24p is on the way out!

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

ESTEBEVERDE

Veteran
Yes... I know for a lot of you I might as well broke the News to you that their is no Easter Bunny, or Santa Claus, or even that Baby Jesus didn't ride on the top of Dinosaurs.

The fact of the matter is that Theatrical Production and Exhibition is moving to an entirely Digital word.

Which will come first the digital exhibition chicken or the digital production egg?


Well, like most monumental and seismic change it will be be a bit of both as it comes in fits and spurts.


First we had a few digital theaters here and there, then we had at least a handful of serious digital acquisition platforms including most recently Jim Janard's Big Bad Red (GO RED!)


Now we have Hollywood with the digital exhibition bug going full swing!


Jim and the other movie magic wizards aren't slowing down either.

Even the likes of Nikon are getting involved in digital motion acquisition.


But, believe it or not it's not the Old Hollywood Geezers coming around to digital in digital out, that is the greatest impetus for this change.

Nope.


It's the Crazy Crazy Crazy lust for large flat panel high def home theater systems AND video on demand.


How long will it take for most works to be purely digital without an emulsion film intermediary?

And more importantly how long will it be before we give up the antiquated 24p?

Well, for film emulsion it will be years, maybe 10 or so and there will always be blow hards... I mean die hards.....

Emulsion is fine. It's cool. It served us well. But it is still a crazy complicated /expensive acquisition/distribution system that's none to easy on the environment.

The accountants will see to it that this dodo dies.


As far as my inflammatory 24p remark.


It will be the movie going public themselves that "like" one high def movie over another. They will be drawn like moths to a flame for the higher frame rates, higher dynamic ranges, and higher resolutions that a purely digital system offers.


I am sure you have your own opinions complete with your own sacred ox's to gore with your well ground ax.


So, there's my $700Billion worth. :beer:


Enjoy your day!
 
Framerate has an aesthetic of its own = matter of artistic choice.

Unless you wanna obliterate *choice* in favor of a few smooth pans.

Juz my 24 dodos per second.

:)
 
I think you're right as far as digital aquision goes. 24p is simply a frame rate and personally I like it. I don't think it's antique. I don't want my movies feeling like the Super Bowl. I think every medium has a feel 24, 25, 30, 60, 80, etc. So I doubt many people leave it simple because it "feels good". But I feel that film as we know it is dying and will soon be a rotting corpse only to be used for nostalgic purposes.

but that's my .02
 
I fail to see how anything said in the original post has anything to do with framerate choices.
But maybe I'm missing something.
 
and thank god we can get rid of DP's too, thanks to lower light sensitivity. and camera operators, since the newer cameras are so light. and the actors are all replaceable with computer animation. and even theatres altogether will go away since we can all watch the best quality at home. can't wait for technology to make ballets and operas and symphonies and concerts obsolete. progress is amazing.
 
24p is a Digital format. Folks are requesting the new Canon EOS 5D mark II to shoot 24p (it now shoots 30p) because of the look.
 
Luis Caffesse said:
I fail to see how anything said in the original post has anything to do with framerate choices.
But maybe I'm missing something.
Click to expand...


Yes.


It has everything to do with frame rate choices.


First, as we move to digital it's only a matter of programming and not physical optimization as was the case with the physical medium of film. There were many reasons why 24p was SETTLED ON back in the day. Mostly Cost and Reliability. AkA Economy.


Now with digital, that is not so much the case so the choice will become almost purely aesthetic.


The transition will occur as those seeking a different look artistically but more important competitively will come up with a superior combination of frame rate, dynamic range, colour, resolution that add up to mo better MOJO.


How will we know it's better.

The audiences will say so.
 
Rubbersquare said:
and thank god we can get rid of DP's too, thanks to lower light sensitivity. and camera operators, since the newer cameras are so light. and the actors are all replaceable with computer animation. and even theatres altogether will go away since we can all watch the best quality at home. can't wait for technology to make ballets and operas and symphonies and concerts obsolete. progress is amazing.
Click to expand...


That's so very cute! :)


Theaters have been on the way out for years and will continue to do so.

Especially in larger metropolitan areas were real estate is so valuable. (Highest and Best Use)


There is some definite truth in your sarcasm.

Crews will indeed be much smaller, lighter, and more agile.

And yes, CG will replace alot. (Personally I hate most CG but such is life)


As to eliminating the creatives it's quite the opposite.

More and More will be able to express themselves and find a market.
 
Allen Green said:
24p is a Digital format. Folks are requesting the new Canon EOS 5D mark II to shoot 24p (it now shoots 30p) because of the look.
Click to expand...


Yes.


We also have an appendix and other vestiges of time immemorial.


And just the same I don't think the ability to shoot 24p will go away as an option.


Quite the opposite.


I think that multiple framerates that are only limited by the hardware/software for acquisition and distribution will be the limits will be available and widely used.


