Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

The Hobbit shot on Epic at 48fps

Yup - Interesting...
 
This is disappointing news. I really hate the 48fps look. I'm also pretty uninterested in 3D, but it's not hard to just skip a 3D screening. This, however, means that viewers may be forced to watch the film in 48fps (as far as I understand it). I am not looking forward to that. IMO, 48fps is awful.

Love the Epics, bummed about this potential new high frame rate trend that is supposedly "the future."
 
My completely uninformed guess would be that they want the extra data for post - time morphing, etc. With a 360 degree shutter, you could drop the release image stream back to 24 and it would be essentially identical to ftg originated at 24. And then for the IMAX- type, early adopter experience they could use 48 for "heightened reality. Does a projection system exist for that yet? Does anyone remember showscan?
 
Mark Wilkinson said:
With a 360 degree shutter, you could drop the release image stream back to 24 and it would be essentially identical to ftg originated at 24.
Click to expand...

Or I suppose they could shoot 48fps at 180 shutter, and when played back at 24fps it would just look like a 90 degree shutter film, like Saving Private Ryan.
 
There will have to be a 24 fps 2D version made -- it shouldn't be hard, if you simply dropped every other frame from the 48 fps footage, it would look like 24 fps photography shot with a 90 degree shutter instead of a 180 degree shutter, and with a little bit of motion blur added in post, it would probably end up looking like most 24 fps movies.

I think 48 fps for a 3D movie kinda makes sense, even though I'm not a fan of 48 fps for 2D movies... the strobing in action scenes in 3D looks more distracting that it does in 2D, so 48 fps may help with that, and I like I said, the 2D version converted to 24 fps should look like traditional film more or less, in theory.
 
Just curious, do the menus of Red cameras use "shutter angle" as the increment for shutter effect or do they list speeds (eg. 1/100 secs) like camcorders?
 
Jonathan Stevenson said:
This is disappointing news. I really hate the 48fps look. I'm also pretty uninterested in 3D, but it's not hard to just skip a 3D screening. This, however, means that viewers may be forced to watch the film in 48fps (as far as I understand it). I am not looking forward to that. IMO, 48fps is awful.

Love the Epics, bummed about this potential new high frame rate trend that is supposedly "the future."
Click to expand...

I'd venture to say you've never seen high-res 48fps stereo projected at high-res and 48fps. When you do, I think you might change your mind - it is a very different look from 2D 48fps shown at a 60fps refresh... which is how most material generated at anything above 25fps is shown.

Lucas
 
Gabe Conroy said:
Lucas Wilson of 3ality said he knew about it, but wasn't allowed to say anything until this article came out.
Click to expand...

Peter Jackson and his crew have been using 3ality Digital gear for a long time now prepping for this show. Like any major feature, information flow is tightly controlled. While we have been able to see and participate in some of the cool stuff they are doing, we can't really talk about it... same with Spiderman.

Lucas
 
I'd probably defer judgment until you see the finished result. Funny how someone can all "suppose" what it might look like, when they have not done extensive testing... and the decision also happens corresponds to Jim Cameron's opinion. Peter and his team have done extensive testing on how it will look in both 3D and 2D. And they have a post army that is 2nd to none. Quite frankly, if I had to bet on anyone's opinion, it would be Peter's. No offense intended to the posters here...

Jim
 
Is there going to be any chance of seeing High Res, 48fps 3D at NAB?
 
Wouldn't shooting and delivering at 48 fps (360 degree shutter) minimize the jittery, strobing effect that TruMotion effects in modern LCD screens produce?
It seems like with a 1/48 shutter speed you'd get the same, nice motion blur that we're all used to seeing and at the same time it would minimize the god awful look produced when TVs try to interpolate between frames.
I know most people on this forum probably turn those setting off on our televisions, but for the average person who doesn't know this is either possible or necessary wouldn't shooting 48 at 1/48 sort of force them to have a better viewing experience?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top