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

Postmaster said:
Interesting and weird times.

Now, that we finally have video cameras that shoot real 24p (something everybody and his kid brother where clamoring for) people hail the benefit of old video frame rates and motion.
Now that we have cameras that shoot - even in the middle of the night - clean as a whistle, we buy noise/grain plug-ins.
Now that we have cheap steadycams, jibs, dollys and whatnot, folks suddenly love handheld.

I guess as soon someone comes up with a rolling shutter/jello free CMOS sensor, there will be a plug-in that adds it back.
Click to expand...



Interesting and weird times- that's an understatement!


M.L.Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
 
PappasArts said:
Hey Emanuel!

I guess it's more integrated with me, the HFR aspect that is, since I was researching at Showscan way back, so I have a personal curiosity to see this in the mainstream as I wanted to see it years ago for larger research numbers on temporal resolutions affects on the brain. However it's taken many years for that to be reality.

Enthusiasm, expectation and reality don't always play in harmony with one another. Truth is, if cinema out the door was all HFR, we wouldn't know the difference. However that's a reality we can not live out. HFR is so clinical in it's process as well immediate in how it connects with our brains ( which I noticed way back while doing research at Showscan ) it changes the entire experience. Not necessarily for the good in some aspects. IMO, 30fps should have been the next jump for a standard if anything. However 30FPS proposal has always been treated like the bastard step son for over 50 years....

Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS
Click to expand...

You're watching soap operas for over 20 years, and that's not long enough to decide you like this look? You just need a bit more "training" so you'll like it?

honestly I think it would go the other way around. If all cinema was hfr and someone figured out how to do 24p people would instantly gravitate toward it as an artistic look that suits film making.

The problem with HFR is the uncanny valley. And I don't think it gets better if you make it out of the valley.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley

What if you make it out of the valley into pure realism? The picture is so real you cannot tell you are not looking at a theater stage with real actors and an elaborate set? Would that be an improvement over the classic "movie" look? I think if people wanted that they would go see a play.
 
Been immersed in projects so I never dropped my opinion back in Dec about what I thought. I enjoyed the HFR experience. It's a tough one to handle with dramatic narrative. It sure made the 3d come alive though. As to the story / film. I'm never comfortable critiquing other artists work publicly, so I'll leave that to my private circle. However Peter Jackson is a hard working artist. Much praise to him and his crew.


What did you think of the Hobbit and HFR?


M.L.Pappas
http://TWITTER.com/PAPPASARTS

http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.com
https://www.FACEBOOK.com/PAPPASARTS

BlackMagic Digital Camera Info: http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.p...mera-Technology-Announcements-amp-Latest-Info
 
Nobody likes the soap opera effect, but on the other hand nobody likes a picture that falls apart during fast action. The future is the Panasonic Varicam which is on the fly variable frame rate ramping. Frame rate is not only a creative choice but a choice that can be changed at will. If an affordable prosumer version of the Varicam is ever produced it will revolution the film making industry and will be the ultimate Barry Green camera.

Although 1080p Blu-Ray does not support 60 fps there is nothing wrong with delivering movies in the 720p format which fully supports variable frame rates in a 60 fps stream. Since 720p allows better temporal resolution the movies will actually be sharper.
 
Gillvane said:
The problem with HFR is the uncanny valley. And I don't think it gets better if you make it out of the valley.
Click to expand...

You should probably read your own link. This has nothing to do with "uncanny valley."

I think if people wanted that they would go see a play.
Click to expand...

Where do you even get that from? Your whole post doesn't make sense.
 
androbot2084 said:
The problem with HFR is the soap opera effect.
Click to expand...

It's not any kind of effect. The "problem" with HFR is that people have 100 years of 24p, which was the slowest frame rate you could use with sync sound, not something picked because of a "dreamy quality" or some other such B.S. People like it because it's familiar, and HFR is new.

100 years of HFR and people will think 24p looks like crap.
 
Gary Huff said:
It's not any kind of effect. The "problem" with HFR is that people have 100 years of 24p, which was the slowest frame rate you could use with sync sound, not something picked because of a "dreamy quality" or some other such B.S. People like it because it's familiar, and HFR is new.

100 years of HFR and people will think 24p looks like crap.
Click to expand...



We don't have to wait 100 years. The video look as been around for a long long time already.
 
Last edited:
androbot2084 said:
Nobody likes the soap opera effect, but on the other hand nobody likes a picture that falls apart during fast action. The future is the Panasonic Varicam which is on the fly variable frame rate ramping. Frame rate is not only a creative choice but a choice that can be changed at will. If an affordable prosumer version of the Varicam is ever produced it will revolution the film making industry and will be the ultimate Barry Green camera.

Although 1080p Blu-Ray does not support 60 fps there is nothing wrong with delivering movies in the 720p format which fully supports variable frame rates in a 60 fps stream. Since 720p allows better temporal resolution the movies will actually be sharper.
Click to expand...

1080/60i and 720/60p have the exact same temporal resolution. They're both 59.94.
 
Gillvane said:
The video look as been around for a long long time already.
Click to expand...

But generally not in anything we would consider "narrative"...sans soap operas of course. And while soaps may not be your particular cup of tea, they have had lots of viewers over the years, a lot of whom have totally gotten into the storylines regardless of the frame rate.
 
Gary Huff said:
Which sitcoms and TV movies were shot in 60i?
Click to expand...

From the '70s through much of the '90s, almost every sitcom was. A couple of exceptions: MASH and Cheers.

When they remade The Ten Commandments a few years ago, it was 60i. There were a number of Tom Selleck westerns which were. Lots, really.
 
David Jimerson said:
From the '70s through much of the '90s, almost every sitcom was. A couple of exceptions: MASH and Cheers.

When they remade The Ten Commandments a few years ago, it was 60i. There were a number of Tom Selleck westerns which were. Lots, really.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. People aren't suddenly shocked by the HFR48 look, and need time to "adjust". They recognize it instantly as the same video look they've seen for over 30 years (only sharper). They didn't really like it then, and still preferred the "film look" when they could get it. Mash looked prettier than All in the Family.
But people realized film was expensive so they'd live with the video look when they had to, i.e. soap operas or low budget productions that couldnt' afford film. The only difference is now you can do the film look without 35mm film.

I've never known audiences to go, you know that Mash series would have been better, if only it looked more like All in the Family with more of that video look. I've never known people that grew up looking at video to start preferring it over film because they were "adjusted" to it. Why would audiences start doing that now with HFR?

There is a reason to use HFR. 3d looks sharper, especially when you move like fast tilts, pans, etc. If you think 3d IQ is the most important thing for your look and that's worth making your movie look like a video, then HFR is the way to go. IMO the 24p look trumps the better 3d, although it does make really nice 3d.
 
Last edited:
But, even so, should not the option for HFR be available to anyone who has an interest in the look? I think people who claim they "can't get into the story" because of HFR are really stretching the point. People still loved All in the Family, didn't they? It was a big hit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top