Movie Reviews 2.0

Can't say I noticed that, then again I watched it on the flight to Brazil so probably not the best way to view it.

I don't care really, I just wanted to mention that I've been in Brazil these last couple of weeks on holiday.

 

You were is South America? What country did you visit? lol

 

Didn't notice it either. Obsessing over pixels and framerates the whole damn day has made you paranoid, dude.

 

As I said, maybe it's exaggerated on my screen given I am viewing it on a very large projected ones. That means framerate inconsistencies or fluctuations may be more visible on my setup. However I would greatly appreciate if you could maybe check your setup as well.

The reason for my interest is that this is the first movie I've encountered this (or high production film anyway) and I find it quite frankly mind boggling that something like this could make it onto the end cut of such a movie. Reading up on it, I'm think it could also be because most of (the driving) scenes are a mix of on-screen film and CGI mixed into one. Then I've also read that the footage was recorded with high framerate cameras, which might the root of it.

I'm happy to dig out various scenes where this is most noticable. On top of my head; All the scenes where CGI and on-screen road action is mixed and running at high speed (due to the high speed in cars). Note the difference in framerate between the "real" footage and the "cgi footage".

 

I've seen it three times, twice in 3D at the cinemas and once at home, streaming it (ie. significantly lower quality). I haven't noticed anything like what you describe and I usually spot judder and uneven framerates instantly.

You do know that's the whole movie, right ?

Cheers

 

Maybe since the movie was shot in HFR, there is less motion blur in a given frame. So the background that is moving by very quickly looks juddery but the characters and cars etc. that are relatively stationary in the frame look fine. That said I saw the movie and noticed no such thing.

Also it could have nothing to do with HFR and you're simply seeing what happens when you try to display fast moving objects at 24Hz. E.g. if you were viewing something at 1FPS a stationary object would look fine but anything moving would be buggered.

 

Or maybe your TV can't display 24p properly? A lot of older-ish displays struggle with true 24p material and introduce stutter, or try to mask it with interpolation which messes up the movements even more.

 

That's probably what it is. And again the artifacts would be more apparent with faster moving things (the background in Mad Max).

 

I don't think Mad Max was shot in HFR.

 

It definitely wasn't.

 

Well yes, but not every scene. I was more trying to point out that what I'm seeing is related to scenes where you have fast moving cars (camera stationed behind looking forward), and you have perhaps a slight panning of the camera, either zooming in or out, left or right, but at the same time, you can see the canyon on the side of the frame while everything is moving. What I'm seeing is that not everything seems to be running at the same speed. For lack of a better description, it feels a bit like the effect we see in games if for example reflections on cars are not rendered at the same framerate like everything else. In Mad Max, to me it seemed there are various parts where parts of the frame, usually the CGI rendered stuff (meaning everything apart of the cars and characters) is running at a different speed/framerate.

Yes, my TV/projector does support true 24p playback, but admittedly I am running it at 60p (3-2-pulldown), but feel the effect I am describing is not due to that, as it doesn't happen consistent enough. I will definitely check this however and will report back with a specific screen or perhaps even a off-screen video if I can capture it.

 

FWIW, I cannot watch 3/2 pulldown content without wanting to remove my eyes due to the constant judder. Some people are more sensitive, it's a curse
And this juddering may increase frame rate artifacts from cgi scenes if they were not shot at 24p exactly

 

Yes, I know what you mean. But given I only watch content like this, I'm well accustomed to what that "judder" looks like and how it behaves. What I am seeing Fury Road is different. I will come back with a video or a specific scene and I will definitely try that scene in true 24p before posting back.

 

I'm pretty sure I've also seen some very odd instances in other movies where CGI parts of the image run at a lower framerate and don't match the rest of the 'live' image.

If you saw it on Mad Max, it could be similar but I'd be a bit surprised, given the budget and obvious attention to detail in the whole movie. Very possible though.

 

That was actually a live action shot

 

I haven't seen Ex Machina yet, but it has made quite a name in the VFX circles; and let's not forget that the Oscars - particularly in this field - aren't based on the opinions of the industry professionals, but on the general members. Mad Max is an amazing movie, and it's VFX has a lot of achievements in both the practical and the CGI side; but to be honest there's little that hasn't been done before. Stunt work may be amazing but it's not really VFX, maybe those guys would deserve an Oscar of their own; but in the end it was mostly a lot of everyday work done pretty damn well.

 

After watching the movie, I googled and found out that the place is an actual hotel were you can stay...I really need to do this one day!

 

Name and link?

 

Lazy

 

Still an effects shot, though. They filmed the wheel in a stop motion like fashion because they needed the high resolution of a still camera as the zoom into the mouth of the skull was too blurry when they used regular motion picture cameras.

Does stop motion still count as life action? Personally I'd say it doesn't.