48fps for movies...yay or nay?

[solomongrundy]

I was looking at the Hobbit trailer here (http://www.hfrmovies.com/TheHobbitDesolationOfSmaug48fps.mp4

 

 ) which is supposed to be at 48fps , and to me it looks like crap. It's too smooth and makes it look like somebody shot it with a Sony handycam. I'm not sold yet.

It might look better in 3d but I don't have first hand experience with that.

[Alex(PlayMedium)]

I like the way 48fps looks, especially the horses or any other fast movements just look a lot more natural in the hfr version of the film 

[CoolBeans]

It is probably meant for 3D as 3D splits up the frames so 24FPS per eye I believe is how it works, don't quote me on it though.

[WoodenMarker]

120 fps please. :3

[TechSage]

I don't notice a difference...I've only watched 24 fps movies so I have nothing to compare to. I've either used a CRT or a 60hz monitor my whole life. So......yay?

[TheRetiredSlave]

I vote 'yay'!

 

48 FPS makes the wide panning shots of mountains actually look smooth and natural, while 24 is just to jittery.. Also, you can actually see detail in fast paced action scenes instead of generic blurs

[WildTurtle]

Anything less than and including 9000 is just too little for me.

[nickpc]

I vote yay

[Hans Christian | Teri]

I think it's definitely an interesting approach. It is a lot smoother than the "more cinematic" 24 fps but as of yet I can't tell if this is good or bad. Personally I shoot everything 24 fps ~180deg shutter, but I think you should always give innovation room to breathe, it could turn out to be something grand!

[_ASSASSIN_]

I dunno, I personally like 24 frames in movies, it feels a ton better, because when you watch the VGHS season 2 trailer (the 1080p option makes it go at 48 frames), everything just looks sped up rather than in normal motion, 

 

http://www.rocketjump.com/?video=vghs-season-2-trailer-hfr

[SMURG]

It's a minor improvement. Not worth the amount of fuss around it though. As others have said, it's kinda nice when their running around on horses and stuff (the Radagast sled scene was particularly enjoyable because of it, I feel) and it's probably helpful for stereoscopic 3D.

[MdX MaxX]

I'm with Linus.  More FPS equals more better.

 

Now, what I don't like are those TVs that take the content and try to form these intermediate frames in order to artificially increase the content's framerate.  Then it just looks terrible.

[solomongrundy]

I disagree with you all. 24fps looks more cinematic . Here's the same trailer on Youtube

The high frame rate trailer in my original post makes me sick.

[Kayn]

Watching this was like playing at 60FPS for the first time. Honestly I really like how smooth it looks when there are those panning shots of the mountain and the fast action scenes. I feel like it's much more pleasing to the eyes and for me feel like I can follow the pictures better.

[obsidian1200]

I don't know, I feel like something as close to the refresh rate of your set would be the best thing for looks and smoothness, but at the same time, the 48p looks weird. Not better or worse, but some of the motion really pops while others don't. It almost seems like in that first trailer, while I'm sure it is, that the framerate isn't constant from scene to scene.

[AraSarkisyan]

I like it!

[zip2k4]

I personally opt for at least 60 for movies and 100 for games, making more frames and making it smooth = more work - but if done properly it is a better choice.

 

the worst thing i disliked about anything lower than 60 is that I can see stutter (personal problem obviously)

[Xorbot]

I dunno, I personally like 24 frames in movies, it feels a ton better, because when you watch the VGHS season 2 trailer (the 1080p option makes it go at 48 frames), everything just looks sped up rather than in normal motion, 

 

http://www.rocketjump.com/?video=vghs-season-2-trailer-hfr

 

Probably because you were brought-up on crap (i.e. 24 fps), and you are used to it.

 

The following is always true, and I really don't care what anyone has to say:

- more pixels

- more frames per second

- more colors

 

I will take 80 billion pixels on a cellphone, 5600 FPS on a PC, and 9.2 trillion distinct colors on any screen, any day, if not more.

 

More. More. More.

[Phillyphries]

48 frames looks to weird and I feel it's such a distraction. 

 

24 frames will always be king

[Hyydrah]

48FPS just isn't enough, but it's nice that they're pushing it further.

[_ASSASSIN_]

Probably because you were brought-up on crap (i.e. 24 fps), and you are used to it.

 

The following is always true, and I really don't care what anyone has to say:

- more pixels

- more frames per second

- more colors

 

I will take 80 billion pixels on a cellphone, 5600 FPS on a PC, and 9.2 trillion distinct colors on any screen, any day, if not more.

 

More. More. More.

not really, I play PC games, the reason more frames is better in that scenario is because of the fact that you have an active input, and you are controlling it, you will feel a more tangible difference with games, but when it comes to movies, 24fps just plain looks better.

Why? because when you look at anything that happens fast, you never see all of it right? so that's why I feel 24 frames is better, in that case, it just feels more natural,  48 frames feels weird because in real life, you don' t have this buttery smooth feeling, dunno.

and no, don't say I was brought up with crap, I take that to offense as my parents are great

[eshbop]

Yeah it's definitely different. The large panning shots look a better but the mid-close up fast paced shots make the actors and sets (maybe because a lot of the set is green-screened rather than real) look disjunct and movement has the illusion of being sped up.

I thought I'd like higher fps, but I'm not sure now.

We are all used to 24fps so it's no surprise. If movies were all 48fps from the get go there'd be more reaction to then watching a 24fps movie than vice versa. People will get used to it, you can't judge HFR movies after watching 2.5hours when everything else you've ever watched has been in 24fps.

[beebskadoo]

I would like to see 60 FPS, though 48 makes everything seem real to me. It's not like i'm watching a movie but i'm actually there.

[Jack.EXE]

Waiting for 144...

Seriosly, give me ONE GOOD Reason why a lower Framerate is better? And dont give me the more cinematic idiocy.

[Lyons]

Looks good, much smoother and gets rid of any motion blur. I like it 

 

 

Damn that looked stuttery......

 

not even 24 fps movie stutters this badly for me.

 

How can you play games if your computer can't even play 48fps HD video?  :P

 

I would like to see 60 FPS, though 48 makes everything seem real to me. It's not like i'm watching a movie but i'm actually there.

 

We'll probably never see 60fps as theatre projectors run and 24hz, meaning they'll only shoot movies in multiples of 24, 48, etc.