The Hobbit...

[Ryan Farnes]

Hmmmmm.

One thing that won't be happening soon is a combination of 4K resolution -- which is already in some theaters -- 3D and high frame rates. Today's gear and networks can't handle that much data.

 

[Maik Müller]

Hmmmmm.

Just one word: REDRAY!

I too hope they'll post some more numbers and maybe do a blog-vid around the whole tech and workflow. I mean its worth it, even for non-REDUSERs, because its probably the biggest digital shoot ever, they're changing cinema-history there, especially with the addition of 48fps with 3D.

Oh, and please release some 48fps-footage! Hehe.

BTW, wasn't there a always a rumor about a third movie, even before shooting started? The idea of doing a bridge-movie between Hobbit and FOTR sounds familiar. I guess, they had something like this always in mind, but left the decision to Peter. "Let him shoot whatever he wants and if he feels its worth making three instead of two movies, than great, if not, lets put that footage on Extended Editions or a Special Appendix-Disc for a super-duper-mega-collectors edition". Whatever, it really looks like a rare situation where studios don't pressure the director too much, i think thats great and in the end it will be visible to all of us. I totally trust Peter, he knows best.

 

[Ravi Kiran]

I hope this situation changes by December so that more theaters can and will show this at 48fps.

http://www.slashfilm.com/revolution...-hobbit-dramatically-downscaled-distribution/

The Revolution Will Be Limited: 48FPS Version of ‘The Hobbit’ Gets Dramatically Downscaled Distribution
Posted on Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 by Russ Fischer

Peter Jackson‘s adaptation of The Hobbit is a Big Deal for a few different reasons. It’s his return to Middle-Earth, and to the stories that established him as one of the biggest directors working today. It is now the beginning of a trilogy, rather than a mere two-film cycle. And, for exhibitors, the most important aspect is that it is the first mainstream film shot with what we’ll refer to as HFR (high frame rate).

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey was shot at 48 frames per second, rather than the film industry standard 24fps. The first public presentation of footage, at CinemaCon this past spring, didn’t go so well, with audiences finding that the increased detail seen in the HFR footage made the film look cheap, rather than more impressive.

Cinemacon is a particularly bad place for a showing like that to bomb, because it was Jackson and Warner Bros. best moment to convince exhibitors that they should upgrade to equipment that could project the HFR footage. We don’t have data on precisely how many cinemas are ready to take the HFR plunge at this point, but we do now know that when The Hobbit opens on December 14 of this year, it will be seen in native HFR projection in only a handful of cities.

Variety reports that people who have seen HFR footage from The Hobbit recently say “the picture now looks vastly better than the test footage shown this April at CinemaCon, which had not yet undergone post-production polishing.”

Even so, the HFR version will get a very limited release this December. In part, that’s because no theaters are currently HFR-ready, though Variety says that some theaters will be able to work with the standard beginning with a simple software upgrade that goes live next month.

WB will do a very limited release, “perhaps nt even into all major cities,” to start getting audiences used to seeing HFR. There may be a wider rollout after the initial opening, but that will no doubt be based on reception to the first release wave.

Go ahead and parse whether this is really a tech issue, or if WB is truly afraid of audience reception to a film that it needs to become a gigantic success. it’s worth noting that showing the film in 24fps isn’t as simple as making a menu selection, as the footage has to be down-converted to add motion blur and avoid a choppy appearance. That conversion was going to happen regardless of this release pattern, however, as even in a best-case scenario there was never a chance that all possible theaters would be HFR-ready in time for the film’s opening.

 

[Vadim Bobkovsky]

Hmmmmm.

Oh for Christ's sake, I can't stand 3D at 24fps. Too much motion blur, strobing and constant lack of depth on fast scenes, this makes my brain hurt. 48 frames will be better. More than that, I agree with Doug Trumbull, we need 4K+ image in 3D shot at up to 120fps, shown by very bright laser projectors on giant screens. Such level of hyper-real daydreaming experience could actually bring kids back to cinemas. 24 is perfectly fine for 2D, no need to change that.

