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 :)

48fps... I've converted.

Im going to see it in 48HFR, just wished I could see it in Dolby Atmos at the same time also to get PJ's full vision realized.
 
Eric Haase said:
I saw some Hobbit trailers in the theater (AMC) that were really oversaturated and looked awful. Same with spider man. I don't know what was going on with those trailers (no other trailer looked over saturated surrounding these trailers in that theater). But all other sources for these trailers look better and Spider Man looked very good in the theater. I am getting excited about this movie as I really loved LOTR trilogy.
Click to expand...

You might have seen some trailers that were graded to account for the light loss due to the glasses and polarization/colorwheel. Not all 3D systems are the same and studios have recently begun sending trailers that are graded for specific systems. So now there's like 12 different versions of a major release trailer. Hobbit alone probably has 20 different versions. It's really easy to get them confused.
 
all i need to know is where they will be showing it in 48fps:-P couldn't find any specifics when I Googled it.
 
One can Only hope that the Hobbit will be released on a limited number of 4K RED Laser projectors in select cities ... that assumption based on some of the clues from jarred in the past couple weeks - I mean is there a better way to showcase that projector? (if its ready)
 
Have already converted to 48fps and even so sadly I will not be able to see The Hobbit in 4k @48fps here, thinking of taking that long over do trip to New Zealand and see it there... ;)

But I sure look forward to get the Redray-Red Projector to be able to see it in its glory, hoping for a 4k DCP release distributed on it, and of course this will be the way we can see our dailies of our first movie, can't wait.
 
I'm as open minded as they come... can't wait, Jim.

I am curious if you know how Peter's decision on 48fps came about?



Jannard said:
When I 1st heard that PJ would shoot the Hobbit at 48fps... I was skeptical. To me, 24fps was "sometime". 48fps was "this morning".

I have to say that I am now a convert. The way this was shot (thank Andrew Lesnie), the VFX and Gollum... 48fps is "other worldly". In a good way. A way you have never experienced before.

Peter is much smarter than I thought. And I always thought he was pretty smart.

48fps on this movie is like nothing you have ever seen... magnificent.

Wipe your mind of preconceived notions. Forget "the will of the mass mind". This is just plain better.

There are so many reasons why to watch this movie...

Jim
Click to expand...
 
I'm all for change and new technology. I'm happy that I will never be required to shoot film - ever again - unless some artistic muse whispers in my ear suggesting it for a given project. That said....

I've spent years working on some of the biggest films and tv shows - if I'm ever in a Best Buy and see anything I've worked on being displayed at 120 hertz or better, I make an instant bee line for the monitor and disable that EVIL effect or, in the worst case, turn the monitor off completely!

Yes, I know there's a difference between shooting and playing back at a high frame rate and converting 24fps footage via an oversampling trick- but I'm going to have to think long and hard before I want to see either during a theatrical presentation.

I don't need to see Gone With the Wind or It Happened One Night looking like it was shot on a Handycam! And I never though the Universal Studios Back to the Future ShowScan ride looked much better than video. The high frame rate effect looks like life. During a movie, 99 percent of the time, I want bigger than life. That bigger than life look, to me, is 24 fps.

Now, 48 fps could be a great effect, but I pray it doesn't end up being the NEW "end all - be all." It's an effect (sure, 24 fps could be argued just an effect too) just like the high speed shutter of Saving Private Ryan. But, being an effect, I would like to keep it for those special moments that need it. For when the Muse comes calling and says, "Hey, this remake of The Last Boyscout, or Raging Bull - that sports footage would look amazing at 48 fps!" But not for everything!

I'm sure one day I'll revisit this message and rethink my position, but, if I ever see a tie-fighter looking like it was shot on HD Betacam, I'm going to bang my head into the seat in front of me! Future Indiana Jones looking like the Cosby Show just seems unsettling to me!

G
 
The JURY STILL OUT with the Audiences around the “World”; But Frankly I would not have suspect for Peter Jackson to take such an awful chance and bet the house on 48 Fps, IF HE DID NOT HAVE A GOOD INCLINATION THAT THIS GRAN EXPERIMENT WAS GOING TO WORK. All the best to him and good Luck to all of us! They will have to TWEAK the “Digital Cinema” projectors around the World, and when the new projectors comes out might as well work on a “New DCI”, one World, and One Standard there might be room in there for 2.00:1 Projection in the mix! December is around the CORNER! "And who knows R3D REDCODE FILES".

Humberto Rivera
 
Glen David Miller said:
The high frame rate effect looks like life. During a movie, 99 percent of the time, I want bigger than life. That bigger than life look, to me, is 24 fps.
Click to expand...

