I guess I'm looking for the target of this finding.
This might be interesting for foveated rendering techniques, and certainly it's interesting to know how the eye responds to "real" visual input, but it doesn't seem particularly relevant to standard displays. These images were presented at 1400Hz updates. That's necessary because saccades are 1000deg/sec events over 10s of ms up to >100deg, while the high resolution fovea is only ~1deg wide.
For standard raster scanned displays (CRT, LCD, OLED) upto 240Hz there are other effects such as "tearing", "flicker", and phosphor lag that are much more visible and distracting effects for "rapidly moving" objects. That's even ignoring video compression artifacts.
This might be interesting for foveated rendering techniques, and certainly it's interesting to know how the eye responds to "real" visual input, but it doesn't seem particularly relevant to standard displays. These images were presented at 1400Hz updates. That's necessary because saccades are 1000deg/sec events over 10s of ms up to >100deg, while the high resolution fovea is only ~1deg wide.
For standard raster scanned displays (CRT, LCD, OLED) upto 240Hz there are other effects such as "tearing", "flicker", and phosphor lag that are much more visible and distracting effects for "rapidly moving" objects. That's even ignoring video compression artifacts.