God I hope the IMAX near me gets the hardware upgrade before December. I want to see The Hobbit in 4K, in 3D and at forty eight frikken frames per second, otherwise why bother with stereoscopic movies anyway. I've seen enough blur and darkness during past 3D showings.

 

[Ryan Farnes]

God I hope the IMAX near me gets the hardware upgrade before December. I want to see The Hobbit in 4K, in 3D and at forty eight frikken frames per second, otherwise why bother with stereoscopic movies anyway. I've seen enough blur and darkness during past 3D showings.

The reason this article caught my eye is that The Hobbit is bleeding edge, well funded, high end production, and there isn't even the infrastructure (or desire) to initially distribute it in these high end formats. I suppose the reason is that there are fits and starts and growing pains with 4K and 3D...but I suppose that is what many of us were wondering all along.

 

[Peter Johnson]

Can someone who has much more knowledge than I find out which, if any, theaters will show a 4K 3D 48FPS version of this? I would travel cross country to see it if a theater showed it. Is this even getting a 4K release at all? New York is only 13 hours by car.

 

[Craig Parkes]

Can someone who has much more knowledge than I find out which, if any, theaters will show a 4K 3D 48FPS version of this? I would travel cross country to see it if a theater showed it. Is this even getting a 4K release at all? New York is only 13 hours by car.

I am almost certain that The Hobbit won't be finished at 4K resolution, just 2K resolution 48fps per eye.

The CGI costs for 4K at 48fps would be staggering (renders alone would be a mammoth increase, 16 times the rendering of a 2K finished 2D movie?)

 

[PatrickFaith]

How do you figure out where it will be 48fps vs 24fps ... or will it be shown everywhere at 48 fps ?

 

[Mark Warren]

This surely would have been mentioned before, but if it hasn't... Jackson says that it only takes "10 minutes" to get used to the higher frame rates, overlooking the fact that he has been watching it for a year or more. Perhaps the more apt quote might be, "It takes about a year staring at it constantly every day, then you really love it and can't do without it."
Just a thought. I can already hear the Hobbits kicking in my door... in 48fps and 24, 3D and 2D.

 

[Vadim Bobkovsky]

This surely would have been mentioned before, but if it hasn't... Jackson says that it only takes "10 minutes" to get used to the higher frame rates, overlooking the fact that he has been watching it for a year or more. Perhaps the more apt quote might be, "It takes about a year staring at it constantly every day, then you really love it and can't do without it."
Just a thought. I can already hear the Hobbits kicking in my door... in 48fps and 24, 3D and 2D.

The thing people aren't getting yet, that 48 fps in 2D makes no damn sense and it's actually looks weirder, BUT in 3D it helps to get rid of some nasty distracting "artifacts". Also I'm not that excited if the 2K finish is confirmed, I'd just go to the regular screening then. 2K Prometheus looked pretty soft on huge-ass IMAX screen.

 

[L. Langer]

Can someone who has much more knowledge than I find out which, if any, theaters will show a 4K 3D 48FPS version of this? I would travel cross country to see it if a theater showed it. Is this even getting a 4K release at all? New York is only 13 hours by car.

As far as we know, it's only a 2K release like any other movie these days. A 4K 3D release would be nice but it is not a reality that is possible with what is available.

 

[L. Langer]

How do you figure out where it will be 48fps vs 24fps ... or will it be shown everywhere at 48 fps ?

WB has said they are limiting the 48 FPS showings and there will be a list of theaters on the official website of those that will show it at 48 FPS.

 

[Maik Müller]

The thing people aren't getting yet, that 48 fps in 2D makes no damn sense and it's actually looks weirder, BUT in 3D it helps to get rid of some nasty distracting "artifacts".

I agree that 48fps helps 3D to get a lot better, but i also think it makes sense for 2D too. 24fps isn't perfect, we're just got used to it. HFR might not be needed for 2D as much as for 3D, but the difference is clearly visible, thats enough for me.

