One of the issues that comes up frequently in technical discussions of both gaming and video is what frame rate should be considered “good enough.” On the one hand, you have people who argue for what I’ll politely call tradition, who believe that 24 fps for film and 30 fps for gaming represents a magic figure that we don’t benefit from exceeding. There’s actually a great deal of objective evidence suggesting this isn’t true, and a new blog post by Simon Cooke, from Microsoft’s Xbox Advanced Technology Group, delves into why humans tend to prefer higher frame rates.

Part of the problem with trying to discuss this topic is that the human eye is a fantastically complicated piece of equipment that performs its own image processing before the signal is ever relayed to the brain. We tend to think of what we see as a cohesive whole because our entire visual system has evolved to allow us to do so. In many ways, however, this is an illusion. The eye’s sensitivity to color, motion, light, and acceleration/deceleration are all different. The situation is further muddied by the fact that, while we often think of the eye as a camera and discuss vision with the same terms we use to talk about computer-generated graphics, neither of these analogies actually capture how the eye receives or processes information. The video below, courtesy of Imgur user Vz58V, shows the difference between 60 fps and 30 fps at three different movement rates.

All of this said, people do tend to prefer higher frame rates for gaming when given the opportunity to try them. This preference holds up even above 60 fps (60Hz), for a number of potential reasons depending on the nature of the game, its graphics, and how fast-paced the action is.

Last but not less important is your own contribution to our cause. You should consider to submit your own serial numbers or share other files with the community just as someone else helped you with Magic Music Maker serial number. Sharing is caring and that is the only way to keep our scene, our community alive. Easily control Music Maker software instruments such as strings, bass, guitars, synthesizers and lots more. Give each and every song a characteristic flair. You can choose 3 MAGIX instruments and 1 Tiny instrument for Music Maker Plus Edition or 6 MAGIX instruments and 2 Tiny Instruments for Music Maker Premium Edition. Easily register MAGIX software here in order to continue to use the full range of features in our MAGIX products. Music Maker Loops Unlimited Free. Music Maker Editions. Music Maker Plus Edition. Product registration Home; Support; My Service Center; Support Purchase Info Technical Support Pro Audio Support. By having a Serial number would suggest that you actually purchased Music Maker. Since you didn't buy Music Maker.Music Maker will run in 'Free Mode', by default. ( ignore the activation box ) Some of Magix programs, have Trial periods, such as ACID Pro 8, Samplitude. These programs Do come with a Special Trial Serial Number. Magix Music Maker for MySpace 1.0 is a free software that allows you easily create your own music in a flash - without any previous knowledge.It only takes a single click to upload the completed song and an exclusive player to MySpace. Be a producer.

Mar 26, 2005  And then increase the monitors refresh rate. Note: If you specify a refresh rate that is too high for your monitor, your screen may become unusable and your hardware may be damaged. Also note, Some monitors shiver at higher rates and some of the higher resolutions and color depths may be unavailable at the higher frequencies.

Simon Cooke’s theory is that this preference has to do with one of the interesting mechanical aspects of human vision — even when you fix your eyes on a single fixed point, the retina is never actually still. The wobble — more properly known as ocular microtremor — occurs at an average frequency of 83.68Hz, with a jiggle range of around 150-250nm, or about the width of 1-3 photoreceptors in the retina.

So what’s the point of this wiggling back and forth? Cooke thinks he knows. By wiggling the retina back and forth, you sample the same scene from two very slightly different points. Meanwhile, inside the eye, you’ve got two different types of retinal ganglion cells — on-center cells that respond when the center of its receptive field is exposed to light, and off-center cells that respond when the center of the field is not exposed to light.

Retinal edge-detection. Image courtesy of Wikipedia

When the retina wiggles back and forth, incoming light strikes both on-center and off-center cells, stimulating both. Cooke thinks this may boost our ability to detect the edges of objects. He also argues that all of this ties back to the Uncanny Valley, though I’ll leave that to him to explain.

Next page: Tying it all back to video game frame rates

• 1 of 2

The wagon-wheel effect (alternatively called stagecoach-wheel effect or stroboscopic effect) is an optical illusion in which a spokedwheel appears to rotate differently from its true rotation. The wheel can appear to rotate more slowly than the true rotation, it can appear stationary, or it can appear to rotate in the opposite direction from the true rotation. This last form of the effect is sometimes called the reverse rotation effect.

