Top
100°

Atomic: Are gamer eyes better suited to accepting The Hobbit’s trailblazing 48fps presentation?

Atomic: After all, 48fps really isn’t that great a framerate in PC terms.

"The general consensus among naysayers is that the footage looks too real, to the point where the film looks too fake. That may read like an oxymoron, but it actually makes sense. Critics are complaining that the vivid lifelike images are removing the magic Hollywood veil and making it easier to spot the fact that dwarves, for instance, aren’t really dwarves, and that they’re actors with a lot of makeup wearing unfamiliar costumes."

Read Full Story >>
atomicmpc.com.au
The story is too old to be commented.
Snookies122052d ago

I watched the Lord of the Rings Extended blu-ray trilogy on a top notch HD TV.... I thought the same thing...

It's so weird, it didn't even look like the movies I'd seen before. Things were so clear, it looked like I was on the set, and it just didn't look as amazing (especially the special effects). Despite it being super HD lol.

I think we've gotten to a point where we need to back off the higher qualities. It's good enough where we are. o_o

NachosWithCheese2051d ago

I actually disagree with that. I think part of the problem is that Hollywood is so used to dealing with lower framerates and lower-quality output (bear in mind that even old-school cameras shoot in super-high-quality formats) that props, costuming and makeup have all suffered as a result.

I'm very excited to see what happens with the future of cinema.

h311rais3r2051d ago

They just make the props better and fix the errors with computers.

Fylus2051d ago

Totally agree with Nachos.

GillHarrison2051d ago

The Lord of the Rings Blu-ray is 24fps, the video quality has nothing to do with video speed.

Snookies122051d ago

Yes I realize it wasn't filmed using the FPS that The Hobbit is being filmed at. Yet, I'm simply stating that it seems as though the movie almost suffers from being really high quality. Unless of course the CGI and makeup is so well done that you can't tell it's not real. Which is a challenge in and of itself.

dumahim2051d ago

LotR wasn't filmed in any special way that hasn't been done for decades. Hint: it's 35mm film.

It's so odd that since Blu-ray came around, people seem to think movies all of a sudden are filmed better too. And somehow seeing it at home on Blu-ray in 1080p is suddenly so crystal clear and overwhelming people when the film you see at theaters typically has much more resoltion. Even the digital projections are usually 2k, but some are 4k. I saw an article earlier today that suggested the theoretical resolution of IMAX film would be about 12k.

grailly2051d ago

you do realize there is a difference in the size of the screen right?

ChocolateGiddyUp2051d ago

Were you watching it on a TV with one of those "smooth motion" settings turned on?

I guess I can see how it might work for sports, but it makes films look insanely cheap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2051d ago
Eyesoftheraven2051d ago

Lower frame rate in film (minimum of 24fps) does not equal lower quality. A 180 degree shutter angle under ideal conditions demands a 1/48th shutter speed at 24fps which therefore produces a subtle motion blur that greatly supports suspension of disbelief in movies. Raising that frame rate as little as up to 30fps creates an excessively smooth, "home video" look -- no amount of stellar make-up and props could hide from that amount of detail present in the sharp image produced by increased frames at high resolutions. You end up recording details you don't need for the sake of a stronger 3D effect at the sacrifice of what makes movies so spectacular in the first place -- the ability to drag you into another, imaginary universe, if not for just a couple hours.

FYI: 65mm film (been around for over ~115 years), in the right hands, produces a much higher quality image and comparatively much larger resolution than any top-of-the-line film-based digital camera to date from RED or ARRI.

GillHarrison2051d ago

This is a perfect explanation. There is a reason movies have been filmed at 24fps for so long, I don't think we will ever accept a higher frames rate for blockblusters and the like.

2051d ago Replies(1)
SilentNegotiator2051d ago

"48fps really isn’t that great a framerate in PC terms"

*Facepalm*

It is if you're maxing it at a decent resolution. Unless it's Call of Duty and you get a gazillion fps anyway.