my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Digital Cinema Forum   » HFR - the reviews are in and it "didn't look so good" (Page 7)

This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8

Author Topic: HFR - the reviews are in and it "didn't look so good" Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 08-16-2012 09:27 AM                     Maybe the box office will sell you an eye patch for $3.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-16-2012 11:37 AM                     I'll just skip the 3D experience as I do now. I just don't like it, for the most part.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-16-2012 12:33 PM                        So all 2-D showings of The Hobbit are going to be downconverted to regular 24fps? I guess I can see why.....if you want to see the big new thing you'll have to buy the higher priced 3-D ticket. But it's too bad, I was kind of wondering how HFR would look in 2-D.  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 08-16-2012 04:11 PM                     FWIW I choose the 2D shows too.  |  IP: Logged Carsten Kurz Film God Posts: 4340 From: Cologne, NRW, Germany Registered: Aug 2009 posted 08-16-2012 05:08 PM                     Originally, they were also planning 2D HFR versions. But who knows now what will really happen then with the recent news. Quite sure we will see a HFR 2D version sooner or later. - Carsten  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 08-16-2012 05:31 PM                     They ought to have all of the 2Ds be 48fps. Every DCI compliant system can run that...and, quite frankly most, if not all of the series 1 stuff can too (including the servers of the Series 1 era)...2D @ 48fps was always in the DCinema spec. If they have 48fps available for 2D and 3D one will see what is the bigger draw and know what to waste...er spend the money on.  |  IP: Logged Scott Jentsch Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1061 From: New Berlin, WI, USA Registered: Apr 2003 posted 08-17-2012 02:06 PM                        Agreed. I would be very interested in 2D HFR, as I intend to see The Hobbit in 2D first, and then maybe in 3D. I'm still not the biggest fan of 3D, and I don't think HFR is going to change my opinion of it.  |  IP: Logged Chuck McGregor Film Handler Posts: 47 From: Bremen, ME, USA Registered: Mar 2012 posted 08-20-2012 06:00 AM                     quote: Mike Blakesley: I was kind of wondering how HFR would look in 2-D. In retrospect and just to be clear, my previous comments about HFR were made with only 2D in mind. That is where I think the advantage is to providing a wider range of technological options in the "art" of the filmmaker over existing 24 fps. Especially true compared to 35 mm in providing both higher visual and time resolution. HDTV is on this dual bandwagon finding higher refresh rates in playback - 120 Hz and higher (effective I'm told, never seen a comparison) on top of the existing increased visual resolution. Possibly dumb question. If higher refresh rate technology is effective in providing clearer motion for a given digital frame rate how might that compare with an actual higher frame rate. Or is the former mostly smoke and mirrors?  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 08-20-2012 11:05 AM                     (Possibly dumb answer) I would imagine that the higher refresh rate on an HDTV is similar to adding a third shutter to a film projector -- increasing flashes per second, with no change to frames per second -- it serves to render the flicker less noticeable. I can't imagine how it could affect the appearance of motion -- and why would it be necessary? Standard Def never had this problem.  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 08-20-2012 05:18 PM                     I think it's both smoke-and-mirrors and something real. They churn out sets that are 120 Hz to natively support 24, 30, and 60 fps material. But when they get stuff that's 3D 24 fps, they need to add in the ability to do 48 fps, so they churn out stuff that's got 240 Hz for that. But then they want to reuse this tech in multiple TVs (including non-3D ones) and so they advertise the 240 Hz feature even if it won't be noticeably different... Although I believe Manny is right about the reduced flicker so depending on how perceptive you are to flicker that could come into play.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 08-20-2012 11:18 PM                        Manny's pretty much right. High-refresh HDTVs just flash the same frame more times. But you can also enable a mode which is called "Shit Vision®". This may sometimes be referred to as Motion Flow or some other nonsense. This adds frames between the real frames giving the impression of a higher frame rate. It's pretty nasty and unfortunately this is usually defaulted to "ON" on most if not all HDTV sets, you you have to go in and turn it off and most people don't know any better. This in itself might make HFR movies in theaters more acceptable to the idiots who can't figure out how to turn this stuff off. I don't think any TVs accept native frame rates higher than 60fps per second.  |  IP: Logged Chuck McGregor Film Handler Posts: 47 From: Bremen, ME, USA Registered: Mar 2012 posted 08-21-2012 03:44 AM                     Ironically, I'm glad to hear that the "Motion Flow" (interpolating frames) doesn't pass muster, your word alone being certainly definitive enough to convince me. I edited a paper about interpolating between two sonic impulse responses. The mathematics required were not your high school algebra. (No. I didn't edit that stuff, just the text.) From that perspective I'd say this was a trivial task compared to interpolating images. This is because interpolating images involves more parameters and these have to be applied to all those pixels. This has got to significantly raise the complexity of the math. "Motion Flow" is probably a good example of technology tripping over itself. Digital opens the door to doing this "because we can." When music CDs first appeared the sound quality generally sucked. That's because the various choices of math first used for the Nyquist filters did exactly what they were designed to do: provide a steep cut-off at the Nyquist frequency. However it really screwed up the information below, like the stuff we could hear! Eventually it was realized that people actually had to LISTEN to this filter. Similar problems exist with digital processors to this day, especially those for loudspeaker management. Set two filters on two different brands of processors to exactly same values and I can virtually guarantee they will measure differently, sometimes significantly at higher frequencies (Nyquist filter raising its ugly head). It's all in the math. In the digital world it is easy to come up with math to do something with video or audio. However once the nuances of human perception are imposed upon that math, history has and continues to show that some super geek fresh out of MIT isn't going to get the math right, no matter what's in his/her books. Extremely reputable companies on the audio side still don't get the math right and we're about 30 years into this. The engineer who wrote the aforementioned paper had to actually invent his own DSP algorithms to create some audio filtering he needed for loudspeaker processing (patent 8081766). He had read all the relevant PhD+ level books on digital signal processing and none had the answers he needed. Where human perception is involved the math for digital processing can get very non-trivial. If your interested here is what the filtering he invented does: Loudspeaker DSP That this new "Motion Flow" interpolation kinda sucks does not surprise me one...so to speak...bit, let alone the mega bits involved. Moral of the story (I guess for now): If you want more frames, shoot and display more frames Just my 2 x 1 cent worth  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 08-21-2012 08:30 PM                     It does indeed suck -- I nearly returned my TV when I turned it on and saw that horrible image. Note -- It is interesting that the floor models in the store always has this feature turned off. Everyone knows it sucks. Shit-Vision indeed.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 08-21-2012 10:19 PM                     Manny, cinema HFR is very similar to Shit Vision® on these new 120Hz televisions.  |  IP: Logged Jim Henk Master Film Handler Posts: 364 From: San Diego, CA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 08-22-2012 03:49 AM                     quote: Manny Knowles Note -- It is interesting that the floor models in the store always has this feature turned off. Everyone knows it sucks. Yes! When I bought my Sony 50" about 3 or 4 years ago, the phrase Motion Flow was on some flyer or another, and I asked about it. The guy turned the feature on for me, and when I turned green, he turned it off, and started laughing. He said that they get that a lot.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 8 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.