The wagon-wheel effect is most often seen in film or television depictions of stagecoaches or wagons in Western movies, although recordings of any regularly spoked rotating object will show it, such as helicopter rotors, aircraftpropellers and car commercials. In these recorded media, the effect is a result of temporal aliasing.^[1] It can also commonly be seen when a rotating wheel is illuminated by flickering light. These forms of the effect are known as stroboscopic effects: the original smooth rotation of the wheel is visible only intermittently. A version of the wagon-wheel effect can also be seen under continuous illumination.

Under stroboscopic conditions[edit]

Stroboscopic conditions ensure that the visibility of a rotating wheel is broken into a series of brief episodes in which its motion is either absent (in the case of movie cameras) or minimal (in the case of stroboscopes), interrupted by longer episodes of invisibility. It is customary to call the former episodes frames. An analog movie camera that records images on filmstock typically operates at 24 frames per second while digital movie cameras operate at 25 frames per second (PAL; European Standards), or at 29.97 frames per second (NTSC; North American Standards). A standard television operates at 59.94 or at 50 images per second (a video frame is two separate images; see interlace). A stroboscope can typically have its frequency set to any value. Artificial lighting that is temporally modulated when powered by alternating current, such as gas discharge lamps (including neon, mercury vapor, sodium vapor and fluorescent tubes), flicker at twice the frequency of the power line (for example 100 times per second on a 50-cycle line). In each cycle of current the power peaks twice (once with positive voltage and once with negative voltage) and twice goes to zero, and the light output varies accordingly. In all of these cases, a person sees a rotating wheel under stroboscopic conditions.

Imagine that the true rotation of a four-spoke wheel is clockwise.^[2] The first instance of visibility of the wheel may occur when one spoke is at 12 o'clock. If by the time the next instance of visibility occurs, the spoke previously at 9 o'clock has moved into the 12-o'clock position, then a viewer will perceive the wheel to be stationary. If at the second instance of visibility, the next spoke has moved to the 11:30 position, then a viewer will perceive the wheel to be rotating backwards. If at the second instance of visibility, the next spoke has moved to the 12:30 position, then a viewer will perceive the wheel to be rotating forwards, albeit more slowly than the wheel is actually rotating. The effect relies on a motion perception property called beta movement: motion is seen between two objects in different positions in the visual field at different times providing the objects are similar (which is true of spoked wheels—each spoke is essentially identical to the others) and providing the objects are close (which is true of the originally 9-o'clock spoke in the second instant—it is closer to 12 o'clock than the originally 12-o'clock spoke).

The wagon-wheel effect is exploited in some engineering tasks, such as adjusting the timing of an engine. This same effect can make some rotating machines, such as lathes, dangerous to operate under artificial lighting because at certain speeds the machines will falsely appear to be stopped or to be moving slowly.

Finlay, Dodwell, and Caelli (1984^[3]) and Finlay and Dodwell (1987^[4]) studied perception of rotating wheels under stroboscopic illumination when the duration of each frame was long enough for observers to see the real rotation. Despite this, the rotation direction was dominated by the wagon-wheel effect. Finlay and Dodwell (1987) argued that there are some critical differences between the wagon-wheel effect and beta movement, but their argument has not troubled the consensus.

Under continuous illumination[edit]

Effective stroboscopic presentation by vibrating the eyes[edit]

Rushton (1967^[5]) observed the wagon-wheel effect under continuous illumination while humming. The humming vibrates the eyes in their sockets, effectively creating stroboscopic conditions within the eye. By humming at a frequency of a multiple of the rotation frequency, he was able to stop the rotation. By humming at slightly higher and lower frequencies, he was able to make the rotation reverse slowly and to make the rotation go slowly in the direction of rotation. A similar stroboscopic effect is now commonly observed by people eating crunchy foods, such as carrots, while watching TV: the image appears to shimmer.^[6] The crunching vibrates the eyes at a multiple of the frame rate of the TV. Besides vibrations of the eyes, the effect can be produced by observing wheels via a vibrating mirror. Rear-view mirrors in vibrating cars can produce the effect.

