• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like
View Poll Results: Should TV manufacturers make a filter that adds chromatic aberration to your TV?
Yes, and on by default
115 37.58%
Yes, and not disableable
191 62.42%
Voters: 306. You may not vote on this poll


Stinkles
Clothed, sober, cooperative
(10-06-2017, 11:15 PM)
Stinkles's Avatar
Here's my feeling:

1. Idiots who don't know any better won't know that it even exists, so turn it off by default.
2. During setup, carefully word a question, "Who is ur favorite director, Stanley Kubrick and Orson Welles, or McG and Michael Bay?
3. Turn it off regardless of the answer.
A-V-B
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:16 PM)
A-V-B's Avatar

Originally Posted by Stinkles

Here's my feeling:

1. Idiots who don't know any better won't know that it even exists, so turn it off by default.
2. During setup, carefully word a question, "Who is ur favorite director, Stanley Kubrick and Orson Welles, or McG and Michael Bay?
3. Turn it off regardless of the answer.

HDTV: Automata
Nekofrog
Banned
(10-06-2017, 11:16 PM)
Nekofrog's Avatar
I remember when I first noticed it on a friend's TV back in... 2010? I don't know, it was a very long time ago, but it instantly made my eyes pop and I said "eww what's wrong with your TV?"

he insisted it was great, but for me it ruined the movie Brazil :\
Syder
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:17 PM)
Syder's Avatar

Originally Posted by Kill Your Masters

Most people don't. You'd be surprised. Most family or friends I visit have this shit turned on.

Super enhanced cinema (super monty python diarrhea effect) sounds too good to be turned off for a 500$ TV or something. TV manufacturers are at fault.

Yeah, I feel like most don't which is crazy. Whenever I visit my grandparents I see how terrible their expensive TV looks because of the default settings.
CopperPuppy
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:19 PM)
CopperPuppy's Avatar
Guys, come on.

Why wouldn't you want all of your content to look like it was recorded on this:

TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
(10-06-2017, 11:19 PM)
TAJ's Avatar

Originally Posted by itwasTuesday

Motion smoothing/image interpolation during text crawl or credits isn't bad though.

I hate it but I use it for Rock Band because I'm focused almost entirely on the gems dropping and it makes that smoother. And the massive input lag it adds can be compensated for by the game.
LakeEarth
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:21 PM)
LakeEarth's Avatar
Turned it off on my dad's TV, and he told me to turn it back on. Didn't win that fight, but the war rages...
Pop-O-Matic
Banned
(10-06-2017, 11:21 PM)
All these Luddites fighting our glorious HFR future. Give me 144 fps films to go along with my 144 fps games or give me death.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
(10-06-2017, 11:22 PM)
Crossing Eden's Avatar

Originally Posted by Pop-O-Matic

All these Luddites fighting our glorious HFR future. Give me 144 fps films to go along with my 144 fps games or give me death.

Film is different from video games. The main benefit of a real higher framerate in gaming is the reduced input lag, there is no such benefit for film unless you want the motion to look incredibly unnatural.
PillarEN
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:24 PM)
PillarEN's Avatar
This is the bane of my existence. This and people who "stretch" images. Especially on youtube uploads. Holy mother of god. 4:3 is ok guys. No need to fatten everything and distort the image of old things.
robotrock
Banned
(10-06-2017, 11:24 PM)
robotrock's Avatar
Aw man, I can't find it anymore, but there was this amazing clip on Youtube maybe six months ago of Batman Forever in 60fps. It was insane to look at.
plagiarize
Banned
(10-06-2017, 11:25 PM)
plagiarize's Avatar

Originally Posted by Crossing Eden

Film is different from video games. The main benefit of a real higher framerate in gaming is the reduced input lag, there is no such benefit for film unless you want the motion to look incredibly unnatural.

This is completely wrong.

But, if it isn't shot in 144 hz, I don't want it to try and display at 144 hz.

