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 :)

48fps The Hobbit - First Review

I like the look, from what I see in the trailers. Will decide when I personally see it. For now it looks awesome. To me at least!
 
Last edited:
Slightly OT; Scorsese says all his future movies will be 3-D

Scorsese spoke at a filmmaking panel alongside director Ang Lee,
Scorsese and Lee are among a growing crop of prominent directors who claim 3-D technology is the future of filmmaking.

The 3-D craze allows filmmakers to accomplish the original goals of cinema, Scorsese said.
"The minute it started people wanted three things: color, sound and depth," Scorsese said. "You want to recreate life."

"There is something that 3-D gives to the picture that takes you into another land and you stay there and it's a good place to be," he said.

"It's like seeing a moving sculpture of the actor and it's almost like a combination of theater and film combined and it immerses you in the story more," Scorsese said. "I saw audiences care about the people more."

Scorsese compared 3-D to the rise of color movies. He said as a film student at New York University in the early 1960s, he was shocked when he heard predictions that all future movies would be filmed in color. He said anyone harboring doubts about the rising influence of 3-D technology should consider how color movies have taken over the industry.

"The technology improves so fast. Like every three months you are behind," Lee said. "The learning curve is really humongous."
Click to expand...
 
I'm frankly not surprised that the establishment is slinging FUD again. I am reserving judgement until I see it and if I don't like it, I will take my ticket money to a 24fps theatre. I don't know what the big deal is. This is similar in theory to Doug Trumbull's Showscan process and that looked awesome. The future can be an unfriendly place to people who are accustomed to being comfortable. I can't wait to see it. I'll put my trust in PJ, he's always delivered in the past.
 
Hats off to the crazy ones. PJ, Cameron, and Lucas are daring to go where no one has gone before. Much like RED. Digital filmmaking would not be where it is today, if it were not for the vision of these guys. I look forward to being part of history.
 
Last edited:
It is my feeling that 3D films should be treated entirely differently than 2D films. 24p does not work well with 3d. It never has. Also, 3D films need to focus more on composition and light to draw the eyes of the viewer, not the shallow depth of field we are used to seeing. It's a different animal. You wouldn't put a mountain lion in a birdcage would you? It would doubtfully hold the beast.

We need to allow a different way of thinking for different mediums. I don't like the true motion looks, or high fps anything if it is 2D. I will always prefer the look of 24p in 2D, but the same rules don't apply for 3D and we need to acknowledge that and move on. Our eyes will adjust.
 
Bob Gundu said:
Hats off to the crazy ones. PJ, Cameron, and Lukas are daring to go where no one has gone before. Much like RED. Digital filmmaking would not be where it is today, if it were not for the vision of these guys. I look forward to being part of history.
Click to expand...

100% agree. From our perspective we will keep pushing the boundaries of what is possible and at affordable prices. You don't have to use the full set of features, but it's important storytellers have the best quality, most flexible tools to capture and display images in ways that have not been seen before.
 
Drew Baird said:
It is my feeling that 3D films should be treated entirely differently than 2D films. 24p does not work well with 3d. It never has.
Click to expand...
Really? So, what do you say about Hugo or the most recent post converted 24fps Titanic?
 
Mike Lary said:
I think you just proved that 3D hasn't eroded your suspension of disbelief. ;)
Click to expand...
If properly aka cinematically* done, yes.

* aka 24p
 
Andrew Rieger said:


I was not comparing Lawless to the Hobbit, I was comparing it to Public Enemies. Sorry if I did not make that clear. Both Lawless and Public Enemies use digital cameras to shoot films about gangsters during the depression. One opts for a more traditional 180 degree shutter (Lawless) while the other tries to shake things up with a 360 degree shutter (Public Enemies) which produces very ugly digital looking images. Lawless looks normal and quite pretty in my opinion while Public Enemies looked like crap, so much so that it ruined my enjoyment of the film. The example was designed to illustrate the fact that making a big change to the way a film appears to the audience can have a negative effect on the film if the audience hates the look. The 360 degree shutter did nothing for Public Enemies except make it look ugly and it sounds like 48fps has done the same thing with The Hobbit. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Click to expand...

Oh, that couldn't have anything to do with Public Enemies being shot on an early F900 and Lawless being shot on an Alexa?

