Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 making of

wow!! so cool he's allready sharing this in a videoblog. Great quality. Nice to watch between all the NAB stuff!!
 
I can't help but be a little disappointed when I see this. Why Peter? Why did you have to go with 48 fps? :(
 
Because we all want to see the Hobbit looking like a making-of video or a CCTV video in 3D.





Just kidding or maybe not. :D
 
Andrew Rieger said:
I can't help but be a little disappointed when I see this. Why Peter? Why did you have to go with 48 fps? :(
Click to expand...

I always wonder when I see these "laments" if the complainers have ever shot 48fps for narrative work?

Well have you? Have you tried molding into something you like?

Have you shot it in 3D?

Just complaining? For no reason then? I see.

48fps may suck ... but you need to give it a fair shake before you draw a conclusion.

So, go shoot some 48fps. Do your damnedest to make it look good, then you can have a reason to complain.

In the meantime, I'm willing to bet Jackson and Lesnie gave this issue a little thought before shooting such a huge budget feature that way. I'm going to extend them a little trust.
 
I am just amazed at this guys good character, he radiates with kindness and makes everyone around him feel at home. What a great place to be working.
And I don't think I've ever been looking forward to a film like with these Hobbit films.
Bulky cameras, hehee...
 
I think this complaining about 48fps is getting a bit silly and boring and ignorant. Lets face it,most of us have not seen a 48fps footage played back realtime at 48fps . Even i am a bit skeptical about it i won't deny,but we are always skeptical and have grown a habit of scoffing at anything new,so lets just wait and watch how things turn out to be. This movie is even more important to me now as it is a big step towards a new technology and on december 2012 after the release of hobbit part 1 we will all settle for on the debate of whether higher frame rates for future cinemas is the way to go or not............... lets see
 
Well l just really enjoyed it for what it was, its great that Peter shares the making of the Hobbit. For get the cameras, frames etc its a story of a the journey to the making a great film.
The a great man.
 
There is absolutely no technical backing to the claims that 48fps will have any negative effect whatsoever in movie image creation, quite the opposite in fact.

All these protests against 48fps shooting is born out of technical ignorance.

For me, Peter Jackson has taken James Cameron's place as the most technical visionary, and forward thinking movie director, because he has fought for high resolution and high framerate for The Hobbit, taking care that his movies will have preserved for the future, the best image quality that is technically available today, thanks to RED.

If I want to re-visit The Hobbit movies in 2023 on my 4K home display, just ten short years after they premièred, they will still have close to "up to date" technical image quality, and not some 2 megapixel quality.

Movies take a long time to produce, and if they are good, they will have a long future of historic interest.
Directors and Producers that don't take care which tools they choose today, might regret their decisions in the future.
 
Brook Willard said:
How many threads do we need on 48FPS, guys?
Click to expand...

Many more i think,well the topic is controversial and challenges many of the beliefs that film purists have in creating a cinematic look. I am sure many of us saw it coming......by the way how many days left on the shooting of the amazing spider-man???
 
This made my day! I had high hopes that Jackson would do a BTS blog for the production of The Hobbit films. Having the privilege to watch all these talented artists working so passionately is inspiring, and what making movies should be about.
 
Iannis Holwech said:
There is absolutely no technical backing to the claims that 48fps will have any negative effect whatsoever in movie image creation, quite the opposite in fact.

All these protests against 48fps shooting is born out of technical ignorance.

For me, Peter Jackson has taken James Cameron's place as the most technical visionary, and forward thinking movie director, because he has fought for high resolution and high framerate for The Hobbit, taking care that his movies will have preserved for the future, the best image quality that is technically available today, thanks to RED.

If I want to re-visit The Hobbit movies in 2023 on my 4K home display, just ten short years after they premièred, they will still have close to "up to date" technical image quality, and not some 2 megapixel quality.

Movies take a long time to produce, and if they are good, they will have a long future of historic interest.
Directors and Producers that don't take care which tools they choose today, might regret their decisions in the future.
Click to expand...