In this new open and competitive marketplace 24p will be crushed and go the way of the poor Dodo Bird.



It will be consumers who make this shift happen.

The writing is on the wall.
 
Gotcha - so you're saying that since the costs involved with shooting/projecting higher framerates will drop due to a move away from physical media, you think it's possible that studios and others will begin shooting/projecting higher framerates - at which point the audience will decide which they prefer by voting with their wallet.

Did I understand you correctly?
 
Luis Caffesse said:
Gotcha - so you're saying that since the costs involved with shooting/projecting higher framerates will drop due to a move away from physical media, you think it's possible that studios and others will begin shooting/projecting higher framerates - at which point the audience will decide which they prefer by voting with their wallet.

Did I understand you correctly?
Click to expand...


Pretty much.


I would only add that the 24p standard was a compromise between technical and economic feasibility and that it became the defacto standard.

As companies and artist fight for audiences they will do so with all the creativity they can muster.

One arrow in their arsenal will be varying the framerate even in a given work.

They will use this to their competitive advantage.


How will we know if this is the case?

The audience numbers will show.


Hollywood is a business. Insular. But a highly competitive business all the same. even though its current business model has its days numbered as well.



What I am saying is a filmaker will come along and make a great film with that certain look and people will love it. Not just the look but the whole package.


The filmaker will keep doing it and others will feel safe and free to follow.


This is exactly what happened when we changed aspect ratio in response to competition with television.


Everyone is always fighting to stay on top and to express themselves how they see fit.


There will be 24p no doubt but it will be on it's way out as the defacto standard.

It won't even be dominant.
 
The 'look' of 24p translates in strobing pans.
I want 60p or higher with a great DOF because that's what gives the footage the 'movie-look'.
24p doesn't make any sense. It's a RESTRICTION.
 
ESTEBEVERDE said:
I would only add that the 24p standard was a compromise between technical and economic feasibility and that it became the de facto standard.
Click to expand...

Emphasis mine...



That's sort of true... but there's more to it. ATSC allows for 19 standards and the technology sort of permits more. I wouldn't be surprised if any of the frame rates in between would play. Monitors are getting sort of dumb.

I don't think that's a bad thing. If monitors get something in real time and play it out, without regard to time flags, frame rates wouldn't matter.

So?

24P came about because you had have something to match film to audio sync.

If you can create content at various rates and it can play at various rates, it's doable. One of the rates for ATSC is 60fps. So is 24fps, and 30fps. I'm guessing that there are monitors that can play the rates in between all those.

Digital theater would be grand at 60fps.

But the bandwidth would be thick by today's standards.

But tomorrows'? Who knows? I don't think there's much that's earth shattering.
 
Zak Forsman said:
what about the undisputed fact that 30p looks like ass? :)
Click to expand...

i think what he's getting at is as the consumer begins to control art, we'll see the shift to 30fps for film. like how consumers demand full frame dvd's because they're "missing" part of the picture. :(
 
Why would anyone want to have higer framerates than 24 for feature films?

The last company that tried that was Showscan and underwent Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 2002.
Now they use it only for motion rides - same with Maxivision.

I never heard someon say in a theater

"meh, what lousy framerate, can´t barley watch that crap - Doom on my 5 year old PC can do more than 70fps"

No, poeple shelling out big $$$ to build home theaters cause they are tired of the soap opera look on TVs.

What the most folks overlook is:

1. They don´t show 24p at 24 Hz in theaters but at 48 Hz or 78 Hz.

2. 24 was taken becaus it was the lowest framerate possible to work with sound,
for the pictures 18 would have be enough if projected with a shutter at 36 Hz.

3. The reason why 24ish framerates are so plesant to the eye is the same why DOF is more pleasant.
It relates to the way we see. The eye can only see a small spot sharp, everything else is out of focus.
Same with FPS, the cones in our eye work in the neighborhood of 24 HZ - so it is a natural framerate for the eye.

Having said that, I want to second Zak and emphasize the undisputed fact that 30p looks like ass (not even mention 60p)

Frank
 
Rubbersquare said:
i think what he's getting at is as the consumer begins to control art, we'll see the shift to 30fps for film. like how consumers demand full frame dvd's because they're "missing" part of the picture. :(
Click to expand...


Exactly.


Letterbox sucked. So the technology and business moved on.



In truth Hollywood is the Movie BUSINESS.

We will always see Art House films etc. In fact, we will probably even have access to more and more as the distribution channels are opened up wider and wider with less friction.



Even now I watch more on demand Netflix than I do on DVD or Blue Ray.

If I like what I see I get the DVD or Blue Ray.


Soon we will have on demand Blue Ray quality and that point will be moot as well.


This distribution channel is growing exponentially not the other way around.


Physical medium is being rapidly displaced.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top