Jump to content

Has gaming decreased your pleasure of watching movies in cinemas?

Dayfly
6 minutes ago, iamdarkyoshi said:

I wait until someone gets them on a file based format, then playback with smooth video project.

SVP: For people who want to fill their video content with all kinds of ghosting visual artifacts due to ineffective frame interpolation:

 

(Seriously, SVP does this, TVs with frame interpolation does this, how does anyone put up with this garbage being introduced to their video?)

 

ebwE8hw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

I think the problem is that you are focusing too much on stuff other than the movie. If you let yourself get sucked in and lost in the movie then you wouldn't notice things like that.

Try and relax and don't think about "glorious 60 FPS master race" next time you're at the cinema and you should be fine.

Yeah probably. I just watched Rogue One today and quite enjoyed it, but also something that added to the experience was I was listening to the music and paying attention to like what instrument was playing certain parts, which was interesting. Also I figured out what would happen at the end like 2 minutes before it ended so I feel super smart.

"You don't need headphones, all you need is willpower!" ~MicroCenter employee

 

How to use a WiiMote and Nunchuck as your mouse!


Specs:
Graphics Card: EVGA 750 Ti SC
PSU: Corsair CS450M
RAM: A-Data XPG V1.0 (1x8GB) (Red)
Procrastinator: Intel i5 4690k @ 4.4GHz 1.3V
Case: NZXT Source 210 Elite (Black)
Speakers and Headphones: Monitor Speakers and Phlips SHP9500s
MoBo: MSI Z97 PC MATE
SSD: SanDisk Ultra II (240GB)
Monitor: LG 29UM68-P
Mouse: Mionix Naos 7000
Keyboard: Corsair K70 RGB (2016) (Browns)

Webcam/mic: Logitech C270
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

If I didn't know that UHD Blu-Ray has 60fps support, I probably wouldn't have said that 60FPS isn't viable, would I?

That makes no sense. You said we couldn't do 60 FPS blu-ray, but we clearly can. It is in the spec.

 

 

8 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

It's basically about 'Frame Time' though not quite in the same way you see in PC gaming, but not far off. Let's start off with PC games, you wanna hit 60fps, but your GPU isn't quite getting 60fps, so you're floating between 40-50fps while frames are 'held' until the next refresh cycle where the frame can be drawn, this gives you an uneven frame time and the feeling is juddery.  This is also why some games include 30fps framerate caps, to offer a smooth and regular 30fps refresh rate on a 60hz display (Because 30 divides into 60 evenly, so the screen just shows the same image for every two refresh cycles) an why you now have G-Sync an FreeSync displays which don't operate on a fixed refresh rate to bypass this issue entirely.

I am just going to say that what you're talking about is completely unrelated to 60 FPS Blu-ray, because with 60 FPS blu-rays we just map each frame to each refresh cycle, and gets 1:1 frame playback (as in, perfect).

But before we go even further, you can't compare games and video because one has uneven frame rate while the others do not. Judder is a far more serious issue in games because the frame rate fluctuates so much. With video you can display an uneven multiple of frames:refresh rate fairly smoothly because the judder will be consistent.

 

 

8 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

...So what happens when you playback 24fps content on a 60hz TV?  Basically the same thing.  You have 24 frames to display every second and 60 intervals within that second to draw them, some frames will have to be drawn twice and others will be drawn three times in a row to fit the 60hz refresh cycle.  This is why most TVs and many good playback systems will change their refresh rate to match their content.  A good media setup will switch the display to 24hz for the playback of a film, so that the refresh rate of the display perfectly matches the content.

Again, completely irrelevant because this problem does not exist with 60 FPS Blu-rays.

You're also wrong in that the TV will change its refresh rate. Very few, if any, TVs does this. Instead what we get is that some frames gets displayed 3 refresh cycles, while other gets displayed 2 times (like you said). This can be noticeable if you look for it, but in general people won't notice it because it is consistent. A good media setup won't change to 24Hz because that is incredibly hard if not impossible to do. You can not keep a frame on an LCD for that long without refreshing it. The image starts degrading. That's why so many FreeSync monitors won't go under ~35-40Hz (and G-Sync switches to twice as high refresh rate as the FPS). Because the image starts degrading.

That's why 120Hz TVs are seen as the "holy grail" of refresh rates. Because 120 is an even multiple of both 24 and 30, so you get no judder regardless of the content (although 48 FPS ruins that).

