VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 22 of 22
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date: Mar 2011
    Location: UK
    Search PM
    I seem to remember a discussion a little while back about frame rates and movies.

    I read somewhere that the new Hobbit movie has been shot at 48 fps and early views have been negative. People complained about the soap-opera effect (movie looking like tv video). I also read somewhere that George Lucas wants to make his next blockbuster in 60 fps.

    What are you views on this?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: England
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by akkers View Post
    I seem to remember a discussion a little while back about frame rates and movies.
    Maybe this.

    I read somewhere that the new Hobbit movie has been shot at 48 fps and early views have been negative. People complained about the soap-opera effect (movie looking like tv video). I also read somewhere that George Lucas wants to make his next blockbuster in 60 fps.

    What are you views on this?
    I hope directors push ahead with higher frame-rates.

    The public's reaction is understandable. After decades of watching big-budget movies at 24fps, and cheaper TV productions at 50i/59.94i, the association is strong. But we're now in a crazy situation where people are complaining about movies that have better temporal resolution.

    Separate to the association; running at a lower frame-rate subconsciously tells the viewer that what they're watching isn't 'reality'. This helps make a film seem less real-life, less mundane, less ordinary and more dreamlike, more fantasy, special, etc. Using soft focus, altering the colour palette, shallow depth of field and unrealistic lighting set-ups are other ways of achieving this.

    Even if 48p becomes mainstream, I see it co-existing with 24p - similar to how 1.85:1 and 2.39:1 films have always done.

    I hope Lucas chooses 48p instead. 60p will convert poorly to most of the worlds TV systems.
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2004
    Location: Freedonia
    Search Comp PM
    George Lucas is semi-retired and appears to have nothing on his plate at present beyond "helping" to write what will certainly be another terrible script for a 5th Indiana Jones movie. I wouldn't hold my breath here. He said he no longer wants to direct big budget blockbuster but might direct smaller, independent films. I doubt that most will be too excited if he turns out a higher frame rate "My Dinner With Andre" type movie.

    When people complain about movies looking like tv video, that is probably due to certain types of digital photography. You don't have to have a TV look when you shoot digitally, but I know nothing about what might have been done for The Hobbit. I don't think the higher frame rate is really the cause for the complaints but I could be wrong.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: England
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by jman98 View Post
    George Lucas is semi-retired and appears to have nothing on his plate at present beyond "helping" to write what will certainly be another terrible script for a 5th Indiana Jones movie.
    Speaking of George Lucas, the guy who does these reviews is a genius:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfBhi6qqFLA
    his reviews of the later Star Trek films are also great.

    Someone give him a TV show... and some pizza rolls.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member fritzi93's Avatar
    Join Date: Nov 2003
    Location: U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by intracube View Post
    Speaking of George Lucas, the guy who does these reviews is a genius:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfBhi6qqFLA
    his reviews of the later Star Trek films are also great.

    Someone give him a TV show... and some pizza rolls.
    Now *that* is a great link. I just got done watching his reviews of all the Star Wars prequels. He's dead on.
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member Noahtuck's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2004
    Location: ®Inside My Avatar™© U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by intracube View Post
    Speaking of George Lucas, the guy who does these reviews is a genius:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfBhi6qqFLA
    his reviews of the later Star Trek films are also great.

    Someone give him a TV show... and some pizza rolls.
    That was F'n hilarious!!!!!

    He sound's like he wore a helmet on the short bus, but there was some real genius in that!!!

    And I totally forgot about "The Last Starfighter"!!!
    Now I am going to have to get it as I have not seen it in years and years and years!!!!!!

    But one thing, where is part 2 ??
    Name:  Part 2.jpg
Views: 40
Size:  25.9 KB

    I am so saving that vid to show other people!!!

    Never mind... I found the other 9....
    LMAO!!!

    Pt. 2
    Obi Wans "outer rim"
    LMFAO!!!!!
    Last edited by Noahtuck; 13th Jun 2012 at 21:45.
    Originally a member since 2001, LONG LIVE TARAN's!!!
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: England
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by fritzi93 View Post
    Now *that* is a great link. I just got done watching his reviews of all the Star Wars prequels. He's dead on.
    Yep, there haven't been many YT videos that kept my attention for 90 mins at a time.

    I must have watched most of his reviews over 3-4 days

    He is to movies what Bill Hicks was to social issues, and what Charlie Brooker is to media and pop culture.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by intracube View Post
    Originally Posted by jman98 View Post
    George Lucas is semi-retired and appears to have nothing on his plate at present beyond "helping" to write what will certainly be another terrible script for a 5th Indiana Jones movie.
    Speaking of George Lucas, the guy who does these reviews is a genius:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfBhi6qqFLA
    his reviews of the later Star Trek films are also great.