Truly continuous illumination[edit]

The first to observe the wagon-wheel effect under truly continuous illumination (such as from the sun) was Schouten (1967^[7]). He distinguished three forms of subjective stroboscopy which he called alpha, beta, and gamma: Alpha stroboscopy occurs at 8–12 cycles per second; the wheel appears to become stationary, although 'some sectors [spokes] look as though they are performing a hurdle race over the standing ones' (p. 48). Beta stroboscopy occurs at 30–35 cycles per second: 'The distinctness of the pattern has all but disappeared. At times a definite counterrotation is seen of a grayish striped pattern' (pp. 48–49). Gamma stroboscopy occurs at 40–100 cycles per second: 'The disk appears almost uniform except that at all sector frequencies a standing grayish pattern is seen .. in a quivery sort of standstill' (pp. 49–50). Schouten interpreted beta stroboscopy, reversed rotation, as consistent with there being Reichardt detectors in the human visual system for encoding motion. Because the spoked wheel patterns he used (radial gratings) are regular, they can strongly stimulate detectors for the true rotation, but also weakly stimulate detectors for the reverse rotation.

There are two broad theories for the wagon-wheel effect under truly continuous illumination. The first is that human visual perception takes a series of still frames of the visual scene and that movement is perceived much like a movie. The second is Schouten's theory: that moving images are processed by visual detectors sensitive to the true motion and also by detectors sensitive to opposite motion from temporal aliasing. There is evidence for both theories, but the weight of evidence favours the latter.

Discrete frames theory[edit]

Purves, Paydarfar, and Andrews (1996^[8]) proposed the discrete-frames theory. One piece of evidence for this theory comes from Dubois and VanRullen (2011^[9]). They reviewed experiences of users of LSD who often report that under the influence of the drug a moving object is seen trailing a series of still images behind it. They asked such users to match their drug experiences with movies simulating such trailing images viewed when not under the drug. They found that users selected movies around 15–20 Hz. This is between Schouten's alpha and beta rates.

Temporal aliasing theory[edit]

Kline, Holcombe, and Eagleman (2004^[10]) confirmed the observation of reversed rotation with regularly spaced dots on a rotating drum. They called this 'illusory motion reversal'. They showed that these occurred only after a long time of viewing the rotating display (from about 30 seconds to as long as 10 minutes for some observers). They also showed that the incidences of reversed rotation were independent in different parts of the visual field. This is inconsistent with discrete frames covering the entire visual scene. Kline, Holcombe, and Eagleman (2006^[11]) also showed that reversed rotation of a radial grating in one part of the visual field was independent of superimposed orthogonal motion in the same part of the visual field. The orthogonal motion was of a circular grating contracting so as to have the same temporal frequency as the radial grating. This is inconsistent with discrete frames covering local parts of visual scene. Kline et al. concluded that the reverse rotations were consistent with Reichardt detectors for the reverse direction of rotation becoming sufficiently active to dominate perception of the true rotation in a form of rivalry. The long time required to see the reverse rotation suggests that neural adaptation of the detectors responding to the true rotation has to occur before the weakly stimulated reverse-rotation detectors can contribute to perception.

Some small doubts about the results of Kline et al. (2004) sustain adherents of the discrete-frame theory. These doubts include Kline et al.'s finding in some observers more instances of simultaneous reversals from different parts of the visual field than would be expected by chance, and finding in some observers differences in the distribution of the durations of reversals from that expected by a pure rivalry process (Rojas, Carmona-Fontaine, López-Calderón, & Aboitiz, 2006^[12]).

In 2008, Kline and Eagleman demonstrated that illusory reversals of two spatially overlapping motions could be perceived separately, providing further evidence that illusory motion reversal is not caused by temporal sampling.^[13] They also showed that illusory motion reversal occurs with non-uniform and non-periodic stimuli (for example, a spinning belt of sandpaper), which also cannot be compatible with discrete sampling. Kline and Eagleman proposed instead that the effect results from a 'motion during-effect', meaning that a motion after-effect becomes superimposed on the real motion.

