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

roxics said:
We were all so excited to get DV cameras that shot 24p. So why all of a sudden is it a thing of interest now?
Click to expand...

I think it came with CMOS chips.
Did anyone here saw that judder problem on the original DVX 24p material?
I can´t remember someone complaining about that back than.
Maybe Barry remembers that better than I do, since he is/was knee deep into that.

Combine that with the extinction of CRTs and there you have it.

I worked with a big 24" Sony CRT computer monitor as my main monitor for preview and grading since last year (than it died).
Fine machine, probably the best CRT that was ever made (besides the HD class 1 studio CRTs for 50k a pop).

Than I got a Dell Ultrasharp and was shocked how crappy my material looked.
Not only banding and strange colors but all the motion was gone and left me with judder.
My CRT runs with 50Hz and I watched 25p or 50i material on it(I´m in PAL country) - buttersmooth.
The Dell runs at 60Hz, and of course you cant fit 25 or 50 into 60.
But also there is a brutal harshness (not sharpness) to flatscreens and digital projectors, that you don´t see at CRTs.

I think that's the main reasons, why folks call for more fps.

Frank
 
Personally, I reckon they're doing this purely to squeeze extra ticket sales out of us film nerds by forcing us to see both versions for the technical comparison... cheeky buggers.
 
Postmaster--I hear you about missing CRT's. Mostly I miss the kinder, gentler feel and true blacks that just don't seem to be there, even with LED to some degree.

That said, I certainly don't miss the bulk. And my laptop has a 120hz refresh, so motion rendition is less of an issue.

Don't agree about digital projectors anymore. I love the feel of my DLP and I've seen wonderful stuff in newer LCD's too. I'd kill to have the wider range of my projector on my everday computer screen.
 
Last edited:
there are newer motion artifacts with cmos rolling shutter and vibrations, yes. but that's not the whole story. there has always bean stuttering in panning, especially when the camera is not dolly-ing or moving or tilting. so there might be more variables, sure(also film recording mechanics and scanning used to introduce slight rotation/vibration/wobble of film while capturing or scanning from frame to frame). but shooting at 48fps and 1/48 shutter will record 24fps and 1/48th shutter, and then add in the in between frames if you choose to use them or not.
 
Postmaster said:
I don´t eat seafood, cause I don´t like the taste of it.
Wouldn´t it be a bit offensive, to say that´s only because I "refuse to change"?
Click to expand...

I said I didn't buy one particular reason for preferring 24fps and not that there are no legitimate reasons.

Postmaster said:
If this is an "abstract" idea, why can even my 68 years old mother tell between 24 and 50 fps?
She knows nothing about framerates at all, but even she can see the difference.

And when somebody tries to sell me something great, why do I have to getting used to it and adjust myself,
instead of seeing the greatness in the first place? Here my red flags go up.
Click to expand...

Never denied that people can't see a difference between 24 and 50, actually it was one of my main points.

I've had to get used to plenty of things that I didn't like at first. Doesn't mean they weren't worth it.

Postmaster said:
No, DPs used all sort´s of shutter angles. for artistic or technical reasons of film since years.
Click to expand...

Of course, as have I, but what angle is the standard?

Postmaster said:
It´s not slightly faster, it´s 180deg, no mater what frame rate you have. Thats because you want natural motion blur. Everything just gives you that saving private Ryan battlefield look, that most folks find hard to watch and distracting.
Click to expand...

A 180 degree shutter at 48 fps will certainly be faster than a 180 degree shutter at 24 fps. Degrees are a relative, not absolute way of measuring shutter speed, while fractions of a second are absolute.

A large part of my comment was disputing the idea that a 180 degree shutter speed (or any degree) is "natural." It's just what we're used to, for a variety of reasons. Besides, I never mentioned going faster than 180 degrees.

Postmaster said:
Interlaced recording did that since donkeys years - but it was the lag smearing of slowly dimming phosphor on CRTs that mad it butter smooth.

Judder comes from the CMOS chip (you don't have that problem on a HVX200) in combination with displays running at 60Hz (how would you fit 24 fps into 60Hz) or projectors that show you just 24fps instead of 2 or 3 times the same picture.
Click to expand...

That's not really what I was referring to, because even though an entire interlaced sensor is recording at all times, individual lines are not. I was referring to getting an entire progressive sensor to be recording at all times (i.e. 48fps with a 0° shutter). This is exactly the same as 24 fps with a 180° shutter except the missing frames are filled in.
 
Last edited:
it's really interesting to hear some of the more in-depth technical reasons why CRT looks soooo different, I always thought it was just about the blacks...
has anyone tried using those new OLED monitors? have you noticed any differences regarding strobing from 24p/25p material?
 