TVs should display what they're being fed with little to no image processing.
eXistor
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:26 PM)
eXistor's Avatar
Can't stand any "enhancements" that are on by default. Makes the picture look like shit. It's always so obviously terrible too, I can't understand why people don't even see it (or claim to not see it).
boredandlazy
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:27 PM)
boredandlazy's Avatar
What really sucks is that turning on these motion interpolation settings is usually the only way to increase the motion resolution of your TV. Otherwise you're generally stuck at around 300 lines during fast movement and everything looks blurry as fuck.
5taquitos
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:30 PM)
5taquitos's Avatar
Me every time I go to someone's house that has smoothing enabled:

"Hey, can I see the remote for a second?"
LCGeek
formerly sane
(10-06-2017, 11:30 PM)
LCGeek's Avatar
Odd they would whine about that instead of the natural blurring most displays have until you light boost or get insane refreshrate.
Mimosa97
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:32 PM)
Mimosa97's Avatar
I have an old Sony Bravia (2012). The only thing i can find is something called LED motion and it’s turned off. Is that what they are talking about?
robotrock
Banned
(10-06-2017, 11:33 PM)
robotrock's Avatar

Originally Posted by 5taquitos

Me every time I go to someone's house that has smoothing enabled:

"Hey, can I see the remote for a second?"

This is me expect with color and tint settings. It’s why I always carry around the AVS 709 calibration disc.
Paragon
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:33 PM)
Paragon's Avatar
Start shooting in high framerates if you want me to turn off interpolation.
Film is a blurry juddering mess without it.

When we moved to flat panel displays that don't flicker, we also needed to significantly increase the framerate.
In fact, we should never have switched to completely flicker-free displays at all.
Flicker reduces how long the image is held on our retinas. This minimizes motion blur while also causing motion to appear smoother.

Warning: this image flickers at a very low framerate.
View this image without any sort of motion enhancements enabled, and track each of the moving circles with your eyes - one at a time while covering up the other with a hand.
You should see that the lower circle is much clearer and appears to move much more fluidly than the upper circle.
Both images move at the same framerate and there is no motion blur at all - the only difference is that one flickers while the other does not.


When you view 24 FPS film on a display which flickers at 24Hz - and only 24Hz, the same thing happens.
Viewing 24 FPS film on a CRT monitor running at 24Hz (or multiples of 24 with black frame insertion) is so smooth that it looks as though you just enabled interpolation.
View it at 48Hz or 72Hz - which is what modern film projectors do - and the magic is lost; film looks like an awful juddering mess again.
In fact, it actually gets worse, since repeating frames on a flickering display causes there to be double-images. Here is 24 FPS at 96, 72, 48, and 24Hz on a CRT, showing quad, triple, and double images from the repeated frames.
But 24 FPS at 24Hz on a low-persistence display is magical. You get the smoothness of an interpolated image without any of the interpolation artifacts... along with a hell of a lot of flicker.
Motion interpolation on a flicker-free flat panel display is restoring the native look for 24 FPS film presented at 24Hz - but the trade-off is that you get interpolation artifacts in place of flicker.
Pop-O-Matic
Banned
(10-06-2017, 11:34 PM)

Originally Posted by robotrock

This is me expect with color and tint settings. It’s why I always carry around the AVS 709 calibration disc.

Airola
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:38 PM)
Airola's Avatar

Originally Posted by Skux

People have this ingrained idea that it's only a "film" if it's 24fps. It "feels filmic" or "has that filmic look". And rightfully so - the 24fps standard has been around for decades and has been used for almost every movie they've watched.

But 24fps is only a number that was chosen because it was the tradeoff between motion fidelity and cost. It was good enough and cheap enough to be widely adopted. Unfortunately it's also terribly limiting in some cases, but attempting to go against the grain is often met with revulsion from film purists.

I think that was a happy accident.