 

8 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

This is why 60fps won't really work, if you shot a movie at 60fps for what few theaters were ready for 60fps playback, you also need a version of this movie that is 24fps for the majority of cinemas that only project at cinematic framerates.  ...So how do we convert 60fps to 24fps cleanly?  We can't.  This is why cinematic HFR content is shot at 48fps, because you can just drop every other frame an you have a 24fps version.

What the hell are you on about? We are talking about Blu-Rays here, not movie theaters.

Your entire post could be summarized as "we can't do 60FPS because the projectors used in cinemas doesn't support that refresh rate", and even that statement is a very broad generalization which is pretty inaccurate, and has nothing to do with the Blu-ray standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

That makes no sense. You said we couldn't do 60 FPS blu-ray, but we clearly can. It is in the spec.

 

 

I am just going to say that what you're talking about is completely unrelated to 60 FPS Blu-ray, because with 60 FPS blu-rays we just map each frame to each refresh cycle, and gets 1:1 frame playback (as in, perfect).

But before we go even further, you can't compare games and video because one has uneven frame rate while the others do not. Judder is a far more serious issue in games because the frame rate fluctuates so much. With video you can display an uneven multiple of frames:refresh rate fairly smoothly because the judder will be consistent.

 

 

Again, completely irrelevant because this problem does not exist with 60 FPS Blu-rays.

You're also wrong in that the TV will change its refresh rate. Very few, if any, TVs does this. Instead what we get is that some frames gets displayed 3 refresh cycles, while other gets displayed 2 times (like you said). This can be noticeable if you look for it, but in general people won't notice it because it is consistent. A good media setup won't change to 24Hz because that is incredibly hard if not impossible to do. You can not keep a frame on an LCD for that long without refreshing it. The image starts degrading. That's why so many FreeSync monitors won't go under ~35-40Hz (and G-Sync switches to twice as high refresh rate as the FPS). Because the image starts degrading.

That's why 120Hz TVs are seen as the "holy grail" of refresh rates. Because 120 is an even multiple of both 24 and 30, so you get no judder regardless of the content (although 48 FPS ruins that).

 

What the hell are you on about? We are talking about Blu-Rays here, not movie theaters.

Your entire post could be summarized as "we can't do 60FPS because the projectors used in cinemas doesn't support that refresh rate", and even that statement is a very broad generalization which is pretty inaccurate, and has nothing to do with the Blu-ray standard.

You failed to understand entirely.

 

What I said, with ALL of this, is that no one is going to make a 60fps movie, because they are going to make movies primarily with 24fps in mind, this is why HFR films are 48fps, and this is why you can't convert a 48fps movie to conform to 60fps for a UHD BD.  So it's not going to happen. The only 60fps content you will see on UHD BD is sports content and an extreme minority of content specifically produced at 60fps.  ...But it ain't gonna be movies.

 

Also, the majority of TVs support 24hz.  Believe me, I've done it with everything from expensive Samsung's to cheap Insignia/Dynex brands from Best Buy.  I assure you, I actually know how this works.  I actually work in the film industry after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

What I said, with ALL of this, is that no one is going to make a 60fps movie, because they are going to make movies primarily with 24fps in mind, this is why HFR films are 48fps, and this is why you can't convert a 48fps movie to conform to 60fps for a UHD BD.  So it's not going to happen. The only 60fps content you will see on UHD BD is sports content and an extreme minority of content specifically produced at 60fps.  ...But it ain't gonna be movies.

 

Also, the majority of TVs support 24hz.  Believe me, I've done it with everything from expensive Samsung's to cheap Insignia/Dynex brands from Best Buy.  I assure you, I actually know how this works.  I actually work in the film industry after all.

So let me get this straight. You're making quite a few assumptions and all of them are wrong.

 

1) That cinemas are using projects that are capped at 24Hz. This is a very big generalization which does not hold true. How many theaters showed the hobbit in high frame rate? I don't have a solid number, but there were no shortage of cinemas where you could go and watch it in HFR. Even my tiny city's movie theater had it in HFR. I wouldn't be surprised if most cinemas has projectors that can handle 60Hz.

 

2) The Blu-ray spec doesn't allow for 60 FPS. It does. It is in the spec. It's been in the spec since 2004 and the support for high frame rate is getting even better in the UHD BD spec. There is no "legacy support" hindering anything.

