enabled when its like that.
 
So even if frame transition would be instant, we would still see blur due to sample and hold?

I always though the blur was caused by the pixels being in 'transit' most of the time (8-15ms) and not being able to settle.
 
Vega said:
I've seen smooth scrolling other ways, and it works flawlessly with the LB Benq. It is a Chrome problem indeed.
Click to expand...

Very nice. Did you get Pixperan working? Did you get the color shift corrected, if very significant.
 
I just bought the Benq X2411T from Overclockers.co.uk

Does anyone know if 2D Lightboost works on a Xbox 360 or PS3?
 
D8V1D said:
I just bought the Benq X2411T from Overclockers.co.uk

Does anyone know if 2D Lightboost works on a Xbox 360 or PS3?
Click to expand...

Sure it will, you just have to turn on the 120fps option on the consoles :p

I hope you were joking.
 
Is there a way to get this to work on AMD/ATI GPUs? I'd like to try this out, but my wallet cant stomach a 680 and a 120Hz Monitor with Lightboost. Especially when I'm already rocking a 7970 Lightning.

Romir said:
VG278H with emitter. It's not working on PC and PS3.

When used with an external emitter Lightboost isn't working for me either. Maybe because the OSD Lightboost and 3D IR Mode options are greyed out and it's not enabled when its like that.
Click to expand...
Do you have a usb cable plugged into your computer from the monitor?
 
Strafer said:
I'm in the same boat -
My OC Tempest arriving today (120hz IPS, like Catleap 2B)

I'd be interested to know how 120hz IPS compares to the ASUS/BENQ LightBoost monitors (i'm assuming these are TN)

summary of what i'm seeing so far:
ASUS/BENQ are like 9/10 or 10/10 compared to CRT (Motion Blur)
However the Asus is a little dim in LB mode and the BENQ has a maroon color tint in LB mode (hopefully can adjust tint in video card settings)
While the 120hz Catleap/Tempest are like 6/10 ? compared to CRT (Motion Blur)
Does the fact that it is an IPS make the colors / contrast / viewing angle / overall picture quality superior?
If the picture is much better i might be able to live with a little motion blur
Click to expand...

How does the OC Tempest compare to the Catleap 2B? They seem to be the exact same except the Catleap is selling for $700-$800. The Tempest is definitely a very tempting option...much cheaper and it's domestic.
 
Transsive said:
So even if frame transition would be instant, we would still see blur due to sample and hold?
Click to expand...
Correct.
There's some good study material at Science & References on the sample and hold effect.
The frame is not erased before displaying the next frame. Instead, the frame is overwritten by the next frame.
You need a black frame insertion effect, or a strobe effect.

Transsive said:
I always though the blur was caused by the pixels being in 'transit' most of the time (8-15ms) and not being able to settle.
Click to expand...
Nope, sadly not. See these PowerPoint slides (albiet from a cellphone manufacturer, they are simpler-looking slides than many of the more complex papers, so I've posted these). It is equally applicable to all displays.

sample_and_hold.png


impulse_driven.png


This PowerPoint was made in 2007.
Other scientific documents I've linked to in Science & References have similiar images, explaining the eye-tracking-based motion blur caused by a sample-and-hold display (some of them using math formulas). From all sorts of manufacturers, including researchers at TV manufacturers.
 
Last edited:
lawlz_xd said:
How does the OC Tempest compare to the Catleap 2B? They seem to be the exact same except the Catleap is selling for $700-$800. The Tempest is definitely a very tempting option...much cheaper and it's domestic.
Click to expand...
IPS and 1440p has far better color and far better resolution.

I hope we can see LightBoost type technology arrive on IPS panels, preferably sooner than later. Alas, when it happens by an official manufacturer (non-overclocked), among IPS, it will probably be 1080p that gets LightBoost first. Due to the longer pixel persistence of IPS, the strobing may need to be modified into a scanning, because IPS panels will probably work better with scanning (a more expensive mechanism). See "Is scanning the backlight better than flashing the entire backlight at once?" from the Scanning Backlight FAQ. However, this is kind of incompatible with the original goal of LightBoost, timing a surge of light (strobes) precisely when the LCD shutters on shutter glasses are open, to boost the light making it through shutters without wasting backlight while both shutters are closed. So manufacturers may add response-time acceleration to IPS, in order to make 3D possible, and consequently also make strobed backlights (LightBoost) practical with IPS.
 
Last edited:
Ya, the science is sound and the motion blur reduction is confirmed awesome. Now the real challenge: expand the technology outside the realm of awful low-resolution horrible image TN panels. :eek:
 
BenQ XL2411T eh?

http://pcmonitors.info/benq/benq-xl2411t-120hz-of-gaming-goodness

http://www.benq.com/product/monitor/xl2411t

One &#8216;make or break&#8217; point and contentious issue on the XL series thus far has been the pixel overdrive which on the 10T in particular was too aggressive. This lead to noticeable &#8216;inverse ghosting&#8217; in some instances. The grey to grey response time is now quoted as &#8216;1ms&#8217; rather than &#8216;2ms&#8217;, which could indicate some tuning has been done to the overdrive algorithm. Alternatively it could just be a mild exaggeration by BenQ &#8211; they wouldn&#8217;t be the first company to make misleading response time claims at any rate. One particularly attractive feature of the XL24 series monitors has always been the low input lag, which is further lowered by an &#8216;Instant Mode&#8217; to bypass extraneous image processing. The company is claiming &#8216;0.001 frame&#8217; of input lag which to all intents and purposes means no input lag whatsoever &#8211; it looks as if that won&#8217;t be something to worry about. We will of course find out more about what differentiates the XL2411T from its predecessors when we review it shortly. BenQ have told us that it should be available to test in November and to expect full retail availability in the UK around the same time. Some retailers are now stocking or taking pre-orders for around £235. We will bring any further details on price and availability as the news comes in.
Click to expand...

​
Mark Rejhon said:
My oscilloscope has arrived! I have definitively confirmed that the ASUS LightBoost uses 2 millisecond strobes in LightBoost mode. This is fully consistent with the motion test patterns showing at least 70% less motion blur, because 2ms is over 70% less than 8.33ms of a single 120Hz refresh.

See my BlurBusters Blog post:
http://www.scanningbacklight.com/asus-vg236h-lightboost-strobes-2-millisecond-120hz/

Click to expand...


The BENQ XL2411T (1ms) computer monitor is reported to use 1ms strobes for LightBoost. This would result in 94% less motion blur than LCD 60Hz.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top