Is it just me that hates 24fps?

Discussion in 'General TV Discussions Forum' started by Jasonpikephoto, Mar 14, 2013.

  1. Jasonpikephoto

    Jasonpikephoto
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    11
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +1
    I'm not sure if I'm posting this in the right section, but is it just me that hates 24fps? Since watching The Hobbit in HFR I thought to myself, why can't all movies now be filmed like this. But I know it's more technical than that. I recently purchased a great TV, an LG 50" Plasma 3D 600hz, and the TruMotion setting is awesome. But it's nowhere near HFR. Is there any way of making this happen? Are there any Bluray 3D players that are future-proof to HFR? I know this all sounds stupid, but I think it's great. I prefer realism in the movies that I watch.

    Cheers
     
  2. next010

    next010
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2005
    Messages:
    10,797
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    163
    Ratings:
    +2,113
    Because the vast majority of people hated it as it makes everything look fake (which it is) and many dislike those video speed up post processing effects like Trumotion. They can be useful for sports but that's about it for me personally.

    You cant buy anything to give you the effect as video is shot at 60 frame per second or in the Hobbits case 48fps. Most media players these days can easily handle 60fps footage but beyond personal footage shot on digital cameras there is no market for it.

    Don't count on HFR taking off, there is even less appeal for it than 3D material.
     
  3. ovbg

    ovbg
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Messages:
    410
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +94
    Though next010 is correct in that most people hated it, and most likely correct in that it won't take off, I'm one of the few that actually liked it.

    I remember when I bought my first widescreen TV & DVD player. Even though it was still only standard definition, the quality improvement over my older TV and VHS was so great, everything looked "fake". I hated it at the time, and couldn't figure out what was wrong with my tele.

    A couple of months later, I never noticed it and when I watched the same DVD again, it no longer looked fake.

    Going back to VHS is impossible of course as that now just looks blurry.

    Oddly enough, I didn't get the same effect going from SD to HD, but maybe that was a more incremental jump.

    I believe that if people gave 48 & 60fps a chance, after a while they will get used to it. But I also suspect people just don't have the patience any more.
     
  4. Scooby2000

    Scooby2000
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,549
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Cambridge
    Ratings:
    +2,469
    I watched the hobbit at 48 and didn't like it, worked well when mixing live action and CG but most the time I just felt like I was on set rather than in some other realm.
    I like 24p, sure it came about due to a technical limitation, but it gives you a detachment I thinks needed.

    Its like HD with CGI, in the past you could hide things, now you see every little detail.
    Not only with CGI but also props, seeing every detail isn't always a good thing as you can see things for what they are, props and sets. The higher frame rate adds to the problem IMO, it further erodes the illusion film makers are trying to create.
    I don't want to see some guy pretending to be a dwarf on a film set, I want to see a dwarf in a world other than my own.
     
  5. ovbg

    ovbg
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Messages:
    410
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +94
    ^^ good points and I know a lot of people share them with you.

    Some small part of me though wonders if this was also argued with the introduction of colour. Try reading the post again, but replace the key words with colour and black&white. I am sure such things were said back then... actually, some people still say it today.
     
  6. Scooby2000

    Scooby2000
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,549
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Cambridge
    Ratings:
    +2,469
    I get your point but the issue still stands with both 4k and HFR. Yes introducing colour meant sets, costumes, makeup and props all had to be done differently, however I can't see how they can make adjustments this time other than with CGI which in itself is going to be more costly with 4k.

    I guess it comes down to what you want to see, a guy dressed up to look like a dwarf or a dwarf. There's a quality about 24p that just removes you slightly, making the illusion work, for movies set in present day reality, nature programs, sport and CG HFR helps you feel like you are there so is a big plus(makes CGI look more realistic).
    Im not sure I want my fantasy/scifi films to look like a stage play, Steve in his recent interview with the guy from Red was bang on with that comment IMO.
     
  7. Smith2004

    Smith2004
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,572
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Ratings:
    +185
    My guess is that it will be a generational thing. Most of us have grown up with 24p and accept it as the 'proper' look for film, but if more films are made in HFR then perhaps more people will get used to it, particularly younger film-goers, and regard it as the norm. Having grown up with 24p, I personally quite like what I have seen of HFR already and would like to see more films made this way, neither do I mind Trumotion and other such 'fake' HFR effects built into many modern TVs (if done well - i.e. without artefacts). But the whole HFR clearly divides people.
     
  8. vism

    vism
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,010
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Royal Leamington Spa
    Ratings:
    +1,188
    Yes, I can't stand 24fps and I grew up with it(I'm 46).

    I'm not aware of any film-goer surveys that point to HFR being "hated". It tends to be people in the industry who really seem to hate it.

    The Hobbit had it's problems but HFR is the future and with Avatar at 60fps (possibly with double scanning), it won't be long before it's the norm.
     
