I can't decide. Motion blur or no motion blur? (For racing I mean, not for screenshots.) I've noticed that some objects are momentarily blurring even at standstill speed, and I've nailed this to the motion blur effect. When I turn it off, everything is crisp and nice. But I kind of like the effect. Help.
On, tried turning it off a while back, god no, cant be without it now. As for issues with it only place ive noticed is Bathurst getting close to the wall, it seems to blur the whole screen for a split second.
Dont want to be asking the obvious, but your tv is set to pc mode? If mine is set to game mode it is blury but pc mode is perfect! Cant say ive noticed anywhere else to be honest.
I was joking...well sort of. My LCD isn't the best at handling motion when viewing TV as it's rather old now but it's fine for gaming at 60Hz. There's no appreciable difference in motion handling between 'movie' mode (which I run by default for the most natural colours) and game mode. Regarding motion blur - it's an effect I'm not too keen on anyway. Don't find it to be desirable or really necessary so always leave it turned off. I'd rather have the (minor) FPS boost by leaving it off.
I kind of got that but thought just incase n all that, you may have gone wow, oh yeah silly me in game mode all this time. Or maybe not !
In all honestly motion blur isn't great at doing what it is supposed to. What motion blur, as a post processing effect, intends to do is to simulate how our brains 'blend' things we aren't focusing on when moving quickly in relation to one another. Unfortunately the motion blur of the post processing variety has the major disadvantage of not being connected to our brains and so it can't shut itself off or shift what is blurred when our eyes choose to focus on something else. At the end of the day it ends up being something that looks nice in replays, but often looks 'wrong' due to the limitations inherent in the medium. HOWEVER, some people love it and that's fine but really just treat it as an 'I like how it looks' not a 'this is how motion blur actually functions'
I think R3E is perhaps the only game out there that does motion blur right. With others, it is usually this artificial looking (and usually far too strong) ghosting effect. With R3E effect is very subtle and applies quite realisitic blurring to track side objects. Currently I'm using fast with ultra quality and have been using it for a while. I think I test it without again and see how it goes. So, I like it although I disable motion blur as a default in any other game I have.
I'm need to try it. Never use it before with other sims because looks unrealistic and fps dropped (blur motion and post-processing i think is most fps depended options) Just. tried it with FR2 at Nord. Looks good, but i don't will use it, think my eyes tire quickly
I use fast-low, cause, even if just in my head, it saves me some performance from reduced anti-aliasing necessity. (I haven't actually tested both scenarios against each other as it's too much to ask to disable vsync AND enable the fps counter. Also I can't stand the massive tearing I get without vsync. But in my imagination it works miracles.)
After some testing, I'm definately also using it! For me, not using it can be compared to the effect that a 60 Hz strobe light has on movement... You're not seeing actual motion, just 60 still images per second. In regular daylight, you see fluent, uninterrupted motion. My eyes need the 60 images per second to be a little bit blended and blurred, to look the way fluent motion does. I don't even see it as a compromise - it's just the choice if you want to play with a 60 Hz strobe light as your light source, or if you want daylight. If the game was rendering at like 400 fps, motion blur probably wouldn't be necessary, but at 60 fps it really is.
Take a look at this pic. https://www.flickr.com/photos/raceroom/31467933720/ There are a lot like this in the news & announcements section. This particular pic was from before depth of field released, so I would have to imagine this is motion blur.