The Nine Gann Course Manuals Compiled By Dr. Baumring Containing His Selection of Excerpts of the Clearest Presentations of the Primary Conceptual Material Necessary For Understanding The Law of Vibration as Taught by W. This is an Extremely Challenging Series of Courses Requiring a Long Term Commitment to Research, Study and Analysis. 'Gann Harmony' The Law of Vibration - The Complete Gann I-IX Course Manuals Compiled By Dr. Jerome Baumring with Notes On W. Gann's Hidden Material - The Complete Gann I-IX Lecture Notes by Julius J.

Dangers[edit]

Because of the illusion this can give to moving machinery, it is advised that single-phase lighting be avoided in workshops and factories. For example, a factory that is lit from a single-phase supply with basic fluorescent lighting will have a flicker of twice the mains frequency, either at 100 or 120 Hz (depending on country); thus, any machinery rotating at multiples of this frequency may appear to not be turning. Seeing that the most common types of AC motors are locked to the mains frequency, this can pose a considerable hazard to operators of lathes and other rotating equipment. Solutions include deploying the lighting over a full 3-phase supply, or by using high-frequency controllers that drive the lights at safer frequencies.^[14] Traditional incandescent light bulbs, which employ filaments that glow continuously with only a minor modulation, offer another option as well, albeit at the expense of increased power consumption. Smaller incandescent lights can be used as task lighting on equipment to help combat this effect to avoid the cost of operating larger quantities of incandescent lighting in a workshop environment.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

1. ^'Time Filter Technical Explanation'. Tessive LLC. Retrieved 13 September 2011.
2. ^Maxim, tutorial 928, Filter Basics: Anti-Aliasing http://www.maxim-ic.com/app-notes/index.mvp/id/928
3. ^Finlay, D.J.; Dodwell, P.C. & Caelli, T.M. (1984). 'The wagon-wheel effect'. Perception. 13 (3): 237–248. doi:10.1068/p130237. PMID6514509.
4. ^Finlay D, Dodwell P (1987). 'Speed of apparent motion and the wagon-wheel effect'. Percept Psychophys. 41 (1): 29–34. doi:10.3758/BF03208210. PMID3822741.
5. ^Rushton W (1967). 'Effect of humming on vision'. Nature. 216 (121): 1173–1175. doi:10.1038/2161173a0. PMID4294734.
6. ^Adams C. 'Can playing with a Slinky change the channels on your TV set?'.
7. ^Schouten, J.F. (1967). Subjective stroboscopy and a model of visual movement detectors. In I. Wathen-Dunn (Ed.), Models for the perception of speech and visual form (pp. 44–55). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
8. ^Purves D, Paydarfar J, Andrews T (1996). 'The wagon wheel illusion in movies and reality'. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 93 (8): 3693–3697. doi:10.1073/pnas.93.8.3693. PMC39674. PMID8622999.
9. ^Dubois, J VanRullen R (2011). 'Visual trails: Do the doors of perception open periodically?'. PLoS Biology. 9 (5): e1001056. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001056. PMC3091843. PMID21572989.
10. ^Kline K, Holcombe A, Eagleman D (2004). 'Illusory motion reversal is caused by rivalry, not by perceptual snapshots of the visual field'. Vision Res. 44 (23): 2653–2658. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2004.05.030. PMID15358060.
11. ^Kline K, Holcombe A, Eagleman D (2006). 'Illusory motion reversal does not imply discrete processing: Reply to Rojas et al'. Vision Res. 46 (6–7): 1158–1159. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2005.08.021.
12. ^Rojas D, Carmona-Fontaine C, Lopez-Calderon J, Aboitiz F (2006). 'Do discreteness and rivalry coexist in illusory motion reversals?'. Vision Res. 46 (6–7): 1155–1157, author reply 1158–1159. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2005.07.023. PMID16139861.
13. ^Kline KA, Eagleman DM (2008). 'Evidence against the snapshot hypothesis of illusory motion reversal'. Journal of Vision. 8 (4): 1–5. doi:10.1167/8.4.13. PMC2856842. PMID18484852.
14. ^Cronshaw, Geoff (Autumn 2008), 'Section 559 luminaries and lighting installations: An overview'(PDF), Wiring Matters, The IET (28): 4

External links[edit]

• Interactive demo showing the optical illusion.