The Hobbit Trailer Motion Smoothed for HFR simulation

TheHobbit_PappasArts_MichaelPappas_PeterJackson_48FPS.jpg


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
http://www.peejeshare.com/files/362094116/The_Hobbit_An_Unexpected_Journey_Trailer.mp4.html


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

[size=+1]BlackMagic Digital Camera Info:[/size] http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.p...mera-Technology-Announcements-amp-Latest-Info
 
Last edited:
Elton said:
Postmaster--I hear you about missing CRT's. Mostly I miss the kinder, gentler feel and true blacks that just don't seem to be there, even with LED to some degree.
Click to expand...

LED does not help with blacks on LCD monitors. Only maybe with those edgeled dimming technology LCD's but still, it's not as real black as a good plasma will give.
 
I don't want to be an OLED early adopter. My phone has one of those, and it has developed a very strong color tint over the last year. OLED was initially thought of as a technology for short-lived cheap screens.
 
Oh, and I used to have a 21" EIZO CRT, but I don't miss it at all. I'm much happier with my current IPS screen.
 
Most akward footage comparison I have seen here ... and second part was deleted.
Can somone post just normal average comparison footage (some people, animals, waterflow, pannig, ...) with proper shutter speed, ISO etc?
 
hawaj said:
Most akward footage comparison I have seen here ... and second part was deleted.
Can somone post just normal average comparison footage (some people, animals, waterflow, pannig, ...) with proper shutter speed, ISO etc?
Click to expand...

What second part was deleted? Checked both links- there working for me.

Hawaj, if you haven't seen this- I posted this earlier of
The Hobbit trailer Motion Smoothed.


The Hobbit Trailer Motion Smoothed for HFR simulation

TheHobbit_PappasArts_MichaelPappas_PeterJackson_48FPS.jpg


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/362094116/The_Hobbit_An_Unexpected_Journey_Trailer.mp4.html

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

[size=+1]BlackMagic Digital Camera Info:[/size] http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.p...mera-Technology-Announcements-amp-Latest-Info
 
Last edited:
Just tested. That after-effects converted trailer looks worse than just loading the 1080p feed off apple TV or YouTube onto a good 120hz MotionFlo/TruMotion TV. No warping artifacts that way.

I am curious why Jackson hasn't just released an actual 48fps 3D trailer for us all to watch. We're all quite capable of viewing it?
 
I don't think computer displays would display 48fps properly. Most are locked to 60Hz and would introduce judder. My Panasonic plasma TV can play 24fps at 48Hz eliminating judder, but how would I send it a 48fps clip?
 
themagickite said:
I am not a fan of high frame rates for viewing, but there is a really interesting article the bbc put out about using 300fps

they say that the alleged limit of perception of high speed framerates: 60fps, is actually not true, and that it's closer to 240fps
300fps works well because it works universally with 25p, 30p, 50i, 60i, 50p and 60p (but not 24p)
Click to expand...
Might as well double it to 600 then, 24p * 25 = done
 
themagickite said:
it's really interesting to hear some of the more in-depth technical reasons why CRT looks soooo different, I always thought it was just about the blacks...
has anyone tried using those new OLED monitors? have you noticed any differences regarding strobing from 24p/25p material?
Click to expand...
I find that OLED have a different strobing issue. I think it has to do with the extreme efficiency of the turning on and off. The blackout is instantaneous, which for people with sensitive eyes (60hz CRTs, even 75hz CRTs bother me, 85hz is managable), it's distracting. Or maybe it's because the whole screen is blacked out every frame, rather than having a continuous backlight being on... Or maybe it's that the time that it's blacked out is longer... not sure (if you wave an OLED screen in the air, you can see staggered images, not a continuous blur). Though this was from a first gen Sony OLED TV, albeit a small one, I assume the technology will get better.

Oh, and for those missing CRTs, pick up a plasma, while they're different, they have more in common with CRTs than LCD, since they still have phosphors, and the contrast ratios tend more to blacks than LCDs (LCD manufacturers tend to boost contrast ratios not by making blacks blacker, but by making screens brighter). Plasma screens also have much better motion detail.
 
Samuel H said:
even people who didn't like the 48p screening said that the "people walking on mountains" landscape shots looked absolutely amazing
it's the closer shots that look awful (among other things, because the set looks like a set)
Click to expand...

This is actually a key distinction! Was it the framerate, or was it because it was shot at 4+K, with the greater resolution, a lot less is left to imagination, and for those looking, they may see the tell tail signs of it being a set.

Actually, I found it interesting that they had to hyper saturate all makeup/clothes/sets to offset the colors coming off the cameras... not sure if that was a contributor, since it would be harder to judge the outcome without seeing graded files. Maybe they just missed the mark on some of the sets. I sure hope the end product is good... can't wait to see it, don't want to be let down!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top