  9. Trollslayer

    Trollslayer
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Messages:
    25,355
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Poole
    Ratings:
    +10,375
    24FPS annoys me as well, I wish empasis would be put on 48FPs instead of 4k resolution then we could get a big step forward at a good price - it would use the same panels and just need minor configuration changes on TVs that already support 1080p50!
    Just think - get rid of all the clever tricks to try and put up with 24FPS on panning shots.
     
  10. Jasonpikephoto

    Jasonpikephoto
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    11
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Ratings:
    +1
    Mixed views then. Even if it is possible on future technology I think they should do this, not as a permanent change, but just a choice. Technology is always changing - for example the Red Ray Player, and the Red Recording Technology; this is how The Hobbit was filmed. Really looking forward to Avatar @ 60fps.
     
  11. vism

    vism
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,010
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Royal Leamington Spa
    Ratings:
    +1,188
    +1
     
  12. vism

    vism
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,010
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Royal Leamington Spa
    Ratings:
    +1,188
    Ah but, a 4k transmission displayed on a HD set will be awesome.
    Wider range of colours, less blocking(mpeg) noise and p50/60. That'll do for me.
     
  13. Trollslayer

    Trollslayer
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Messages:
    25,355
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Poole
    Ratings:
    +10,375
    But why exclude 48FPS at 1080p? The technology already supports it and would open this up to those who couldn't afford 4k.
     
  14. mike7

    mike7
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,949
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Norfolk
    Ratings:
    +618
    Smith2004;My guess is that it will be a generational thing. Most of us have grown up with 24p and accept it as the 'proper' look for film, but if more films are made in HFR then perhaps more people will get used to it, particularly younger film-goers, and regard it as the norm.

    I think this is very true. We have a generation who have been brought up in a world of video games where everything is 'crystal clear' and sharp and leans more in the direction of a world of animation rather than actual reality. When films like Avatar and The Hobbit come along that rely heavily on CGI and overlit sets where with little or no subtle sense of natural perspective, as we see in normal life, they are acceptable to some more than others.

    Strangely the introduction of 3D emphasises unreality in my eyes and I suspect that is why most 3D films rely on total animation or heavy CGI. I suspect some of the classic cinematographers of old would wince at some of the stuff we see on the cinema screen today where the fundamental rules of photography have been abandoned in the requirement for enhanced reality. It's an effect that certainly doesn't win any prizes,and gets quite boring to watch after a while.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2013
  15. Scooby2000

    Scooby2000
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,549
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Cambridge
    Ratings:
    +2,469
    Maybe the future will be a mix, more a style choice or effect.
     
  16. vism

    vism
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,010
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Royal Leamington Spa
    Ratings:
    +1,188
    The current HD standard doesn't support p48 for 2D. They could frig the standard again but that still means buying new kit so you might as well go 4k.
     
  17. vism

    vism
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,010
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Royal Leamington Spa
    Ratings:
    +1,188
    But why do you not like a more real image? What you're getting rid of is judder and double images that are flaws in the technology.
    Surely this is an opportunity for the cinematographer to improve things.

    I thought the effects in The Hobbit were quite poor and the HFR really showed them up, that's a reason to do better cgi.

    Also, there was a scene in a forest where the subtle colouring that had been applied really made the place seem otherworldly. Normally I'd be stressing about the judder from the trees during panning shots.
     
  18. Trollslayer

    Trollslayer
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Messages:
    25,355
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Poole
    Ratings:
    +10,375
    There is a real issue with 3D which affects some people more than others.
    The prespective requires small differences between the left and right images and at 1920 pixels inaccuracies arise. Think of it (although I am probably abusing the term a little) at digital astigmatism.
     
  19. Trollslayer

    Trollslayer
    Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Messages:
    25,355
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Poole
    Ratings:
    +10,375
    Sorry, I meant to say can with some software changes.
     
  20. Jason Shouler

    Jason Shouler
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,135
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    POOLE
    Ratings:
    +162
    Resolution has little affect on 3D.

    Even very poor material can still generate very good 3D.

    The biggest problem is that the TV can ONLY generate parallax separation and yet our eyes are used to using a lot more information which is available in the real world (for instance our eyes will use 'range-finding' techniques to judge if something really is near or far - which obviously can never work on a TV).

    This is why it's very important for 3D films to be produced with a deep depth of field - since this allows our eyes to range over the scene without discomfort (since everything is ALWAYS in focus)
     
  21. Ossie77

    Ossie77
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,616
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Ratings:
    +173
    Forgive my utter ignorance but should 24p be switched on for ALL blu rays and DVD's? I watched The Hobbit both ways and much preferred 24p on. There was less judder, smoother motion and the colours were warmer?! Should 24p effect the sharpness of the picture quality because I could swear with it turned on the images were softer?!
     

Share This Page

Loading...