Also I'm not that excited if the 2K finish is confirmed

Yeah, i hope thats not true. 4k please!

 

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Just hope they tell us how many TB they filmed.

From what I've read recently in an article, about 6-7 TB's a day.

Wondering if the movie will have a 4K or 2K finish. I know 4K is a massive chunk more of data for VFX, and as someone who doesn't know details about that milieu, I'll believe them on their word, but when I heard that Spiderman and Prometheus were all being finished in 2K, I was a bit surprised though.
The girl with the Dragon Tattoo was finished in 4K, right? Of course that didn't nearly have the amount of FX that Spiderman and Prometheus had.
Still, I would think that The Hobbit would have the budget and the scale to be one of the first really big movies to be finished in 4K.

 

[Ravi Kiran]

Wondering if the movie will have a 4K or 2K finish. I know 4K is a massive chunk more of data for VFX, and as someone who doesn't know details about that milieu, I'll believe them on their word, but when I heard that Spiderman and Prometheus were all being finished in 2K, I was a bit surprised though.
The girl with the Dragon Tattoo was finished in 4K, right? Of course that didn't nearly have the amount of FX that Spiderman and Prometheus had.
Still, I would think that The Hobbit would have the budget and the scale to be one of the first really big movies to be finished in 4K.

I wonder if Prometheus and The Amazing Spider-Man would have gotten 4K finishes if they were not in 3D. 4K is cheaper and less difficult than it used to be, but 4K 3D is now the new benchmark to reach.

 

[L. Langer]

Spidey and Dragon Tat both got 4K. Spidey 3D was 2K and the VFX shots were resized for 4K as they were for the Sam Raimi films.

 

[Vadim Bobkovsky]

I agree that 48fps helps 3D to get a lot better, but i also think it makes sense for 2D too. 24fps isn't perfect, we're just got used to it. HFR might not be needed for 2D as much as for 3D, but the difference is clearly visible, thats enough for me.

I like new plasmas with 120Hz interpolation thing as much as the next guy, it's fun and all. However, if we're talking film replacement here I'd rather go with global shutter or integrated tessive filter (or really damn fast readout speeds on new CMOS sensor) with the improved dynamic range and sensitivity, rather than faster frames per second. I saw a 2K 3D demo one time, something like 5 or 6 minutes, of 60p footage with lot's of movement (no CGI effects though), I just felt high, man. Having that hyper-experience without doing dr00gs is great, if you ask me. My head probably would've exploded if it was 4K demo instead of 2K, that's why I was so excited about 4K 3D possibility. I just need my 4k3d48fps fix, maaaaan

 

[Marc Wielage]

I am almost certain that The Hobbit won't be finished at 4K resolution, just 2K resolution 48fps per eye. The CGI costs for 4K at 48fps would be staggering (renders alone would be a mammoth increase, 16 times the rendering of a 2K finished 2D movie?)

Well... it's a $500 million movie, and the director owns the VFX house. My assumption is they will do it in 4K, or whatever the resolution works out for that aspect ratio. To me, the 48fps and 3D parts of the puzzle are the most challenging, not the 4K (or 5K or whatever).

More info on the lack of 48fps screenings in Daily Variety:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118057587

And on the opposite side, here's ILM's Dennis Muren and also VFX guru Doug Trumbull arguing for the adoption of 48fps:

http://www.studiodaily.com/2012/08/trumbull-muren-and-others-vouch-for-high-frame-rate-cinema/

This piece offers this interesting tidbit about The Hobbit:

"Anywhere between 6 and 12 TB of camera data was generated on each day of the six-days-a-week production, with about two hours of 48fps 3D screenings taking place daily. A total frame-to-frame equivalent of 24 million feet of film was processed."

Yikes... 12TB per day... For a year.

 

[L. Langer]

Well, it looks like The Hobbit is getting some limited edition Oakley 3D shades. I don't know if they are Gascan frames like the last few limited editions but they will apparently come with a nice little "Sting" pin.

 

[Carlos King]

Bravo, great film on shot on RED!