48FPS Footage & 24FPS comparison- Shot with RED -Realtime-Not slow motion.

[PappasArts]

FOR MORE HFR CINEMA INFO: Follow M.L. Pappas on Twitter
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
&
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM


[UPDATE:] 12/16/12- Since this post was published the Hobbit has been released. I've linked to the section
to get you past all the old posts to where the latest conversations begin about the Hobbit from those that have seen it in HFR 48FPS.
Those discussions begin here on Page 13: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread...-motion/page13

48FPS Footage & High Frame Rate Cinema Info




Whether we like it or not, HFR ( High Frame Rate ) cinema and entertainment is
here to stay; just as 3D. Directors, DP's and all production positions would be best served to learn how
to make their craft perform better in all aspects, whether it's shot for 2D or 3D HFR at either 48FPS or
60FPS and higher. HFR cinema is not forgiving and does not allow the veil of protection for lesser than excellent
performance in production values. HFR exposes all the flaws in many areas of production, however this is a good
thing too. It will force people to raise the bar on their talents and skill much higher on all aspects of production like
acting, editing, cinematography, costuming, makeup, lighting and much more. This in the long run will improve
the art and craft of cinema production, and in the end a much more exciting experience for audiences.

The question is how will the distinctions be in the market place so audience can choose. Peter Jackson's
film The Hobbit will be in three flavors when released. A 2D version at 24FPS, a 2D 48FPS and 48FPS 3D.
48FPS movies and blu-ray's may have distinctions just as we have phrases like "FULL HD" , "1080P" 3D, 2D
etc. For 48FPS vs 24FPS version we might see "CINEMOTION" for 24FPS and "FULLMOTION"
for 48FPS and higher frame rates. Then audiences could go for what motion characteristics they prefer.

"Shoot a good film at 48fps and show people that version. For some it comes off
as a "Soap Opera" feel. Spit out a 24fps version of that exact film, and it's now liked,
and revered as good Cinema. However both are identical as for the film is concerned.

It's kinda like having a book read to you, versus you reading the book. You absorb
the story in a different way. Same story, same book, different experience"

"Simple solution in the short term to get people accustomed to High Frame Rate Cinema
is to offer the same production as Full Motion 48fps, and one in Cine Motion 24fps. I believe
over time people will choose the production that is more immersive with more temporal info.
However they need to see both, and realize psychologically that both versions are identical
films, just one is more in tune with our temporal resolution."



FILMMAKER MAGAZINE ARTICLE on HFR.
The article also links to this DVXUSER posting as a resource for more HFR info..

http://filmmakermagazine.com/60811-t...camera-prices/

•••••••

48FPS/HFR EXAMPLE FOOTAGE



#1. EXAMPLE OF 48FPS VS 24FPS FOOTAGE FILES



I was sent this information and attached video's by a colleague DP- so I'll pass it on to all of you
since this is of interest to many including myself. The below tests which are in a zip, contain two
shots. One being filmed at 24FPS and the other file is the same shot filmed 48FPS for playback at
48FPS.This will give you an idea of how 48FPS looks since no one seems to have yet to upload a
true real time 48FPS material ( non slow motion ).

Tip: If your using quicktime, be sure that your getting proper 48fps
playback speed. If it drops below, you loose the effect of 48FPS.

BLUEREI'S RETARDED RED FPS TEST - 24 & 48 FPS

Two files in the zip folder: rocks24.mov and rocks48.mov.

•First half of each clip is ungraded, due to reports of how the clip was shown to the audience ungraded.
•Second half is graded in Redcine-x to give an example of a more cinematic look and color.

Rocks at 48fps- clip 1:
•48FPS
•1/270 shutter speed
•2.40:1 Aspect
•2500 ISO
•White balance @ 5000k
•REDCODE 12:1 (default)

Rocks at 24fps- clip 2:
•24FPS
•1/48 shutter speed (180 degree)
•2.40:1 Aspect
•500 ISO
•White balance @ 5000k
•REDCODE 12:1 (default)

Zip file size: 477mb.
THE DOWNLOAD:
http://ge.tt/6Esr9oG/v/0?c

•••••••

#2 Example- 48FPS comparison footage



This is a very good example of 48FPS- shot on RED, it compares the
usual 24p 1/48s with the Peter Jackson settings: 48p and 1/64s.

THE DOWNLOAD:
http://maximum-attack.com/basement_red_fps.zip

Link #2 In case first links
bandwidth is exceeded.
https://rapidshare.com/#!download|94...278C55F28F|0|0

(posted in the comments here by Marden Blake:
http://nofilmschool.com/2012/04/pete...es-the-hobbit/)

•••••••

The Hobbit Trailer Motion Smoothed for HFR simulation



Until December or Peter Jackson releases a 48fps official trailer. Here's
The Hobbit trailer with a motion smoothing algorithm applied to it. It's not
exact nor scientific, however you get a very small approximate how the
48fps Hobbit will feel in theaters come this December. I recommend you watch it at
the frame size it is and not watch it full screen as that will blur/artifact the image up.