Maybe if 48fps had been the norm, some artists would've had experiments with the frame rate and someone would try 24fps and would look it like "hey, this looks really cool, really dreamy, maybe we should film all the future movies in 24fps" :)

Sometimes accidents and limitations create the perfect result. I think 24fps might've been exactly that.
Androidsleeps
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:42 PM)
Androidsleeps's Avatar
Ugh the disgusting soap opera effect that makes me want to stab my eyes! Why is it still default setting on TVs?! I approve of this campaign.
Lace
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:43 PM)
Lace's Avatar
I use black frame insertion on my Samsung TV to help remove the judder I normally get with 24p content. Honestly I find it the best solution to remove judder regular TV sets suffer from without that weird soap opera effect.
FunkyMunkey
Banned
(10-06-2017, 11:48 PM)
FunkyMunkey's Avatar

Originally Posted by Stinkles

Here’s a fun trick: with motion smoothing on, watch the uhd version of Lawrence of Arabia to see how cheap and nasty David Lean’s masterpiece looks.

thats enough satan
DerZuhälter
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:52 PM)
DerZuhälter's Avatar
It's a great feature if you watch a lot of sports.
Paragon
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:52 PM)
Paragon's Avatar

Originally Posted by Lace

I use black frame insertion on my Samsung TV to help remove the judder I normally get with 24p content. Honestly I find it the best solution to remove judder regular TV sets suffer from without that weird soap opera effect.

The problem with BFI or backlight strobing is that it's not matched to the source framerate on most displays.
If your TV strobes at 120Hz (which most Samsung displays do) then a 60 FPS source will have double-images in motion. 24 FPS will have five image repeats per frame.
Some Sony TVs have 60Hz BFI, which is great for 60 FPS games, but I'm not aware of any modern display which will strobe at a rate <60Hz so it doesn't solve the problem for film.
The best option is still to combine interpolation with BFI/Strobing. Many displays will interpolate to 120 FPS if they strobe at 120Hz, rather than 240 FPS with it disabled.
SS4Gogita
Henshin!
(10-06-2017, 11:53 PM)
SS4Gogita's Avatar
The most infuriating part is there are people who don't notice it. I point it out to my sister on her TV and she has no idea what I'm talking about.
Einchy
semen stains the mountaintops
(10-06-2017, 11:55 PM)
Einchy's Avatar
I bought a gaming PC for play all my movies at 4k 120fps and not 24p.
Krakatoa
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:56 PM)
Krakatoa's Avatar
I love the soap box effect. It makes everything look so fake :)
Secret Character
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:56 PM)
Secret Character's Avatar

Originally Posted by Pop-O-Matic

All these Luddites fighting our glorious HFR future. Give me 144 fps films to go along with my 144 fps games or give me death.

Did you watch the Hobbit films in HFR? It was dreadful.
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:56 PM)
HomerSimpson-Man's Avatar
That smoothing effect is like diarrhea to the eyes. It's one thing to film something in a higher framerate, it's another when a processing effect makes it look like it's speeding up and down constantly after the fact.

That garbage is disorienting. If you use it to take advantage of the higher motion resolution, for the love of god, use it on the lower settings, it creates less of that motion smoothing artifact.
ReAxion
Member
(10-06-2017, 11:59 PM)
ReAxion's Avatar
walking into a costco is troubling.
OrangeAtlas
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:04 AM)
OrangeAtlas's Avatar
I forced a friend to turn it off a little while ago when we were watching something, it was unbearable.

He said he didn't even notice and his dad liked it because it "made everything look like a play".

Blegh.
Darth Pinche
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:07 AM)
Darth Pinche's Avatar
Yup, lose that shit. I tried to keep an open mind when I saw The Hobbit in High Frame Rate (HFR) but it just solidified my view that my brain is wired to view that smoothness with cheap reruns of The Twilight Zone.

The Hobbit being garbage did not help.
matthewuk
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:08 AM)
Not all motion interpolation is bad!

