The Hobbit...

[Josh Snyder]

Josh,

Peter already said that 48fps is not for all movies, 3D in the other end IMO is, even so I am not signing in to make all my movies in 3D, as at times depending on what my story calls for, I would want to use specific lenses and effects redundant in 3D.

Yes, this is what I mean. If they could shoot 3D in 24fps without having any problems they would. All the "looks better because it looks more realistic" is BS.

Why not chill a little and not use terms like BS when referring to the efforts of Peter Jackson and other people that are genuinely trying to produce as good as possible, from their enormously educated perspective, a better cinematic experience?

I love PJ too but it's the truth. They have to try to "sell" the 48fps "videolike" look because they have to use it.

[Scott Crawley]

Yes, this is what I mean. If they could shoot 3D in 24fps without having any problems they would. All the "looks better because it looks more realistic" is BS.

So you think that strobing and temporal/spacial perception have nothing to do with how "real" it feels to the viewer?

[Tobias Ashenheim]

Yes, this is what I mean. If they could shoot 3D in 24fps without having any problems they would. All the "looks better because it looks more realistic" is BS.

i think this is quite true.. it really is born out of servicing 3D, not from benefiting traditional motion picture; though attempting to change perceptions quicker by broadening audiences exposure to it, would really smooth out the road to their 3D asperations.

[KETCH ROSSi]

That illustrates a key point about shooting at 48fps. You can get two products out of one digital RAW master.

Shooting 48fps at a nominal 1/48th shutter speed (as EPIC can do) maintains the exposure and motion blur of traditional 24fps capture, which allows you to simply drop alternate frames in post and extract a "normal" 24 fps presentation.

So, 24fps for those who prefer a "traditional" look and 48 fps stereo for those who prefer an "immersive" look.

And this is exactly what we are doing with "RAPE of a BEAUTY" apart form some 96fps footage for Still Extraction for Print... LOVE EPIC!!

[Josh Snyder]

Why do I always read "Rape and Beauty"? :D

[KETCH ROSSi]

Why do I always read "Rape and Beauty"? :D

Why, do they only rape ugly people??


Wait til the first trailers hit the net, then you'll get it... ;)

[Steven James Eaton]

I've actually been wondering if maybe 48 FPS isn't enough of a jump. Maybe to get out of the valley, it really does need to move up to 80 plus or so with a higher shutter speed closer to the normal 180 degree, just to give people more of a "This is different, Ya'll" feeling instead of going for the Goldilocks approach? It seems the shutter is what's throwing people off, so maybe that's the thing we all need to fix. I know, at that realm of frame speed, it makes things pretty ridiculous to handle data-wise, but why go for a half-measure? It doesn't seem to be making people happy... That said, I'm extremely excited (and open minded) to check it out.

[Josh Snyder]

Why, do they only rape ugly people??


Wait til the first trailers hit the net, then you'll get it... ;)

I don't know. Sometimes there are some things you always read wrong no matter how many times you have read them :p

Yeah can't wait to see the first footages. Just remember to grade before uploading hehe ;)

[KETCH ROSSi]

I don't know. Sometimes there are some things you always read wrong no matter how many times you have read them :p

Yeah can't wait to see the first footages. Just remember to grade before uploading hehe ;)

Don't worry, I too have learned my lessons about posting and or showing "UNFINISHED" material... ;)

The footage will go to one of the best Post facilities that exist today, which also specialize in R3D file post processing while I'll be following every step of it.

[Ravi Kiran]

Does anyone here know if there will be 4K 48fps 3D screenings of The Hobbit? Or will it just be 2K?