> So I just watched a few movies on Blu Ray, on a 1080p TV that refreshed at 
> 120 Hz.
>
> Specifically, "Sleepy Hollow," "Wall-E," and "TCoN: Prince Caspian."
>
> And, my reaction in general was:
>
> YIPPEE!

Agreed - I saw a 200 Hz comparison with 50 Hz, the difference was amazing.

> Of course, this brings me to the point of my post... that as nice as the 
> added resolution of 1080p is, it didn't do nearly as much for the picture 
> as having a 120Hz refresh rate.  The movement is absolutely amazing!  I 
> can't wait until video is recorded at this rate natively, rather than 
> interpolated by the TV!

It's all needed because of the way LCD works, it "holds" the pixel colour on 
the screen for the entire length of the frame, rather than the CRT way of 
just providing a burst.  This means that for moving images, whilst your eye 
is tracking the motion, you see a blur rather than a smooth sharp movement. 
This happens even if the response time is zero, but longer response times 
just make matters worse.

You can either fix this problem by doubling up frame-rate or resolution - 
both work equally well, and just need some algorithm to interpolate between 
frames/pixels.

Post a reply to this message