How do I create a function to process each millisecond? - page 4
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
The depth of knowledge is amazing! ...and the subtlety of perception! Usually everyone sees jerks and unnatural movement in Charlie Chaplin films.
So shoot a baby at 25 fps and one at 50 fps, you'll see the same jerks.)
So shoot the baby at 25 fps and at 50 fps, you'll see the same jerks)
Or else you haven't held the camera in your hands.
I've never held a camera in my hands.
You're the one who's writing, not me.
24 frames per second is enough for a natural, even motion effect.
You're the one writing it, not me.
Are you still arguing that?
The bouncing on your phone is probably from the codec.
That's amazing! Play around with your phone and draw conclusions based on that game. 24 frames is the eternal and worldwide standard.
There are now four standard frequencies: 24, 25, 30 and 33. And somehow the world lives beautifully... no one has anything jumping around.
On my computer, it is just under 2 milliseconds with COLOR_FORMAT_ARGB_NORMALIZE , and less than a millisecond with COLOR_FORMAT_XRGB_NOALPHA
I measured the rendering speed and it turned out that the COLOR_FORMAT_ARGB_RAW colour formatting method is about two times faster than COLOR_FORMAT_ARGB_NORMALIZE.
After that, I started alternating the rendering methods. If there is no transparency of the part, then it is COLOR_FORMAT_ARGB_RAW; if there is transparency, then COLOR_FORMAT_ARGB_NORMALIZE. This gives me a noticeable speedup of element interactivity. If you quickly move cursor over elements, they react to colour changes much faster. These are the subtleties.
Are you still disputing this?
The jumps you have there on your phone are most likely from the codec.
That's amazing! Play around with your phone and draw conclusions based on that game. 24 frames is the eternal and worldwide standard.
There are now four standard frequencies: 24, 25, 30 and 33. And somehow the world is doing just fine... no one has anything jumping around.
I'm not arguing, I'm stating the facts, you read books about TV as a kid))
that's what i'm telling you, the tv has 50 different half-frames, not 24
I'm not arguing, I'm stating facts, you read books about TV as a child))
That's what I'm telling you, the TV has 50 different half-frames, not 24.
On TV, it's the way the frames change. I've already written here that allowing natural motion when shooting and the monitor flicker problem are different problems.
Film cameras simply frame frames at 24 fps, there is no interlace, just dumb frame change. Why are you arguing about something you don't understand?
On TV, it's a way of changing frames.
Why not 24 half frames?)
I'm not arguing, I'm stating facts, you read books about TV as a child))
So I'm telling you that the TV has 50 different half-frames, not 24.
But the frequency will still be 25Hz because a half-frame is output at 25Hz, but the previous half-frame is reproduced on the TV screen due to the "pixel decay time".
why not 24 half frames?)
That would correspond to 12 frames per second - not enough to convey the natural fluidity of movement.