The quirks of Motionflow?

A question that i'm sure everybody has on their mind is this.

How exactly does motionflow work?

Being a huge PS3 gamer, My new 46z4100 is used primarily for games. This is where I think motionflow would help me...

Short answer, yes and no...

Yes, it reduces the "smearing" effect that is by nature, a side effects of the LCD technology, and no, it introduces a slight delay in terms of responsiveness.

Would someone be kind enough to completely explain how motionflow works?

From my understanding it is the following:

-First frame is sent into the Bravia Engine 2.
-BE2 waits for second frame
-BE2 recieves second frame and quickly interpolates the "fake" frame in between the two key frames.
-The first frame is output to the display and the second frame is held again in anticipation of the third frame.
-The third frame arrives and the second frame and the interpolated frame are output to the display.
-The third frame is held in anticipation for the fourth frame and so on...

I believe this is why there is a delay, and is especially noticeable when gaming, where your input should directly translate into on screen actions.

I believe I see a fundamental flaw with Motionflow, there will always be a delay.

Lets take Motionflow 240hz for example, the newest release from Sony.

- First frame is sent to the BE2 and held in anticipation for the next frame.
- Second frame is recieved and the two are interpolated twice, creating two intermediate frames.
- The first frame and the two intermediate frames are output.
- The second frame is held in anticipation of the third frame.

The hold delay is still there, no matter what. And that hold will only be as fast as the 60hz signal being sent to it. In other words, it won't get faster than 16ms.


What puzzles me is twofold:
How long is the processing delay to create the one or two interpolated frames?

Also, with the introduction of 240hz, since we're now seeing the first frame and an additional TWO interpolated frames, is the percieved lag reduced? How so? I think what is key here is that the Bravia Engine take no longer than 1ms to process the inerpolated frames. That way we will have a 17ms response.

I think this is the nature of 60Hz broadcast and HDMI standards. The television will always have to wait, regardless of how many interpolated frames are created between the first frame in the 60hz cycle and the second frame..... That is a constant that never changes.

You can essentially have motionflow 960hz and still have the SAME delay from the Bravia engine waiting for that second frame, that third, that fourth frame. The output (once processing is complete) can get faster and faster, but the hold and wait delay remains the same: 16ms between each 60hz frame...

In a 60hz Signal from, say, a PS3 sending out 1080p 60 how long in milliseconds is the delay from which one frame is sent to the next?

I believe the equation is 1 / 60, which would be .016 or 16ms.

So the equasion for the Motionflow delay would roughly be:

Delay = 16ms (for a standard 60hz PS3 game) + (time it takes for Bravia Engine to actually process interpolated frames) + LCD response time (usually 2.5ms)

There is one constant in that equasion... the 16ms will never change unless the HDMI / Bluray standard is updated to support 120hz. The rest, such as lcd response time and bravia engine processing time can be reduced to something like 1ms.

So, by being generous, one could assume that a 25+ms delay would be normal when Motionflow is enabled.

This can be addressed by updating the PS3 firmware to output 120hz natively... but that would suggest that ps3 games should be capable of rendering at 120+ frames per second.... most of which only run at 30 or 60.

Apologies for my brain spillage... But I think Motionflow is an interesting technology forced to conform to prehistoric standards.

My intentions for this thread are to get some minds storming about how exactly this technology works... What you've read are my guestimations.

bump... anyone care to clarify the "lag" caused by motionflow?
Does anyone know if such latency can be overcome?

I found out that HDMI can actually support 320hz over 1080p connections. So my argument becomes invalid, in a way.

Chopin, really good information. Thanks.

Your post should be starred as it clarifies plenty about this very misunderstood technology.

However, we are making the assumption that motionflow 240hz only samples in between 2 frames.. If it samples more, we're back to the same delay 120hz motionflow has, or worse... Theoretically, the Bravia Engine doesn't need to be updated between 120hz and 240hz as it is apparently the same algorithm split between more frames..... It's just a faster LCD panel.

Anyways, most of our information is speculative. We don't know how many frames motionflow samples, and we can't account for how much time the Bravia Engine takes to process the tweened frames... nor any processor, not only Sony's.

Personally, even with lag included, I enjoy motionflow for gaming... Running my z46 Bravia in Game mode makes it snappier, but at the cost of clarity of motion, pixels just start blurring together and that makes twitchy shooters harder when your target is moving. To each his own.

I think someone from inside the industry needs to shed a little light, without giving away who they work for or who's technology they're explaining... I understand the need for secrecy though.

sorry to revive a dead topic, does anybody else have any input on this interesting subject?