Edit: I dropped the points on the details, just to focus on the main point. Rest assured that I read the paper, I was arguing in good faith, and that after a bit more thinking I understand your criticism of my…
The paper's motivation is to explore the new coded display, and they are doing that by exploring an aspect that they care about. That aspect is very specifically well-defined, and if you want to show whether a display…
That is just the motivation, the experiment is much more general and is not related to display technology: > The work presented here attempts to clarify “the rate at which human perception cannot distinguish between…
What they are trying to do is recreating the situation that is more similar to actual light sources in computer screens and TV (varying flickering rate from different pixels/ areas). They are saying that the current…
Here is one: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep07861 They mentioned in Results section: > For the median viewer, flicker artifacts disappear only over 500 Hz, many times the commonly reported flicker fusion rate.
Look, they sourced their claims (quite literally, they put how they calculate, from which standard). And linking to the correct document is literally how scientific citation works — I replied the page to you above…
31 and 32 (by the printed page number), in pdf it’s 42
See my comment on the other reply. > Either there's a study showing that 246 Hz flickering poses "Extremely High" health risks or there isn't. They calculated it using the definition from the standard.
The “very/moderate high” comes from the standard itself, which is quantified within the standard. In the context, it is about the probability of having issues, while the effect (mild to catastrophic) is another axis.…
IEEE Recommended Practices for Modulating Current in High-Brightness LEDs for Mitigating Health Risks to Viewers : https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/1789/4479/ There is nothing anecdote about flickering in LED light…
Edit: I dropped the points on the details, just to focus on the main point. Rest assured that I read the paper, I was arguing in good faith, and that after a bit more thinking I understand your criticism of my…
The paper's motivation is to explore the new coded display, and they are doing that by exploring an aspect that they care about. That aspect is very specifically well-defined, and if you want to show whether a display…
That is just the motivation, the experiment is much more general and is not related to display technology: > The work presented here attempts to clarify “the rate at which human perception cannot distinguish between…
What they are trying to do is recreating the situation that is more similar to actual light sources in computer screens and TV (varying flickering rate from different pixels/ areas). They are saying that the current…
Here is one: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep07861 They mentioned in Results section: > For the median viewer, flicker artifacts disappear only over 500 Hz, many times the commonly reported flicker fusion rate.
Look, they sourced their claims (quite literally, they put how they calculate, from which standard). And linking to the correct document is literally how scientific citation works — I replied the page to you above…
31 and 32 (by the printed page number), in pdf it’s 42
See my comment on the other reply. > Either there's a study showing that 246 Hz flickering poses "Extremely High" health risks or there isn't. They calculated it using the definition from the standard.
The “very/moderate high” comes from the standard itself, which is quantified within the standard. In the context, it is about the probability of having issues, while the effect (mild to catastrophic) is another axis.…
IEEE Recommended Practices for Modulating Current in High-Brightness LEDs for Mitigating Health Risks to Viewers : https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/1789/4479/ There is nothing anecdote about flickering in LED light…