4 ms·
> If you wan't to compare against human "sample rate", it'd be equivalent to at least ~200 FPS Where does this figure come from?
by michaelcampbell 9y ago
> If you wan't to compare against human "sample rate", it'd be equivalent to at least ~200 FPS
Where does this figure come from?
- jon_richards 9y agoI think they're pulling it from noticeable monitor FPS rates. I'm not an expert on machine vision, so I couldn't tell you the FPS needed to correlate movements between frames.
- Tobba_ 9y agoMy ass, mostly. I'm extrapolating based on monitor framerates and how accurately we can see the velocity of fast-moving objects, and that I can spot a timing difference of ~5ms reliably. Human eyes are almost comparable in terms of a framerate based on the neuron spiking rates, which are somewhere over 250-500Hz max. Obviously that's not directly comparable though, but it gives an idea of how well we can deal with moving objects.