|
|
Post by jmilton on Jan 23, 2012 16:04:37 GMT -5
So, Peter Jackson is shooting The Hobbit in 48 fps...or at twice the frame rate as traditional movies. Reason? Smoother, more natural motion. 24 fps is an antiquated tradition. Cameron agrees and is shooting the Avatar sequel in 48 fps.---So it begs some questions: www.firstshowing.net/2011/peter-jackson-talks-at-length-about-using-48fps-for-the-hobbit/Will BD players support it? Will the UMC-1 allow it via "pass thru"? Will your newly purchased HDTV support it? ..and what about the fabled XMC?   |
|
|
|
Post by House on Jan 23, 2012 16:09:30 GMT -5
Probably going to be a dumbed down version
|
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Jan 23, 2012 16:17:18 GMT -5
Onkyo/Integra will support it.  ;D |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,340
|
Post by DYohn on Jan 23, 2012 16:18:35 GMT -5
To me it smells like a simple gimmick, since NOTHING supports 48FPS except for a few specialty digital projectors that can be found in some cinemas. There is a reason it is a direct multiple of 24FPS (instead of the more common digital speed of 60FPS): so it can be shown using standard projectors with a minimum of expensive processing.  |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,340
|
Post by DYohn on Jan 23, 2012 16:19:37 GMT -5
Onkyo/Integra will support it. ;D Yes. At 24FPS just like everything else. |
|
|
|
Post by ÈlTwo on Jan 23, 2012 16:30:46 GMT -5
There is data that a higher frame rate make more data visible, and can cause the appearance of stuttering for certain scenes. A slower frame rate make make motion look more fluid. It will be interesting.
As for showing on Blu-ray, there should be no problem encoding it, however you're best off with a TV that does 240 or 480 Hz. I guess they'll just have to use a pulldown ratio to account for the difference.
|
|
|
|
Post by House on Jan 23, 2012 16:36:36 GMT -5
so glad ive never been one to try and keep up with the video end of the world....that sht changes faster than superman late for a hot date.
|
|
hemster
Global Moderator 
Particle Manufacturer
...still listening... still watching
Posts: 51,920
|
Post by hemster on Jan 23, 2012 16:39:30 GMT -5
Jackson says: "However, while it's predicted that there may be over 10,000 screens capable of projecting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps by our release date in Dec, 2012, we don’t yet know what the reality will be. It is a situation we will all be monitoring carefully." Hmm. I wonder if that many movie theaters will undertake the expense of upgrading their gear to support the higher frame rates (by the end of 2012?) or will they just show as usual, in which case there's no benefit to us. I'd love to witness the lack of blur and strobing afforded by the higher rate for myself. Would be very interesting. BD players and processors could support 48FPS.. but not without a firmware upgrade at a minmum. The marketing geniuses will likely want us to replace our gear anyway.  |
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Jan 23, 2012 16:43:19 GMT -5
And don't forget the new 48fps capable HDMI cables!!! ;D
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,340
|
Post by DYohn on Jan 23, 2012 16:57:04 GMT -5
I think Jackson is smoking something that's illegal without a prescription.
|
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Jan 23, 2012 19:11:00 GMT -5
Time will come ... And everybody will be happy ever and forever ...
No more blur and unfocused pictures from camera panning is in our future ... That's for sure.
The eye is the bulb inside the globe (eyeball). The frame's speed is the ultimate focus of its time arrival.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,340
|
Post by DYohn on Jan 23, 2012 19:13:01 GMT -5
24fps has been fine for films since the early 20th Century: it will remain fine for films for many more. |
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Jan 23, 2012 19:19:05 GMT -5
Not with the lenses of a camera panning from sideways.
* We have two eyes, a movie camera has only one.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,340
|
Post by DYohn on Jan 23, 2012 19:20:17 GMT -5
Not with the lenses of a camera panning from sideways. Of course it is. That's been a common technique since 1910... |
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Jan 23, 2012 19:22:10 GMT -5
It depends on the speed - and of course the speed of the action on-screen ...
|
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Jan 23, 2012 19:22:24 GMT -5
Not with the lenses of a camera panning from sideways. Of course it is. That's been a common technique since 1910... It's been flawed since 1910. |
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Jan 23, 2012 19:26:09 GMT -5
It depends on the speed - and of course the speed of the action on-screen ... Exactemente; all about speed from the on-screen action. And that is also directly related to speed from the panning of a moving camera. I think. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 23, 2012 19:26:48 GMT -5
3D at 24 fps is not very comfortable. If you want to watch as lot of 3D movies (comfortably), you need motion interpolation. 48 fps 3D will be more comfortable and have fewer motion interpolation artifacts.
|
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Jan 23, 2012 19:31:27 GMT -5
The main culprit is money. Cost more to speed things up, in everyting ... And plasma HDTVs with 600 Hz natural refresh high frame rate is better than LCD's 120 & 240 Hz refreshing (interpolated) high frame rate. Much better for sports action. |
|
xki
Emo VIPs
Gwack!
Posts: 1,756
|
Post by xki on Jan 23, 2012 19:35:52 GMT -5
Of course it is. That's been a common technique since 1910... It's been flawed since 1910. LOL - It was limited by technology of the time. Just like CDs being 44Khz. Or TV being 480p. Flawed? YES! There were cranks on the front of cars, too. Or horses in every yard. What will probably happen is that the 48fps will be dumbed down to work. Or dumbed up? I'm not too worried. I'll bet it will look good in the theaters (If their equipment can handle it.) |
|
;D
