I recently read an article from Peter Jackson how he's filming the Hobbit in 48p and how he's done with and prefers the faster frame rate in all aspects. And I have to say I agree with him.
The 24 frame rate was established a very long time ago when sound was introduced to film. And mostly because projectors of the day had an intermittent which would only react so fast. 24 frames worked back then, but why oh why are we still using it now. Everyone wants digital cameras with 'native' 24p, which doesn't actually mean anything, but yet everyone wants it. There's nothing wrong with your digital footage NOT looking like the blurry film you're used to seeing. I agree that 35mm captures more color variances than most digital chips can, but no one knows exactly how many frames per second your eye will perceive, so why choose 24? And isn't the ultimate goal to have footage that is exactly how our eyes see the world?
SO that's my question, discuss, debate, argue, and I'm curious what other opinions are on this
The 24 frame rate was established a very long time ago when sound was introduced to film. And mostly because projectors of the day had an intermittent which would only react so fast. 24 frames worked back then, but why oh why are we still using it now. Everyone wants digital cameras with 'native' 24p, which doesn't actually mean anything, but yet everyone wants it. There's nothing wrong with your digital footage NOT looking like the blurry film you're used to seeing. I agree that 35mm captures more color variances than most digital chips can, but no one knows exactly how many frames per second your eye will perceive, so why choose 24? And isn't the ultimate goal to have footage that is exactly how our eyes see the world?
SO that's my question, discuss, debate, argue, and I'm curious what other opinions are on this