    Someone give him a TV show... and some pizza rolls.
    Thanks for that. I wasted half the day on YT after following your link. Funny stuff!
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2008
    Location: Poland
    Search PM
    I hope Lucas chooses 48p instead. 60p will convert poorly to most of the worlds TV systems.
    yeah right Especially when 99% of LCD/plasmas are 60Hz even in PAL zone.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member fritzi93's Avatar
    Join Date: Nov 2003
    Location: U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    I'm all for higher frame rate. I was particularly struck by a passage quoted by edDV in the other thread:

    Trumbull discovered that although viewers see smooth motion from film displayed at 24 frames per second (fps), the standard in motion pictures for decades, they are subconsciously still aware of the flicker. This awareness reduces the emotional impact of the film. As the speed of projection ramped up, so did the emotional response, peaking at 72 fps. After that speed, no further improvements were noted.

    But I confess that I'm none the wiser as to: Why 48 fps? If existing projector equipment won't do 48 fps anyway, why not 60 fps? Presumably expense would not be a compelling reason if shot digitally rather than on film.
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  
  11. Originally Posted by fritzi93 View Post
    But I confess that I'm none the wiser as to: Why 48 fps?
    Because it can be decimated to 24 fps for old theaters, PAL, DVD, Blu-ray, etc.

    Look at this the other way around. Suppose movies had always been shot at 48 fps or 60 fps and somebody tried to introduce 24 fps as something new. He'd be lynched for the jerky, flickery mess.
    Last edited by jagabo; 15th Jun 2012 at 07:34.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: England
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
    I hope Lucas chooses 48p instead. 60p will convert poorly to most of the worlds TV systems.
    yeah right Especially when 99% of LCD/plasmas are 60Hz even in PAL zone.
    Uh, I think you're wrong about that. Yes, computer LCD displays usually run at 60Hz, but LCD TVs and plasmas in PAL/Secam areas should be running at 50Hz for obvious reasons.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member
    Join Date: Aug 2008
    Location: Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Here is an interesting older interview with James Cameron that is primarily about 3D technology, but near the end of the interview there is a discussion on frame rate:

    http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983864?refCatId=1043
    Quote Quote  
  14. AGAINST IDLE SIT nwo's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2004
    Location: Stadium Of Light
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by intracube View Post
    Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
    I hope Lucas chooses 48p instead. 60p will convert poorly to most of the worlds TV systems.
    yeah right Especially when 99% of LCD/plasmas are 60Hz even in PAL zone.
    Uh, I think you're wrong about that. Yes, computer LCD displays usually run at 60Hz, but LCD TVs and plasmas in PAL/Secam areas should be running at 50Hz for obvious reasons.
    Nope, i think you will find you wrong about that, all HD LCD/LED/Plasma TVs sold in the E.U. have both 50Hz and 60Hz as standard.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member fritzi93's Avatar
    Join Date: Nov 2003
    Location: U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Gramps View Post
    Here is an interesting older interview with James Cameron that is primarily about 3D technology, but near the end of the interview there is a discussion on frame rate:

    http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983864?refCatId=1043
    Thanks for that. From the link:

    "The DLP chip in our current generation of digital projectors can currently run up to 144 frames per second, and they are still being improved. The maximum data rate currently supports stereo at 24 frames per second or 2-D at 48 frames per second. So right now, today, we could be shooting 2-D movies at 48 frames and running them at that speed. This alone would make 2-D movies look astonishingly clear and sharp, at very little extra cost, with equipment that's already installed or being installed."

    So 60 fps can't be displayed with existing projectors, whereas 48 fps (in 2D) can. 60 fps would have to be decimated and displayed at 30 fps for 2D, and 3D would be out of the question. Older equipment couldn't display it at all. Little point in that.

    Did I get that right?
    Last edited by fritzi93; 15th Jun 2012 at 09:04.
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member
    Join Date: Sep 2007
    Location: Canada
    Search Comp PM
    That was in 2008. In later, more recent interviews , Cameron said he would "personally favor" 60fps

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/avatar-james-cameron-eyeing-60-frames-237522
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: England
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by nwo View Post
    Originally Posted by intracube View Post
    Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
    I hope Lucas chooses 48p instead. 60p will convert poorly to most of the worlds TV systems.
    yeah right Especially when 99% of LCD/plasmas are 60Hz even in PAL zone.
    Uh, I think you're wrong about that. Yes, computer LCD displays usually run at 60Hz, but LCD TVs and plasmas in PAL/Secam areas should be running at 50Hz for obvious reasons.
    Nope, i think you will find you wrong about that, all HD LCD/LED/Plasma TVs sold in the E.U. have both 50Hz and 60Hz as standard.
    I didn't say that they only ran at 50Hz I said that they should be running at 50Hz when displaying PAL/secam content. Atak_Snajpera's comment suggested that LCD/plasmas run at 60Hz "even in PAL zone" - which isn't correct.

