Wizarding World - Diagon Alley Discussion (Opens 2014)

[boomerthom]

Again, thanks, this is so pertinent to our discussion of frame rates, and distance in attractions.

Is the "critical frequency" column intended to mean frame rate in the graphics? If not, I am at a loss of how to read them.

On a similar note, if frame rate and distance from the source (or projection) may be an issue, would this not be the problem on FJ? Guests are very close to those screens. I believe we discussed recently that the frame rate is assumed to be 60fps on FJ.

I thought the issue with UltraHD TVs was resolution+framerate+close distance to the screen. Framerate by itself shouldn't be an issue. The vast majority of PC games are generally played at a high framerate (around 60) and mouse+keyboard requires you to sit close to the screen. If 60FPS caused a widespread issue, PC gaming wouldn't be viable at all. Maybe the lower resolution of 1080p keeps this from becoming an issue. I'm not aware of any 4K monitors...not that any PC could even run a decent looking game at 4K/60FPS anyway

Is FJ's resolution higher than 1080p? I thought the ride was in development before 4K video became standard.

 

[Teebin]

I thought the issue with UltraHD TVs was resolution+framerate+close distance to the screen. Framerate by itself shouldn't be an issue.

Correct, yet I am reading that it seems to be the combo of all three; distance, fps and resolution. Shame on me that I did not read the full articles but was there a discussion of 60fps on 1080p as boomer suggests? Better yet, does 30fps cause problems on ultra hd?

 

[Parkscope Joe]

In hindsight, the statement above makes absolutely no sense. If it was so 'real' then why aren't hundreds of people getting sick on trains every day from looking out the windows? If people are getting sick in tests of the HE, then it is because the depth perception sucks or the sync is off or both.

Could be the frame rate is too slow or the eye can't properly focus on the various planes of depth. I think combine DH's rumor of a new display tech with this, and things are falling into place.

 

[ChrisFL]

I just want to say this discussion is very interesting, I had no idea that ultra hdtv would cause those kinds of issues

 

[the last chronicler]

I know if I play a videogame on my iPad whilst riding in a vehicle I get sick due to the inconsistency between the visuals and reality, this may be factor in a more subtly manner for the Express.

Another possible way of explaining this sickness could be to describe the frame rate as the 'uncanny valley' of vision. Most people are used to 24fps, which people's brains interpret as cinema, whilst 60fps may be nearing natural but not quite, creating confusion as to whether it should be interpreted as reality or illusion?

 

[Teebin]

Most people are used to 24fps, which people's brains interpret as cinema

Weeeeeeell. Actually most Americans are used to 29.97fps which is television. True film cams shoot at 24fps but even that has to be interpolated for TV using "3:2 pulldown" so that they end up with 29.97fps. (basically an old method of interpolating frames to create the correct number of frames)

What jsal has shown us is that somewhere between 30fps (29.97) and 60fps at hi res there is a sweet spot. In theaters where the screen is 20' or more away, human eyes can handle the higher res and frame rate.

I find this so fascinating as it goes against a long held theory. Fascinating...

 

[boomerthom]

Even in theaters, I heard that some people had trouble with Peter Jackson's The Hobbit which was shown in 48FPS. Wonder what the resolution was on that.

I'm actually thinking that the size of the screen may not be the problem. Assuming Transformers's ride film is at least 48FPS, wouldn't the wraparound IMAX screens cause problems since its a close 4K high FPS image completely filling your vision? There has to be something more to it. Could be way off base but perhaps CG imagery is easier-tolerated than live action? Would explain why live action films seens to be more difficult to tolerate than high FPS ride films and video games. Just a thought.

 

[jtsalien]

I'm actually thinking that the size of the screen may not be the problem. Assuming Transformers's ride film is at least 48FPS, wouldn't the wraparound IMAX screens cause problems since its a close 4K high FPS image completely filling your vision? There has to be something more to it. Could be way off base but perhaps CG imagery is easier-tolerated than live action? Would explain why live action films seens to be more difficult to tolerate than high FPS ride films and video games. Just a thought.

The Stimulus Area variable directly relates to screen size. The larger the screen, the higher frame rate you need actually.

Well, as we continue our journey down the wormhole, I found this article: http://wolfcrow.com/blog/notes-by-dr-optoglass-motion-and-the-frame-rate-of-the-human-eye/

Various agencies have conducted tests of their own to find the ideal frame rate for cinema.
-Thomas Edison believed that 46 fps was the minimum for strain-free vision.
-James Cameron believes shooting in 60fps will heighten the sense of reality for stereoscopic film.
-Douglas Trumbull, the developer of Showscan, discovered that as the speed of projection ramped up, so did the emotional response, peaking at 72 fps. In fact, movies shot on 24 fps are usually projected at 48 fps or 72 fps.
-BBC Research had successfully demonstrated in 2008 that increasing the frame rate can significantly improve the portrayal of motion even at standard definition. Their tests were conducted by shooting 300 fps on a Phantom V5.1 camera, but displayed at 100 fps on a Christie Mirage S+4K projector due to limitations in display technology.

The maximum fusion frequency for rod-mediated vision is about 15 Hz. The maximum fusion frequency for cone-based vision is about 60Hz. This corresponds to between 30 to 120 fps.

