Does 30fps feel more "cinematic" than 60fps?

Oh yes... I usually start to get pissed at a lot of movies for <2sec shot action scenes that go on for 5 minutes. It's just... infuriating. John McTiernan does VERY great action scenes that don't rely on that crap. But I guess it's also a taste thing...
 
I think if it gets to a point where you can barely make out what happens on the screen, it's really not a taste thing anymore. Of course you can use it as a stylistic or story telling device to a certain degree. The shaky closeup shots worked quite well in the early scenes of Batman Begins for example. You know, where a still untrained Bruce Wayne beat up the inmates. Unfortunately Chris Nolan didn't lose the technique in favor of something more sophisticated as the film went on.
 
Reiko said:
Yeah. But this clip was originally 1080p... I purposely downscaled it to speed up the conversion process.

Here's another one.

A 60fps clip of The Avengers (From Marvel)

http://www.peejeshare.com/files/362...on-Man-vs-Thor---Film-Clip---(60fps).mp4.html
Click to expand...

If you interpolate the movie from 24 to 60 fps it will not in any way resemble a real movie shot at 48 fps. Just like upscaling a DVD to 1080p will not give you Blu-ray quality.

What is the point of these interpolated video clips that you post?
 
Gubbi said:
People associate the fluidity of the higher framerate with 'cheap' video and completely discount all the improvements. The facts remain: 24Hz movies are a juddery, motion blurred mess.

As Shifty said, people resist change. I'd bet if people were to sit through 3-4 movies at 48Hz, then watch one at 24Hz, all the deficiencies of 24Hz would be apparent.

Cheers
Click to expand...

Yeah, well they did and do already. We have 50hz interlaced and 60hz interlaced TV incl movies. We have 60p sports and then we have the true cinematic experience with 24fps at the cinema.

And we have the new super movtion flow, look like crap video technology taking the empty left space of DNR and "MPEG smoothness" taking the world "by" storm.

I am holding my breath and really REALLY hoping that the Hobbit will be the one movie that makes all my doubts go away and leads the way into the new world with a whole new experience. But so far there is not a shred of evidence that supports it, on the contrary.

While i lust and pay a high price for my pursuit of graphic superiority in PC games and on movies i think the limited framerate really does add something or rather, i think it makes your brain add something that isn't there. With high framerates it just gets to real, so real that it forces the the brain to scrutinize what it's seeing. It takes away the "magic". For example, in the old days, when we build TV sets, they all look like shit in reality, but thanks to the lowres cameras it looks pretty spectacular on tv. The eyes/brain worked it out all by itself. With HiDef the demands on tv sets grew immensely, take a look at them now, they look ok, but instead of looking spectacular, they just look real.
 
When I watch a movie, I want to feel like I'm watching a movie and not a documentary or behind the scenes footage.

Also, you pick up flaws in the actors' performances easier with a faster framerate. I'm with the people who think it looks too real and it will turn movies into plays.

So many people associate 24p with quality. I watched Pirates of the Caribbean with motion-flow on and it looked like an amateur taped it. It loses the cinema magic.

I've never watched a game show, talk show or soap opera and thought "THAT'S how movies should look".
 
Oh... god... must not reply... *scnr*

Motion Flow... yeah. No... upscaling 24Hz to 48Hz is BY AND LARGE something different than shooting 48Hz to begin with... and saying a movie made at 48Hz will look like a low budget TV soap opera is just as insane... just saying.
 
That trailer looks pretty good, not exhibiting all traditional movie artifacts, I like ! ;p
 
-tkf- said:
Yeah, tell it to those that actually did watch the screening, even the trailer/teaser seemed to be "off".

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/thehobbit/
Click to expand...

Is there a non quicktime version of the 48fps trailer someplace? Curious to see it myself.