The 48fps backlash has nothing to do with technical ignorance. We are all aware of the fact that 48fps is better for fast action, results in a perceived increase in resolution and makes 3D more tolerable. Rather, I, and many others, feel than the increase in frame rate looks cheap and distracting. I am fond of the 24 look because I am used to it and I equate it with cinematic images. We can agree to disagree but don't act like those who are against 48fps are ignorant. We understand why higher frame rates are technically better but we find 24fps to be more aesthetically pleasing.
 
Andrew Rieger said:
The 48fps backlash has nothing to do with technical ignorance. We are all aware of the fact that 48fps is better for fast action, results in a perceived increase in resolution and makes 3D more tolerable. Rather, I, and many others, feel than the increase in frame rate looks cheap and distracting. I am fond of the 24 look because I am used to it and I equate it with cinematic images. We can agree to disagree but don't act like those who are against 48fps are ignorant. We understand why higher frame rates are technically better but we find 24fps to be more aesthetically pleasing.
Click to expand...

I still want to know what you have shot at 48fps on which you base this sage wisdom?

Also what have you viewed that was shot cinematically at 48fps for 48fps viewing from which you can draw these aesthetic conclusions?

Note: "shot cinematically" doesn't mean checking out European Trash TV or news shot at 50fps (which is 50i anyway). I mean something like say "The Hobbit" or your own tests with say 35mm, a R1 camera in 3K mode, or a Scarlet or Epic.

I doubt you have, because most folks don't have access to a real 48fps camera. Many more don't have a way to actually show 48fps as actual 48fps. My HDTV resamples it to 60i

I am starting to be a little impatient with the uninformed "dialog" about 48fps.

If you didn't shoot it and screen it, your opinion isn't particularly valid.

Sort of like debating the utility of debating color with a blind man.

I think you can see this in the types of comments 24fps "purists" make, where they talk about feelings and aesthetics. Where they try to equate the look of higher frame rate photography with "cheapness" when in fact higher frame rates are more expensive to deliver.

Its sort of like the 3D debate, but at least most people have at least seen 3D, even if they haven't shot it.

I suggest you think back to your early working days, and tell me if you understood the best ways to light a scene and move a camera when you started in camera.

Oh sure you had big ideas from watching films and TV, but you really had no clue until after you gained a LOT of experience.

So, go shoot and learn, then I'll give your opinion credence.

I bet that suggestion will be met with people saying, "Why waste my time on something I know won't work?" <sigh>

FWIW, I have tested 48 for 48, and frankly it looks good. I'm the first to admit I have a lot to learn- but you are absolutely wrong to dismiss it out of hand as you do.

The secret is NOT the frame rate, but rather the shutter and the camera pacing. For my aesthetics, I prefer to keep the same shutter I'd use for 24, and I use the same types of camera motion that are appropriate for 24.

Now, if the first thing you try and do with 48 is whip the camera around like a maniac because you can- well that's gonna suck.

In essence I am saying that the technical limits of 24 created an environment where you were restricted to more elegant camera motion, and remembering that elegance in 48fps photography despite being able to move more quickly is a GOOD thing.

As far as the shutter, I am advocating a 360 degree shutter angle for 48fps digital material. Or, sticking with the same 1/48 shutter speed, if thats how you think of shutter.

Now, the main place I see (for 2D work) that 48fps really makes a difference in the viewing experience, provided you follow my rules, is when you see action, especially fast cut action, where the frame rate can really give you a better representation of reality.

Aside from action scenes ... it really doesn't make a huge difference in the "feel" of the picture to me. Again, aside from setting the frame rate to 48 you have to basically treat it the same as shooting cinematic 24.

I've thought of a few places where I can reliably get a subtly better feel with 48, and a few where you have to create more romance to create the moment, because 24 subtly did some of the work for you. (Hint: create a LOT more DR in your "low light" scenes - HDRx is just in time!)

So ... go shoot and learn. Try and reserve your thoughts until you have something on which to base it more than fear, uncertainty and doubt.
 
Matthias Martin said:
I am just amazed at this guys good character, he radiates with kindness and makes everyone around him feel at home. What a great place to be working.
And I don't think I've ever been looking forward to a film like with these Hobbit films.
Bulky cameras, hehee...
Click to expand...

+1

Seems like he would be a great boss.

So good for him to provide BTS for all the fans, who he knows will be jonesing for these movies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top