Takeaways:

-Through EEG, we know that beta waves lie between 13 to 30 Hz, which corresponds to 25 to 60 Fps.
-Through phi phenomenon and beta movement, the maximum fusion frequency of the eye corresponds to 60 Hz, or about 120 fps.
-Practical testing by eminent agencies have shown that the frame rate must be above 60 fps, and even above 100 fps to take full advantage of the high spatial resolutions.

So, it appears that the fps of the human eye is actually 120 fps. However, it's the refresh rate of the brain that is closer to the 25-60 fps we discussed earlier.

 

[Enbee]

The Stimulus Area variable directly relates to screen size. The larger the screen, the higher frame rate you need actually.

Well, as we continue our journey down the wormhole, I found this article: http://wolfcrow.com/blog/notes-by-dr-optoglass-motion-and-the-frame-rate-of-the-human-eye/



So, it appears that the fps of the human eye is actually 120 fps. However, it's the refresh rate of the brain that is closer to the 25-60 fps we discussed earlier.

Some this is questionable. "Movies shot at 24 fps are usually projected at 48 fps or 72 fps." is certainly inaccurate. I believe you're right about the brain refresh rate though.

 

[Cruiseshipfan]

I know if I play a videogame on my iPad whilst riding in a vehicle I get sick due to the inconsistency between the visuals and reality, this may be factor in a more subtly manner for the Express.Another possible way of explaining this sickness could be to describe the frame rate as the 'uncanny valley' of vision. Most people are used to 24fps, which people's brains interpret as cinema, whilst 60fps may be nearing natural but not quite, creating confusion as to whether it should be interpreted as reality or illusion?

That caused by your eyes and ears sending your brain different signals. The same thing happens when your reading in a vehicle. Its one of the most common causes of travel sickness, and it why they tell you to look at the horizon when you get seasick.

 

[Andy]

These last few pages is exactly why we have the best forum around. This is amazing stuff to give a full understanding of obstacles there facing. :thumbs:

 

[neoshinok]

Weeeeeeell. Actually most Americans are used to 29.97fps which is television. True film cams shoot at 24fps but even that has to be interpolated for TV using "3:2 pulldown" so that they end up with 29.97fps. (basically an old method of interpolating frames to create the correct number of frames)

I believe the 3:2 pulldown method is how they convert 24fps to 60fps, which is what most televisions of years past displayed. Side note, I'm really enjoying how nerdy this conversation has gotten!

 

[Disneyhead]

3:2 pull down is the formula for converting 24fps to 29.97fps (SD) and 59.94fps (HD).

 

[Cruiseshipfan]

These last few pages is exactly why we have the best forum around. This is amazing stuff to give a full understanding of obstacles there facing. :thumbs:

I was thinking the exact same thing. I was blown away by the things that people here know, and to have so many in one place.

 

[the last chronicler]

That caused by your eyes and ears sending your brain different signals. The same thing happens when your reading in a vehicle. Its one of the most common causes of travel sickness, and it why they tell you to look at the horizon when you get seasick.

I guess I'm saying the 60fps' contradiction with tradition cinema and TV frame-rates could be accompanied with a slight contradiction between the trains real movement and what the screens display accentuating the motion--or lack of motion--sickness.

 

[TylerDurden]

if anyone is interested...the HE track looks like it runs at an incline...thats my contribution for the day

 

[ChrisFL]

I know if I play a videogame on my iPad whilst riding in a vehicle I get sick due to the inconsistency between the visuals and reality, this may be factor in a more subtly manner for the Express.

Another possible way of explaining this sickness could be to describe the frame rate as the 'uncanny valley' of vision. Most people are used to 24fps, which people's brains interpret as cinema, whilst 60fps may be nearing natural but not quite, creating confusion as to whether it should be interpreted as reality or illusion?

I wouldn't call that 'uncanny valley' as the issue you're mentioning has more to do with physiology than psychology.

The uncanny valley is our emotional response to creepy non-humans that try to look like humans

 

[shiekra38]

I wouldn't call that 'uncanny valley' as the issue you're mentioning has more to do with physiology than psychology.

The uncanny valley is our emotional response to creepy non-humans that try to look like humans

Uncanny Valley really deals more with say animatronics and reconstructive surgery than frame rates...may be why everyone finds Small World so creepy

Also deals with animation...I do not believe that it leads to sickness...rather a creeped out feeling, zombies being the highest feeling of creepyness and lowest feeling of acceptance (hence the valley description)

 

[Andy]

The GIGANTIC pulleys for the HE ride system are on site in a staging area in case anyone cares :thumbs:

 

[Casey81]

I know The Hobbit was brought up earlier with the way the higher (48 fps) also looked "ultra-realistic" to some people. If I remember correctly from my neuro classes last fall, if the frame rate is any higher than ~40 fps, your brain will perceive it as reality because we can only interpret about 40 "frames" a second. Your brain will adapt to the higher frame rate over time, but when there is a slower frame rate, your brain knows something is wrong, and works the lighting and sets into the overall image and that's why our normal movies at the slower frame rate look like a cohesive image. The added movement of the train may just be giving your brain something else to try and work into the image and that's the cause of the nausea. If that doesn't make sense, sorry, I'm a little tipsy right now