 

3) That all blu-rays that are sold are mastered for cinema, and then converted to blu-ray. That might be true for movies like Rogue One, but that is far from the only type of video that gets released on BD. With channels like the BBC sending at high frame rate (BBC HD is 50 FPS), and TV series getting more and more popular (with higher budgets) chances are the non-blockbuster movie BD sales will keep on increasing. With UHD BD improving the support for HFR chances are more videos will be released in that format as well.

 

4) That your TV is actually running at 24Hz. I don't know what TVs you have tried, but I am willing to bet that if you hook them up to a oscilloscope you would find that the TV does not run at 24Hz even when you put it in that mode. It probably runs at a multiple of 24Hz and does 2:2 pulldown, because at such low refresh rates there would be a noticeable flickering. Again, this is why G-Sync (and I believe some FreeSync monitors) will double the refresh rate and do 2:2 pulldown once you go below a certain threshold.

 

5) That most TVs has a 24Hz mode, and will change to it when you play something at 24 FPS. This is bullshit. A handful of TVs does this, but the vast majority does not. Check out this list from rting where they tested it. 14% of the TVs they tested did this, and they were all very high end TVs. Only 14% of new TVs does this, and if you go back just a few years that number is even lower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, no, you actually missunderstood most of what I said, thdn ranted about it as a result of your incorrect assumptions.  But I'm at work making actual movies right now so you'll have to wait till the evening for me to formulate at more detailed response.  But wow, I'm especially baffled as to where you got #1 and #2 from.  But the important thing is that you're angry about it.  Stay angry my friend.  ;O

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

But wow, I'm especially baffled as to where you got #1 and #2 from.

 

Where I got number 1 from:

21 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

This is why 60fps won't really work, if you shot a movie at 60fps for what few theaters were ready for 60fps playback, you also need a version of this movie that is 24fps for the majority of cinemas that only project at cinematic framerates ...So how do we convert 60fps to 24fps cleanly?

By "cinematic framerates" I assumed you meant 24 FPS, because that's what you were talking about earlier in the paragraph, in the middle of the sentence, and the sentence right after.

If we assume that you meant 24Hz when you said "cinematic framerates", and I really don't see how you could read your post in any other way, then you were saying that the majority of cinema projectors only work at 24Hz. You might also have included 48Hz in that definition (since you earlier talked about skipping each second frame to bring 48FPS down to 24FPS), but that still implies that the projectors can only do 24Hz.

Maybe that's not what you meant, but that's what you wrote.

 

 

Where I got number 2 from:

22 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

Even support for 48fps HFR is non-existent in the UHD Blu-Ray standard.  (Please don't make me explain why 60fps isn't viable for legacy support reasons)

You're talking about the Blu-Ray standard and then you (in parenthesis) say that 60fps isn't viable for legacy support reasons.

Again, you might have meant something different, but the way you wrote it you say that 60 FPS is not supported by Blu-Rays for legacy reasons.

That's why I replied and asked why you thought it wasn't supported, because it was already in the Blu-Ray standard (and thus clearly is supported).

 

 

I am not mad.

If the things I listed were not what you meant then perhaps you can clarify what you meant? The way I read your posts, and I really can't see how they could be interpreted any other way, those are the things you have said and meant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

If the things I listed were not what you meant then perhaps you can clarify what you meant? The way I read your posts, and I really can't see how they could be interpreted any other way, those are the things you have said and meant.

Still at work.  But please refrain from saying that you see no other way to interpret my posts when you are the only person in this thread experiencing comprehension issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

So let me get this straight. You're making quite a few assumptions and all of them are wrong.

 

1) That cinemas are using projects that are capped at 24Hz. This is a very big generalization which does not hold true. How many theaters showed the hobbit in high frame rate? I don't have a solid number, but there were no shortage of cinemas where you could go and watch it in HFR. Even my tiny city's movie theater had it in HFR. I wouldn't be surprised if most cinemas has projectors that can handle 60Hz.

Let me say this more clearly.  Many cinemas projectors or DCP hardware is capped for 24hz, yes and no the majority of cinemas are not capable of 60hz.  But, you are missing the more import aspect that you fail to understand; The entire monster machine that is the film industry is built on 24fps.  If you can not produce content that can be made to conform to 24fps display, you will not be producing content.

