FredMSloniker 
"[@Joshua":](/images/2623735#comment_9656916
")
[@rocco1050":](/images/2623735#comment_9657113
")
[@Tetrominon":](/images/2623735#comment_9658277
")
[@Joshua":](/images/2623735#comment_9658283
)
Fun fact: while the format of animated GIFs allows frames to last as little as 10 ms (the time a frame lasts being specified as multiples thereof), not every browser supports that, and they use 100 ms instead. If the first image below animates slower than the second, your browser has this issue.
>>743519p
t
>>743800p
t
Why do I bring this up here, you ask? Because a series of 20 ms frames (the next-shortest setting) means you're getting 50 frames a second. Therefore, it's not possible (at least, in a fully supported way) to capture the majesty of 60 frames a second in a GIF.
"
[@rocco1050
"
[@Tetrominon
"
[@Joshua
Fun fact: while the format of animated GIFs allows frames to last as little as 10 ms (the time a frame lasts being specified as multiples thereof), not every browser supports that, and they use 100 ms instead. If the first image below animates slower than the second, your browser has this issue.
>>743519
>>743800
Why do I bring this up here, you ask? Because a series of 20 ms frames (the next-shortest setting) means you're getting 50 frames a second. Therefore, it's not possible (at least, in a fully supported way) to capture the majesty of 60 frames a second in a GIF.