Hobbit HFR Project Timeline

[Cid J Salcido Uyarra]

Does anyone know if they captured their project at 23.98 or 47.96?

I know they shot 48fps but what was their project setting for their timeline?

Say they did shoot 47.96 whats the process to convert the files for BluRay release at 23.98?

I would imagine the new codec will house the film at 23.98fps and project timeline at 23.98.

How does your footage look if you shoot 23.98 timeline at 48fps and convert to 47.96 timeline?

The reason I ask is I want to shoot all my footage from here on out in 48fps and 60fps for sports/action.

Just like R3D allows you extra pixels to future proof your footage I feel like hi-speed is the next step.

After you capture you can never go back.

Any literature/posts/videos on the Hobbit Post Workflow would be appreciated.

I'd imagine they made several copies of everything since they released multi-platform (3D HFR, 3D 24p, 2D 24p).

 

[Andrew Gentle]

I'm interested in hearing how they did it as well.

I'm most interested in the shutter speed. I assume the (approx) 48p HFR look is with a 180° shutter, 1/96, but for the 24p, they'd want it to be 1/48. So did they shoot with a 48p timebase at 48 fps and a 1/48 shutter speed and enable HDRx at +1, giving you a 1/48 on your A track and 1/96 on your X track? Then they'd just choose A track and drop every second frame for 24p or choose their X track with every frame for 48p. But that's just a guess.

 

[Michael Tiemann]

I think you are really asking about what to do with the tiny numbers to the right of the decimal point (the 1/1001 problem), but let's look at the most significant bits first--the frame rate to the left of the decimal point. I would recommend shooting 60fps or 120fps, not 48fps, for sports/action. Why? Read this: https://plus.google.com/+MichaelTiemann/posts/anVnUHhHKRP

The TL;DR version is that the eye interprets imagery one way at lower frame rates (below about 36-50 fps) and another way at higher frame rates (above 72-100 fps), depending on your genetic luck of the draw. In between these two (36-100 fps worst case, 50-72 fps best cast) lies the "Uncanny Valley" where the eye struggles to find the best way to do its job. This perhaps explains why some loved the 48fps Hobbit and others hated it. If you want to record HFR for the purposes of capturing and playing back at HFR, I would recommend sticking with 60fps (very standard in today's world, and possibly safe from the Uncanny Valley for must people) or going to 100fps or 120fps (depending on whether you live in a PAL or NTCS world).

 

[Ruff]

Weta prefers a 270 degree shutter at 48fps.

 

[Will Steer]

I'm interested in hearing how they did it as well.

I'm most interested in the shutter speed. I assume the (approx) 48p HFR look is with a 180° shutter, 1/96, but for the 24p, they'd want it to be 1/48. So did they shoot with a 48p timebase at 48 fps and a 1/48 shutter speed and enable HDRx at +1, giving you a 1/48 on your A track and 1/96 on your X track? Then they'd just choose A track and drop every second frame for 24p or choose their X track with every frame for 48p. But that's just a guess.

They shot at a 270 degree shutter, so motion blur would be pleasant at both 24 and 48 fps. I think with 48fps 5K stereo they had enough of a data load without introducing HDRx!

I'd be curious to know whether they edited in 24 or 48. It would probably be simpler if the pipeline was 48 right through until the DI at which point you'd do a different online for each deliverable, I'd guess.

Maybe you should do that? Shoot 48 (or 60 for NTSC?) with a 270 degree shutter then transcode to both 48 and 24 fps prores, offer those as well as the original?

 

[Bobby Farokhzad]

At the start of production on "Unexpected Journey" Avid Media Composer did not support a 48 FPS project timebase. I'm pretty sure editorial was done on 24 FPS. With all the different deliverables of the films, to my knowledge, none of them was finished in 4k yet.

 

[Craig Parkes]

From my understanding the project was offlined in stereo at 24in Media Composer, then mastered at 48 on a SGO Mystika platform.

The offline basically had a special timecode function in Avid brewed up to do 48fps timecode at while maintaining 24fps files/workflow, so that thing would get passed through to vfx/conform etc correctly.

 

[Martin Ubilluz]

would have to be edited in 48fps timeline or else 48fps looks lie slow-motion in a 23 fps time line .. no? they could convert to 23. for editing and then relink to the original at 23. but you can't edit 48fps in 23 or it will be slow motion

 

[Simon Dunne]

This is from the Hobbit November edition of Empire UK. You can see the camera settings on the side of the matt box.

http://postimg.org/image/udorka179/

Craig's on the right path also in terms of work-flow

 

[Bobby Farokhzad]

from: http://m.postmagazine.com/Publications/Post-Magazine/2012/December-1-2012/Edit-This-The-Hobbit.aspx

"However, according to Olssen, the Avid editing was done entirely in 2D at 24fps. Jackson’s Park Road Post would “digital telecine” all the original footage into graded Avid DNxHD files at 24fps. “So the editing room had normal Avid footage just like any other film.” As needed, Park Road Post would conform scenes in 3D at 48fps and screen them in 2K 3D at 48fps in a full-size digital theater. "

 

[paulherrin]

yes, i remember hearing that the editing was done @24fps.
maybe it's changed since the first film, but i think that's unfortunate to only edit @ 50% precision...

 

[Marc Wielage]

The offline basically had a special timecode function in Avid brewed up to do 48fps timecode at while maintaining 24fps files/workflow, so that thing would get passed through to vfx/conform etc correctly.

Weta has been mum on their technology used to keep the project synced, but there is no such thing as timecode beyond 30fps just yet. SMPTE has at least one (and maybe two) committees working on a new granular timecode system that will go up to 120fps, but as far as I know it's still in the planning stages. Once the new timecode is out, every piece of hardware and software out there will have to be completely revised in order to use it, because it torpedoes all the existing math used in VFX, editing, sound, and color correction. It'll basically be an entirely new standard, and it won't be simple, cheap, or easy to change over to it.

 

[Andrew Gentle]

yes, i remember hearing that the editing was done @24fps.
maybe it's changed since the first film, but i think that's unfortunate to only edit @ 50% precision...

At least, this way, when the film is viewed in 24p, the shots will be the same length in time. Otherwise, if you had a 14 frame shot or a 15 frame shot in 48p, they'd both likely come out as a 7 frame shot in 24p. Kind of like a rounding error, I guess. I'm not sure the artistic difference would be appreciable, though.