Those are two radically different cameras!

It couldn't have to do with anything else about the image ... for example the low light, noise and grain levels on Public Enemies? Nope its got to be the shutter.

Also ... I think that despite the image flaws (which I am not a fan of for 24p) Public Enemies looks better and more interesting. I actually fell asleep during the Lawless trailer. In fact, I'm pretty damn sure I'd rather watch Public Enemies on VHS "full screen" than Lawless on Red Laser.
 
Bruce Allen said:
I have to say I am surprised at the vitriol on the net about all of this.

This is about creative options for filmmakers.

The nice thing about cinemas getting upgraded to project 48fps is... it's a fun new look and definitely helps 3D. And you can still play 24fps fine too.

You can easily mix stuff too - have the film at 24fps... but maybe you have ONE MOMENT of the film that you think looks better or achieves a certain creative effect at 48fps: you now have the creative option to show that the way you want to.

The internet seems to be filled with a bunch of whiny jerks who think that Mr Jackson or Mr Cameron should make movies the way they want them to.

What a nerve! Jackson and Cameron can do whatever the hell they want. And guys who like 24fps 2D film can keep doing it. Nobody's stopping them. In fact, now 24fps becomes an artistic choice.

The whiny jerks are free to get off their asses and make movies the way they want. But they'll never do that, of course. Too much work.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
Click to expand...

Yeah! What that guy said!
 
Julian Fort said:
Even film shot at 48fps looks like video. Terrible terrible terrible idea for narrative motion pictures!!!!!
Click to expand...

That statement is an oxymoron.

Film shot at any frame rate looks like film.

You know ... because it actually is film.

You don't like high frame rates? Cool ... but lets not get overboard here.
 
Thor Melsted said:
Other advancements in motion picture history that met with mixed reaction:

Sound.
Color.
Digital.
3D.

Why should a frame rate change be any different?
Click to expand...

Because those changes happened immediately after their absence. Higher frame rates have existed for decades and have been universally shunned in the cinema world. Only now with 3D is it becoming a discussion point.
 
Ryan Farnes said:
Because those changes happened immediately after their absence. Higher frame rates have existed for decades and have been universally shunned in the cinema world. Only now with 3D is it becoming a discussion point.
Click to expand...

3D has also been around for decades. It may have fallen out of the mainstream and come back, but it hasn't been new for a long time. The reason those technologies met with mixed reactions was they were both unfamiliar, and unrefined. IMHO.
 
Emanuel A. said:
Really? So, what do you say about Hugo or the most recent post converted 24fps Titanic?
Click to expand...

I really enjoyed Hugo. I watched it in both 2D and 3D in the theaters. The 3D had constant strobing. I have only seen the trailer for Titanic in 3D, but it had the same issue. Same with DoF. Good movies, not made better by 3D. Avatar is on the same list; there were great things about it, but the 3D was flawed. Just because they are good movies done in 3D, it doesn't mean that the 3D was done well.
 
I also dispute this assumption, which has been made repeatedly with an accompanying assumption that faster is better:

"and that the only reason I like 24 fps is because I'm more accustomed to it. "

Different frequencies affect the mind differently. The mind operates at pulsing frequencies (alpha, beta). This flickering 24fps has a way of regimenting the mind and tuning it into a kind of trance state. It is not at all clear that higher frequencies affect the mind the same way.
 
Joe G. said:
I also dispute this assumption, which has been made repeatedly with an accompanying assumption that faster is better:

"and that the only reason I like 24 fps is because I'm more accustomed to it. "

Different frequencies affect the mind differently. The mind operates at pulsing frequencies (alpha, beta). This flickering 24fps has a way of regimenting the mind and tuning it into a kind of trance state. It is not at all clear that higher frequencies affect the mind the same way.
Click to expand...

In this interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpZd-UoYWCY (link provided by Erich Ocean) Trumbull says that his research showed peak emotional and physical response in the neighborhood of 72 FPS. Take it as you like it.
 
I predict a bit of a kerfuffle ensues when The Hobbit gets released. If people at an event called CinemaCon are so conspicuously divided, I cannot imagine what the public reaction will be before, during and after December.

Square peg, round hole? Sure, you can jam it in there, the landscapes look awesome, the strobing is gone, but the texture of the motion might be a step backwards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top