Ah, so I was missing context then, apologies. So then it might be related to the shape of the eye's lens (or eyeball depending on which opthalmologists you follow).
My understanding has always been that we are much more sensitive to flicker in our peripheral vision, which would be why a greater distance makes it less of a problem. It is also why flicker is more of a problem on larger CRT's. I'm very sensitive to flicker on computer CRT's I run mine at 100Hz, I can live with (just) 85Hz, but anything below that annoys me no end. Some people can't even detect 60Hz flicker (and some more sensitive than I are very annoyed by the flicker of fluorescent lighting).
Now as for why this might be. I could speculate that we are more sensitive to movement in our peripheral vision for survival reasons, and if this is indeed the case that this increased sensitivity may well pick up on flicker.
Tony.
Now as for why this might be. I could speculate that we are more sensitive to movement in our peripheral vision for survival reasons, and if this is indeed the case that this increased sensitivity may well pick up on flicker.
Tony.
I'm one of those "chosen few" that is bothered by flourescent flicker. Back in early days of home computing (remember the good ol' i286?) I was always very irritated by CRT flicker. My first PC was the first generation i486, 10 Mhz I think, and it gave me headaches. I could never tolerate 60Hz refresh on CRTs but oddly, LCDs running at 60Hz seem OK.
Mike
Mike
If you were to place a photodiode at the front of a CRT and view its output on a 'scope, you'd see sharp pulses as the beam whizzed passed. Only a small spot on the screen is illuminated at one moment - that's how 'light pens' used to work.
An LCD is a 'mask' over a constantly illuminated backlight and does not flicker at all. The refresh rate merely specifies how often the image on the mask is updated.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.