10 ms·
You don't want small pixels. This causes optical aliasing and associated problems. Edit: By small pixels I mean a low pixel aspect ratio(area of lit pixel vs t
by rsaxvc 3y ago
You don't want small pixels. This causes optical aliasing and associated problems.
Edit: By small pixels I mean a low pixel aspect ratio(area of lit pixel vs total area per pixel). If you consider this as a DSP problem(instead of a time series problem, a brightness value over distance or angle), there's effectively no reconstruction low pass filter. You can think of small lit pixel area with larger distance between like zero padding. This can make some things appear sharper, but by doing so it'll appear less like the image source wants it to.
- H8crilA 3y agoNo, the perfect pixel is a sinc() function of appropriate bandwidth. A pixel of the form "dot with a dark area around it" is a better approximation of sinc() than pixel of the from "fill all the available space evenly". And it doesn't mean the bright part of a pixel should be as small as possible, no, it should be tuned for bandwidth. Even eye receptors (cones) approximate sinc() in the same fashion.
- rsaxvc 3y agoSure, but at least for RGB subpixel displays common to LCD TVs, each subpixel has neighboring dark-area not only in the form of the black matrix, but effectively also that of the two other colors.
- rsaxvc 3y agoI said pixel aspect ratio, but what I meant was pixel aperture ratio. I hope that's clear from the context.