Motion Smoothed Hobbit Trailer Download
http://www.peejeshare.com/files/3620...ailer.mp4.html




Articles on 48FPS and (HFR) High Frame Rate Cinema


The Hobbit, the “Soap Opera Effect,” and the 48fps (and Faster) Future of Movies


http://www.studiodaily.com/2012/04/t...ure-of-movies/

“I was surprised to see how similar the real deal looks to the phony-baloney version
that's generated by 120Hz and higher-frequency television sets using frame-interpolation
techniques to simulate the missing frames, extrapolating 120fps motion from, say, a 24fps
Blu-ray source. This is known, disparagingly, as the "soap opera effect"

•••••••

Why movies are moving from 24 to 48 fps


http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...m-24-to-48-fps

"although the jump from 48 fps to 60 fps is hard to detect, so most high-frame-rate
movies will likely settle for 48 fps. While still pricey, high-frame-rate tools will increasingly
become cost effective even for independent filmmakers wanting to take advantage of the new technology"

•••••••

Peter Jackson Responds to 'Hobbit' Footage Critics, Explains 48-Frames Strategy


http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...nemacon-317755

“A lot of the critical response I was reading was people saying it’s different. Well, yes,
it certainly is,” Jackson, speaking by phone from New Zealand, said. “But I think, ultimately,
it is different in a positive way, especially for 3D, especially for epic films and films that are
trying to immerse the viewer in the experience of a story.”

•••••••

The Hobbit at 48fps: Too Much Information and the Science of Eye Movement


http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonyk...-eye-movement/

“The footage opened up with wide expansive shots of people walking on mountains
and over rich green landscapes — those awesome shots that became synonymous with
the Lord of the Rings series when it began a decade ago,” he writes. “These shots looked
incredible — almost like something you would see in an IMAX 3D nature documentary —
so extremely vivid and breathtaking, and more real than we’ve ever seen these shots before.…
This is the future of Cinema…"

•••••••

James Cameron Says The Next Revolution in Cinema Is…


http://www.slashfilm.com/cameron/#

The footage shot at 48 frames a second looked incredible. The best way to describe it,
is to quote Cameron: “If watching a 3D movie is like looking through a window, then
(with this) we’ve taken the glass out of the window and we’re staring at reality.”

•••••••

Douglas Trumbull-tech pioneer on 'Hobbit' footage: 'A fabulous and brave step in the right direction'


http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/05/0...t-frame-speed/

"So I’m just thrilled that Peter Jackson has done The Hobbit in 48 frames.
It’s definitely a fabulous and brave step in the right direction. And I talk to
him regularly and we’re talking about all this brouhaha and trying to figure
out, “Well, how do we deal with it?” You know, do we back off, which I think
would be a tragic mistake. I hope that he has a lot of success with this movie.
I think people are going to learn to appreciate the 48 frames over 24.
I hope it doesn’t have any adverse effect on Jim’s ability to make Avatar at 60.
It would be tragic not to. So we’re all trying to band together and figure out
how to get to the next phase of what the movie experience is."

•••••••

Cine Gear 2012: The Debate over High Frame Rates Grows Among Filmmakers

Footage from Peter Jackson's "The Hobbit," shot at 48 frames per second, has ignited the discussion.
Legato admitted that his preference for 24fps may be because he grew up working in film rather than video. A number of attendees at both CinemaCon and Cine Gear also find fault with what is sometimes described as 48 fps’ “video look.” Legato and other filmmakers on a Cine Gear panel acknowledged a bias against a video look may be generational.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...e-rates-333008

•••••••

Vote in this Poll question
Do You Like the High Frame Rate Cinema look or 24fps look?
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread...-or-24fps-feel

•••••••

This charts shows the difference of how many frames are captured per second.

•••••••

Marty McFly: I guess you guys aren't ready for that yet. But your kids are gonna love it
I wonder if this is a similar reaction people are having today about High Frame Rate Cinema?

M.L.Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS

BlackMagic Digital Camera Info: http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.ph...mp-Latest-Info

[rosebud]

Thanks for sharing this. This goes to the heart of the age old film vs video debate, which I think has been over simplified: 24fps good, anything else bad.

[Lammy]

Cheers for the link.

Yep, that's pretty much the same motion characteristics I've been seeing when shooting 50p for slowmo on my ole DSLRs. Can't say I like the look though. Everything looks faster and more juddery. Strangely, I prefer the 300hz TruMotion/Motionflo weird super smooth interpolation stuff on the newest HDTVs...

But I am all for 24 or 25p ^_^

[Postmaster]

I think the main difference I see is not because of the frame rate, but because of the shutter speed - 1/270 looks always unpleasant, at any frame rate..
And boy is that beast noisy at just 2500 ISO (yeah I know it´s raw, but didn´t expect it to be THAT bad).

Frank

[Lammy]

Yeah shouldn't that be 1/48 still or would it be 1/96??

[RGBaker]

The 'juddery' look doesn't come from a higher frame rate, it comes from a higher shutter speed. The shorter the shutter speed, the bigger the motion jump between frames ... even if the frame rate is doubled. In an 'ordinary' scenario the shutter is open half the time and closed half the time. In the scenario posted here, the shutter is open one quarter of the time and so closed three quarters of the time -- that results in a visible 'jump' in the motion between each frame. Shoot the same sequence at say 1/60 of a second, 48 Fps and the look would be much more fluid.

JMHO
GB

[Amr Rahmy]

they should have used the same shutter speed for both.

was that the same shutter speed used for the hobbit? is that why they chose that particular speed. i think 1/48th is 1/48th look, and the double frame rate will only help with the motion artifacts.


side note: and i think a test should be made with a global shutter camera to eliminate any rolling shutter motion artifacts.

[agcohn]

It is hard to judge from such a limited subject, but the 48fps clip looks like it is playing in fast motion compared to the 24fps clip.

I am very skeptical about the use of 48/50/60 fps for dramatic material. It might be more accurate than 24fps from an objective, scientific observation perspective, but I think 24fps is closer to how our brains process visual information.

Technically, we see things a lot faster than 24fps, but I believe that the motion characteristics of our vision (motion blur, etc) are closer to how 24fps video looks than the higher framerates.

[Lammy]

I believe the original tester got confused with 270 DEGREES shutter (which is used in the Hobbit) and thought it meant 1/270...

[Amr Rahmy]

i thought that was a typo like the iso 500 and 2500