One of the problems with LCD displays is that motion effectively reduce the resolution to 300p. So yep 1080p in stills or slow panning. But as soon as the action get heated the details fly out of the window.

I agree most settings create wierd unatural movement.

But you can have your cake and eat it, for example on some of the Sony's I've owned "clear" motion flow has virtually no soap opera and maintains constant resolution.

So it is in most cases a question of tweeking.
CreepingFear
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:09 AM)
CreepingFear's Avatar
I'm all for native HFR. That's not what this is. This is like colorization of black and white material. It's not not good looking.
GAMEPROFF
Banned
(10-07-2017, 12:10 AM)

Originally Posted by Pop-O-Matic

All these Luddites fighting our glorious HFR future. Give me 144 fps films to go along with my 144 fps games or give me death.

I am fine with my movies not looking like shit while I have to pay additional 5€ after paying extra für overlength movies and 3D
rjinaz
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:10 AM)
rjinaz's Avatar
Guess I'm an outlier because I LOVE motion smoothing. Makes it seem like the show I am watching "pops" more.

I don't think it should be default no. But I do like it as an option, in particular on tvs. I never turn it off. Hesitant to get the new TCL 4k P series because no motion smoothing options.
ExVicis
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:12 AM)
ExVicis's Avatar
I love that for all the things James Gunn has worked on they put Slither first before Guardians of the Galaxy.
forrest
formerly nacire
(10-07-2017, 12:16 AM)
forrest's Avatar
Can we just get shit filmed at a higher number of frames as a standard?

I also turn off frame interpolation / motion smoothing, whatever you want to call it.
Neuromancer
The Mayuh of f'n Bawston
(10-07-2017, 12:17 AM)
Neuromancer's Avatar
My neighbor has this turned on. I don't know if he realizes how bad it is or how to tell him.
5taquitos
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:18 AM)
5taquitos's Avatar

Originally Posted by Neuromancer

My neighbor has this turned on. I don't know if he realizes how bad it is or how to tell him.

Just break in to his house in the middle of the night and fix it for him, I'm sure he'll be grateful.
Fitts
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:20 AM)
Fitts's Avatar
Interpolation is gross. Sample-and-hold displays are insufficient for displaying full motion.

Y'all should've bought plasmas while you could. Too bad the early stigma stuck, FUD spread like wildfire, and the average consumer continually buys into half-baked gimmickry.
Beerman462
Banned
(10-07-2017, 12:23 AM)

Originally Posted by 5taquitos

Just break in to his house in the middle of the night and fix it for him, I'm sure he'll be grateful.

I fixed one of my inlaws TVs without them knowing. They came into the room and were wondering why the picture looked better.
Jigolo
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:24 AM)
Jigolo's Avatar
unite the directors for a true battle lol
bud
straight
(10-07-2017, 12:24 AM)
bud's Avatar
most people genuinely have no idea this is turned on by default.

it upsets me.
Huw_Dawson
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:25 AM)
Huw_Dawson's Avatar
It destroys 2D animation. Off, please!
asagami_
Banned
(10-07-2017, 12:26 AM)

Originally Posted by CopperPuppy

Guys, come on.

Why wouldn't you want all of your content to look like it was recorded on this:

Eh, you are right, like watch David Lnynch's Inland Empire :)
Nepenthe
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:28 AM)
Nepenthe's Avatar

Originally Posted by Huw_Dawson

It destroys 2D animation. Off, please!

It destroys CG too, especially if it's mixed with live action. I remember it really being pushed during Iron Man 2, and the disparity between Tony and his suit was all the more obvious.

It's disgusting.
Fallout-NL
Member
(10-07-2017, 12:28 AM)
Fallout-NL's Avatar

Originally Posted by ExVicis

I love that for all the things James Gunn has worked on they put Slither first before Guardians of the Galaxy.


And rightly so.

Thread Tools