 

That is WHY HFR is 48fps, because you can cleanly make a 24p version.  Legacy compatibility with the frame rate that the hugest portion of the industry uses and will continue to use is paramount.  This is why you will not be seeing 60hz content outside of specific areas such as sports, live broadcasts, and some specialty history/environmental stuff.  You can argue about what you think should be 'technically possible' until you are blue in the face, it doesn't change that the target is 24fps.  Even content that was once shot at 60i such as soap operas and cheaper scripted television productions have moved to 24p.  The 'film look' is the target, it was just once more expensive than the 'video look'.  You won't be getting to 60fps movies because you can't cleanly drop 60fps to 24fps.  It's not happening and even HFR at 48hz is basically a stillborn attempt seen in only a literal handful of movies.

 

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

2) The Blu-ray spec doesn't allow for 60 FPS. It does. It is in the spec. It's been in the spec since 2004 and the support for high frame rate is getting even better in the UHD BD spec. There is no "legacy support" hindering anything.

Still dunno why you think I said the Blu-Ray spec doesn't do 60fps, only said it's 60fpsdoesn't solve the HFR problem because 60fps is no substitute for 48fps and converting 48fps to 60fps will be garbage.  Also refrain from referring to 60fps as 'HFR'.  We don't use it to refer to 60fps in the industry.

 

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

3) That all blu-rays that are sold are mastered for cinema, and then converted to blu-ray. That might be true for movies like Rogue One, but that is far from the only type of video that gets released on BD. With channels like the BBC sending at high frame rate (BBC HD is 50 FPS), and TV series getting more and more popular (with higher budgets) chances are the non-blockbuster movie BD sales will keep on increasing. With UHD BD improving the support for HFR chances are more videos will be released in that format as well.

This thread is about cinema, don't get why you are bringing in specialty broadcast content into the discussion as if you think it will magically bring in the era of 60fps cinema to the mainstream.  In short; Nobody cares.

 

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

5) That most TVs has a 24Hz mode, and will change to it when you play something at 24 FPS. This is bullshit. A handful of TVs does this, but the vast majority does not. Check out this list from rting where they tested it. 14% of the TVs they tested did this, and they were all very high end TVs. Only 14% of new TVs does this, and if you go back just a few years that number is even lower.

Er... Did you actually rea the link you provided here?  It even clearly says "71% Judder-free 24p" which, while you said 'the majority does not', 71% is in fact a majority.  You seem to have confuse the information on where the TV reads a 60hz input feeding 24fps content with a pulldown, detects that it's 24p going through a pulldown, and adapts, then ditto for doing the same with a 60i input.  So I'm not sure if you didn't read your own link here or didn't comprehend it, but it's one of the two, either way this link is working against your own argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 3:41 PM, Sazexa said:

I wouldn't say it's decreased the cinema experience. My love of audio has made me dislike my local cinemas more than my love of gaming. I can sit back and enjoy a good movie in theaters. Although, I find it harder to want to watch movies at home. Even with pretty nice sound system and TV, I don't really watch movies at home any more.

I couldn't agree more. I go to the movies more for the audio immersion than the big screen effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

Let me say this more clearly.  Many cinemas projectors or DCP hardware is capped for 24hz, yes and no the majority of cinemas are not capable of 60hz.  But, you are missing the more import aspect that you fail to understand; The entire monster machine that is the film industry is built on 24fps.  If you can not produce content that can be made to conform to 24fps display, you will not be producing content.

 

That is WHY HFR is 48fps, because you can cleanly make a 24p version.  Legacy compatibility with the frame rate that the hugest portion of the industry uses and will continue to use is paramount.  This is why you will not be seeing 60hz content outside of specific areas such as sports, live broadcasts, and some specialty history/environmental stuff.  You can argue about what you think should be 'technically possible' until you are blue in the face, it doesn't change that the target is 24fps.  Even content that was once shot at 60i such as soap operas and cheaper scripted television productions have moved to 24p.  The 'film look' is the target, it was just once more expensive than the 'video look'.  You won't be getting to 60fps movies because you can't cleanly drop 60fps to 24fps.  It's not happening and even HFR at 48hz is basically a stillborn attempt seen in only a literal handful of movies.

 

Make up your mind already. Did you or did you not say that the majority of cinemas only support 24 FPS? You can't say it, then I repeat it say that's not what you meant, and then once again go back to saying it.

Anyway, so your argument is that because current films are made for 24 FPS, future ones will be too? That's a pretty shitty argument. Just to be clear, I am not saying we should move away from 24 FPS, but what I am saying is that there is no technical reason for why we can't.

You've gone from arguing the technical "can't be done for legacy reasons" to arguing "people making this specific type of videos are not interested".

 

 

5 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

Still dunno why you think I said the Blu-Ray spec doesn't do 60fps, only said it's 60fpsdoesn't solve the HFR problem because 60fps is no substitute for 48fps and converting 48fps to 60fps will be garbage.  Also refrain from referring to 60fps as 'HFR'.  We don't use it to refer to 60fps in the industry.

Because the way your sentence was structured, it is pretty much impossible to read it in any other way. If you write a sentence talking about the Blu-ray standard, then add in parenthesis that 60FPS isn't viable for legacy reasons, then the implication is that there is a legacy reason for why Blu-rays can't be 60 FPS, which they most certainly can.

If you're going by the assumption that everything i mastered for 24 FPS then sure, converting it to 60 FPS for the Blu-ray release will not work, but that assumption is far from true.

 

5 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

This thread is about cinema, don't get why you are bringing in specialty broadcast content into the discussion as if you think it will magically bring in the era of 60fps cinema to the mainstream.  In short; Nobody cares.

High frame rate video is actually getting more and more popular in all but one area, blockbuster movies. For everything else, documentaries, nature, sports, porn (especially porn), amateur videos (like YouTube), high frame rate is growing at a very rapid phase.

Your definition of cinema might only include those Guardians of the Galaxy style movies, but mine does not.

 

5 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

Er... Did you actually rea the link you provided here?  It even clearly says "71% Judder-free 24p" which, while you said 'the majority does not', 71% is in fact a majority.  You seem to have confuse the information on where the TV reads a 60hz input feeding 24fps content with a pulldown, detects that it's 24p going through a pulldown, and adapts, then ditto for doing the same with a 60i input.  So I'm not sure if you didn't read your own link here or didn't comprehend it, but it's one of the two, either way this link is working against your own argument.

Yes I did read it. I think you have not read your own and my posts thoroughly enough.

Here are two citations:

On 2016-12-18 at 11:59 PM, AshleyAshes said:

This is why most TVs and many good playback systems will change their refresh rate to match their content.

On 2016-12-19 at 8:22 AM, LAwLz said:

You're also wrong in that the TV will change its refresh rate. Very few, if any, TVs does this.

The article says that 71% of TVs has a 24p mode that you can manually select. The article also says that 14% of TVs will change their refresh rate rate when you try feeding it a 24FPS. So no, most TVs will not change their refresh rate to match their content. 14% of TVs will do this (and I still don't believe it actually goes down to 24Hz, because that would look terrible). On 71% of TVs they tested it was possible to achieve smooth playback by manually tweaking the TV to suit the content you are watching, but that's not what you claimed.

 

 

Anyway, it seems like our argument is based on how to interpret your posts and not technical merits. I will claim that the way you wrote your posts you meant one thing, and you will claim that I interpreted your posts the wrong way. Wanna leave it at that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate motion blur and think movies should be at least  60fps. People who say HFR is bad are just used to 24fps. You tube videos are 60fps and they look awesome. Some console gamers are still saying 30fps games are better, but no one thinks that after a week of gaming at 60fps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

The article says that 71% of TVs has a 24p mode that you can manually select. The article also says that 14% of TVs will change their refresh rate rate when you try feeding it a 24FPS. So no, most TVs will not change their refresh rate to match their content. 14% of TVs will do this (and I still don't believe it actually goes down to 24Hz, because that would look terrible). On 71% of TVs they tested it was possible to achieve smooth playback by manually tweaking the TV to suit the content you are watching, but that's not what you claimed.

Your article doesn't' say that at all and this discussion isn't going to continue if you can't even comprehend the text of your own links.

 

Quote

Luckily, some TVs are able to adjust themselves and play 24p movies judder-free. A few can also remove judder from 24p video sent via 60p and 60i signals. As part of our testing process, we check whether every TV can do judder-free 24p, and also judder-free 24p via 60p/60i.

It literally says 71% do 24p judder free.  The other tests are for 24p sent via 60p and 60i signals.  The 71% is for support of 24hz input delivering 24p content.  No, it's not a 'manual mode', it's just the TV being given a 24hz signal by it's input device.  The 14% is for pulldown detection.