I'm along these lines too. The higher frame rates and of course 3D to me seems just the stone-age version of what will one day be the holy grail of immersive virtual reality; feeling as though you're actually *in it*, much like a theme-park ride. But for me today, 24fps represents not stark reality, but a projected dream-world, which you view partially objectively as an observer, and partially subsumed, your imagination disappearing into it. It's subtler to me and in many ways more complex the way it can work on you as observer/participant.
 
24 fps is a dream or memory, 48-60 is overwhelming real life, 90+ is a helluva trip to the beyond. For 3D purposes I believe in Jackson, Cameron and Trumbull's vision. Now gimme it in 4K+ on a giant-ass IMAX screen and I'm happy as a hamster.

The good thing about new super-advanced digital cinema projectors, that you can have every format for digital projection, you don't have to worry about the reels of celluloid. Everything is just files, be it 2K 24fps or 4K 48fps or 8K 120fps some day.
 
Last edited:
[/PHP]The JURY STILL OUT with the Audiences around the “World”; But Frankly I would not have suspect for Peter Jackson to take such an awful chance and bet the house on 48 Fps, IF HE DID NOT HAVE A GOOD INCLINATION THAT THIS GRAN EXPERIMENT WAS GOING TO WORK. All the best to him and good Luck to all of us! They will have to TWEAK the “Digital Cinema” projectors around the World, and when the new projectors comes out might as well work on a “New DCI”, one World, and One Standard there might be room in there for 2.00:1 Projection in the mix! December is around the CORNER! "And who knows R3D REDCODE FILES".

Humberto Rivera[/PHP]

Maybe not this time, but certainly the next time around, the World Need one more theater Projector upgrade after this one. By the year 2016 it will be a different world, presently there are too many 2K projectors, the screen brightness is not quite there yet, and theater owners are trying to get away with whatever they can before they upgrade, but eventually they will all have to.

Humberto Rivera
 
Jannard said:
Be ready for a shock. Wipe your mind clean. It is unreal.

Jim
Click to expand...
Unreal ? In my mind, it's rather the opposite : it's TOO real. Which could be good in some situations, but is not something I'm looking for in a feature film.
Now, I can't judge how it feels when projected in 3D, because I never got a chance to see it, so I'm hoping it will indeed make the 3D viewing experience better than it is today.
But in normal 2D projection, 48 fps is a definite no for me. I mean, even 30p looked kinda video-ish to me compared to 24/25p. Yes, this is all about perception, it's totally subjective, but it's still my (and many people's) feeling. 50p feels like video, even if it's shot on film.
I also hate all these new flatscreen TVs that interpolate frames automatically and instantly make the most beautiful feature films look like a cheap soap opera. I know they add ugly artifacts compared to really shooting at high fps, but I still hate that high fps look.

This being said, I hope I'll get to see the Hobbit projected in 3D at 48fps because I'm really curious about it. I'd love to be proven wrong.
 
Jannard said:
When I 1st heard that PJ would shoot the Hobbit at 48fps... I was skeptical. To me, 24fps was "sometime". 48fps was "this morning".

I have to say that I am now a convert. The way this was shot (thank Andrew Lesnie), the VFX and Gollum... 48fps is "other worldly". In a good way. A way you have never experienced before.

Peter is much smarter than I thought. And I always thought he was pretty smart.

48fps on this movie is like nothing you have ever seen... magnificent.

Wipe your mind of preconceived notions. Forget "the will of the mass mind". This is just plain better.

There are so many reasons why to watch this movie...

Jim
Click to expand...

I saw some 48fps 3d tests a few months ago, to say the least, it spooked me...
I'm really hoping they have done something different to what I have seen so far, becuase it just looked liked pin sharp video to me.

Im happy to be shown something better thats for sure, because im sure it will become main stream and I want to like it.
 
I've seen it too. I wouldn't describe it as "video" though. More like hyper attentive, which is really quite immersive.

24fps won't go away, but we'll be seeing more 48fps productions initially. Scaling up to 60-72fps, pretty much where humans can't detect individual frames. Video games have been hitting this target for a while now. I think down the road 60fps is going to be a target for productions. Trumball is aiming for 120fps for 3D work and that's understandable as well with current technology.

The great thing here and moving forward is that there will be options on how to capture and show your projects in the future. The benefit for Red shooters is we have a camera that plays nicely with future viewing technology today.

There are certainly concerns in the VFX world of having higher frame rates (same deal with higher resolution) which equate to more work for individual artists and longer render times. However, this is not something to be scared of in these times. It is something to adapt to. Creatively, it's another world to explore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top