    Although a lot of TVs outside the US are multi-standard, virtually all SD/HD broadcasts in Europe are 50i/50p. A film shot at 60p would have to be converted before being broadcast or sold on DVD.

    Not sure if 60p is allowed for region B blu-ray discs...

    Originally Posted by Gramps View Post
    Here is an interesting older interview with James Cameron that is primarily about 3D technology, but near the end of the interview there is a discussion on frame rate:

    http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983864?refCatId=1043
    Thanks for the link. An interesting read.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2008
    Location: Poland
    Search PM
    Not sure if 60p is allowed for region B blu-ray discs...
    only for 1280x720
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date: Oct 2010
    Location: England
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
    Not sure if 60p is allowed for region B blu-ray discs...
    only for 1280x720
    I'm not awake yet... Thinking about it, a 60fps film would be converted to 59.94i(29.97i) 1920x1080 for region A blu-rays. If region B discs support that, then it would be a partial work around.

    Wouldn't be of much help for DVDs or broadcast, though.
    Quote Quote  
  20. One of the problems with 24fps is it's just not always fast enough to produce smooth motion, but produces a "strobing" effect.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24p#Disadvantages_of_24p

    While I don't understand the technical reasons for it, current displays don't seem to display 24fps video smoothly either, or they make the 24p strobing effect look worse. Something to do with the sample and hold effect on eye tracking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDTV_blur

    To me, motion on my Plasma TV at 25fps (I use ReClock to play everything at 25fps and 50hz to eliminate the NTSC judder) often still looks "jittery". I'd be more than happy to watch 48fps video, which I'd speed up to 50fps using ReClock and no doubt motion would finally look nice a smooth. 60fps @ 60hz would no doubt look pretty good too.
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2001
    Location: Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search Comp PM
    Current DIGITAL eCinema projectors accept 24Fps (2D 2k, 3D 2k or 2D 4k) or 48fps (2D 2k only) input, and output double flash (48fps for 2D 2k, 4k), triple flash (72fps for 2D 2k...4k?) or tripleflash (144fps for 3D 2k). No current Digital eCinema projectors accept 60p input AFAIK; digital video projectors do but only at 1080 resolution, no 2k or 4k. When they accept 60p, it is either single flash 60p (2D), double flash 120p (2D), quad flash 240p (2D) or single flash 120p (3D). Note that when I say 60p I really mean 59.94, etc.

    Old Film-based projectors only run 24p double-flashed to 48p, 2D. That's it.

    There are odd exceptions (Showscan projectors, scientific/engineering application projectors, some Imax projectors and planetarium projectors), but they don't really count for mass consumption.

    Cameron knows what he's talking about: 60p is his personal preference, but he knows that's not currently viable whereas 48p could be.

    Hopefully, the technology of projectors & their available bandwidths will improve to allow up to 72fps + 3D + 4k. And the DCI specs would have to be amended/appended, and theatres would have to buy in to it also. But, man! that would be something!...

    Scott
    "When will the rhetorical questions end?!" - George Carlin
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member fritzi93's Avatar
    Join Date: Nov 2003
    Location: U.S.
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
    That was in 2008. In later, more recent interviews , Cameron said he would "personally favor" 60fps

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/avatar-james-cameron-eyeing-60-frames-237522
    Oy, in the later interview, he says this:

    “The reason I went down that path is because I believe it makes for better 3D,” Cameron said of his advocacy of higher frame rates in a new interview with The Hollywood Reporter. “There were lots of arguments for why 48 and why 60. My feeling is if it is a software upgrade (for digital cinema projectors), do both. It doesn’t change anything at the projector; you don’t have to change the lamp house or the lenses. If you are uploading software you can upload it for 48 and 60 and let the filmmakers decide.”

    What's that *if* doing in there? Can existing equipment do 60 fps or not? Software upgrade? I notice aedipuss did mention the possibility in the other thread.

    Anyway, I was thinking 60 would be a convenient rate in regard to refresh rates for either 50 Hz or 60 Hz. Think of it: true 1080p/60 on a home display. No more painful, jerky pan shots. No iffy motion interpolation needed.
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads