4 ms·

Flat panels differ in one very important aspect though. A CRT monitor achieves its refresh rate by briefly illuminating phosphors on the surface of the monitor,

Flat panels differ in one very important aspect though. A CRT monitor achieves its refresh rate by briefly illuminating phosphors on the surface of the monitor, and relying on human persistence of vision to achieve an image. The CRT monitor is only actually illuminating a single pixel at a time, and simply scans the surface very rapidly. So, increasing the refresh rate on a CRT monitor has a very visible impact on the smoothness of the image and the visibility of any flicker. Flat panel monitors may only have a 60 Hz refresh rate on average, but each lit pixel is illuminated 100% of the time. The refresh rate dictates how long each pixel takes to change to a different color and affects the smoothness of motion and video, but a static image on a flat panel display should have no flicker at all. (Assume for a moment that the flat panel's backlight has no inherent flicker; some flourescent backlighting suffers from this, but it's unrelated to the display's refresh rate. I'm also glossing over some of the finer technical details in both kinds of tech.)

fao_ 9y ago
> relying on human persistence of vision FYI: persistence of vision was debunked back in 1912[1], 1976[2], and again in 1993[3]. It's still taught in film classes, and they justify this by claiming that it's "disputed". It's not disputed, it's downright incorrect. Please stop referring to it, as this only confounds the idea, and helps it with false validity. [1]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/34413805_Experimentelle_Studien_uber_Sehen_von_Bewegung https://www.researchgate.net/publication/34413805_Experiment... [2]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268400050_The_Myth_of_Persistence_of_Vision https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268400050_The_Myth_... [3]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20687993?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents https://www.jstor.org/stable/20687993?seq=1#page_scan_tab_co...

fao_ 9y ago

> relying on human persistence of vision FYI: persistence of vision was debunked back in 1912[1], 1976[2], and again in 1993[3]. It's still taught in film classes, and they justify this by claiming that it's "disputed". It's not disputed, it's downright incorrect. Please stop referring to it, as this only confounds the idea, and helps it with false validity. [1]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/34413805_Experimentelle_Studien_uber_Sehen_von_Bewegung https://www.researchgate.net/publication/34413805_Experiment... [2]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268400050_The_Myth_of_Persistence_of_Vision https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268400050_The_Myth_... [3]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20687993?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents https://www.jstor.org/stable/20687993?seq=1#page_scan_tab_co...