 

If you can't understand this, there's no point to you continuing in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

Your article doesn't' say that at all and this discussion isn't going to continue if you can't even comprehend the text of your own links.

 

It literally says 71% do 24p judder free.  The other tests are for 24p sent via 60p and 60i signals.  The 71% is for support of 24hz input delivering 24p content.  No, it's not a 'manual mode', it's just the TV being given a 24hz signal by it's input device.  The 14% is for pulldown detection.

 

If you can't understand this, there's no point to you continuing in this thread.

It says 71% of TVs can do 24p judder free when you have both the sender and receiver set to 24p. It says only 14% of TVs can do judder free playback when you feed it a 60Hz signal.

 

If you plug in something like a PC, or Chromecast or whatever, and plays a video, then only 14% of TVs will detect that it is a 24 FPS video inside that 60Hz signal, and adjust itself accordingly... That's far from "the majority".

 

Did you give up on the Blu-ray and 60FPS debate? Do you understand why I interpreted your post the way I did?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

It says 71% of TVs can do 24p judder free when you have both the sender and receiver set to 24p. It says only 14% of TVs can do judder free playback when you feed it a 60Hz signal.

 

If you plug in something like a PC, or Chromecast or whatever, and plays a video, then only 14% of TVs will detect that it is a 24 FPS video inside that 60Hz signal, and adjust itself accordingly... That's far from "the majority".

 

Er... PCs can output 24hz without issue if the connected display's EDID reports support for that refresh rate.  (Or you could force it.).  I literally have my HTPCs doing this.  This is actually a well talked about topic in the HTPC scene.  Xbox 360, Xbox One, PS3, PS4 and most Blu-ray players too.  A good number of android boxes support refresh rate switching as well...

 

But you're right, the Chromecast is a piece of shit.  However this thread isn't titled 'What a piece of shit the Chromecast is', is it?

 

Honestly, you didn't even know that a PC can output 24hz, why are you even in this thread trying to start an argument?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AshleyAshes said:

Er... PCs can output 24hz without issue if the connected display's EDID reports support for that refresh rate.  (Or you could force it.).  I literally have my HTPCs doing this.  This is actually a well talked about topic in the HTPC scene.  Xbox 360, Xbox One, PS3, PS4 and most Blu-ray players too.  A good number of android boxes support refresh rate switching as well...

 

But you're right, the Chromecast is a piece of shit.  However this thread isn't titled 'What a piece of shit the Chromecast is', is it?

 

Honestly, you didn't even know that a PC can output 24hz, why are you even in this thread trying to start an argument?

I do know that PCs can output 24Hz (the article I linked even mentions it). That does not always work though (though like you said, you can force it) and support has historically been very hit and miss (the card saying that it outputs at one frequency, but it has quite high margins of errors because the internal clock isn't accurate enough).

 

If you really want good playback on your PC then you need to have the stars align, or use something like ReClock (which alters the video as well as changes the reference clock for your GPU so that everything aligns with your TVs refresh rate).

 

So let's break this down. You said that most TVs will automatically change their refresh rate to match the content.

The numbers we have shows that 71% of TVs tested does this, but only if the sender supports 24Hz output. Things that support this are for example Blu-ray players and well configured PCs.

Only 17% of TVs did what you claimed when the signal was 60Hz. Examples of when this happens is when you use a top-set-box (like you do if you have cable/satellite TV), a Chromecast, an Apple TV, some (maybe all?) of those cheap Android TV sticks (last time I checked, AOSP did not have proper support for it), a PC that doesn't automatically switch to 24p or does so incorrectly, and the list goes on.

 

Now, you might say that your comment was only referring to the first category, but if that was the case then you were making a huge generalization which ignored a large amount (if not the majority) of use-cases.

 

 

Also, you didn't answer my question. Did you understand why I interpreted your post about the Blu-ray standard the way I did?

 

Lastly, I don't understand why you are so mad at me. I thought I was trying to be calm and rational when I suggested that we were both right but because of different interpretations/meanings we ended up in a fairly pointless argument. But apparently that's not what you're after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

The numbers we have shows that 71% of TVs tested does this, but only if the sender supports 24Hz output. 

Kewl, you learned how to count beyond the number 14.  :3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AshleyAshes said:

Kewl, you learned how to count beyond the number 14.  :3

Why do you act like this? Your comment doesn't contribute anything to the conversation. I've tried to reason with you but now you're just resorting to childish insults and ignoring questions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×