TheWretched said:
Oh... god... must not reply... *scnr*

Motion Flow... yeah. No... upscaling 24Hz to 48Hz is BY AND LARGE something different than shooting 48Hz to begin with... and saying a movie made at 48Hz will look like a low budget TV soap opera is just as insane... just saying.
Click to expand...

Some more reactions for you:

http://www.studiodaily.com/2012/04/the-hobbit-the-soap-opera-effect-and-the-48fps-and-faster-future-of-movies/
 
Considering that most of us are browsing the net with a 60Hz LCD screen, both 24fps and 48fps material won't be representative of how it would look like in the theaters... So it's mostly pointless to release a 45fps version of the trailer.
 
So does that mean 120Hz displays get screwed by 48fps? :p Oh look, guess we need 240Hz LCDs to cover 24,48,60
 
tuna said:
If you interpolate the movie from 24 to 60 fps it will not in any way resemble a real movie shot at 48 fps. Just like upscaling a DVD to 1080p will not give you Blu-ray quality.

What is the point of these interpolated video clips that you post?
Click to expand...

Actually I will say the interpolation quality is very accurate to native 48fps or 60fps. This is acheivable since the algorithm (Very High Quality) in the script is not possible in realtime. Also the motion blur from the 24fps version carries over to the higher framerate. I did a test to demonstrate it.

Here's a shot of a dude kicking a basketball shot in native 24fps

http://www.peejeshare.com/files/362102663/basement24.mov.html

Now here's a shot of the same scene reshot in native 48fps

http://www.peejeshare.com/files/362102664/basement48.mov.html

Now here's the 24fps shot interpolated to 60fps

http://www.peejeshare.com/files/362102665/basement60fps.mp4.html

As you can see the motion blur from the 24fps version is carried over. Movement is also very similar to the 48fps version. Surprisingly the 60fps interpolated version displays better panning on the last shot.

I hope that clears up the interpolation vs. native debate.
 
Laa-Yosh said:
Considering that most of us are browsing the net with a 60Hz LCD screen, both 24fps and 48fps material won't be representative of how it would look like in the theaters... So it's mostly pointless to release a 45fps version of the trailer.
Click to expand...

My gaming pc is hooked to a 65" plasma, I wanted to watch it on that as I believe it has a 48hz option. I've never looked for it or tried it to be honest, so this would be a first. Maybe it's only meant to double up 24fps material though, who knows.
 
Simon F said:
Buy yourself some shutter glasses and let the rest of us enjoy better cinema. :)
Click to expand...

Give us the option to choose when watched on our home entertainment systems.

I'm curious to see what the split would be for the average joe out there regarding which they prefer.
 
joker454 said:
Is there a non quicktime version of the 48fps trailer someplace? Curious to see it myself.
Click to expand...

Sorry, afaik the trailer is actually in 24 but nevertheless still looks off for some reason, which is very likely to be the 48hz parent with a lack of blur?
 
tuna said:
If you interpolate the movie from 24 to 60 fps it will not in any way resemble a real movie shot at 48 fps. Just like upscaling a DVD to 1080p will not give you Blu-ray quality.
Click to expand...

From Jokers link:

First of all, 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" for the live, electronic feel the footage gets when the slow, 24-frame cadence is stripped away, and I think most old-school film fans find it a little disconcerting.
Click to expand...

http://www.studiodaily.com/2012/04/...ct-and-the-48fps-and-faster-future-of-movies/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shifty Geezer
Why isn't framerate upscaling being progressed when TVs have it but it's a better fit in game engine?
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
7K
xz321zx
X
I
The first Evil Within still has remarkably sophisticated lighting
Replies
2
Views
666
Phantom88
P
D
Are modern GPU's really offering a worse level of performance than historic GPU's??
Replies
16
Views
2K
Kaotik
Kaotik
Cyan
Playtron : new Linux based platform-agnostic open gaming OS
Replies
9
Views
773
eastmen
E
iroboto
  • Locked
Are current games less effectively executed than previous generations? *spawn
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
Back
Top