Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: HFR - as sucky as I called it months ago?

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

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Digital Cinema Forum » HFR - as sucky as I called it months ago? (Page 4)

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

Author

Topic: HFR - as sucky as I called it months ago?

Antti Nayha
Master Film Handler

Posts: 268
From: Helsinki, Finland
Registered: Oct 2008

posted 12-28-2012 03:15 AM

OK, fair enough, scratch the ”exactly” then. But the whole shutter thing makes only a minor difference to me. The overall impression remains that of a 50/60 fps daytime soap opera, which is what matters. The rest is finesse, though others may disagree.

And my comment about a 180° shutter was related to the Engadget 50 fps demo video. The Benny Hill Effect there is more pronounced compared to The Hobbit, that used something like 240–270° as mentioned earlier.

| IP: Logged

Lyle Romer
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1400
From: Davie, FL, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 12-28-2012 05:18 PM

Years ago Dean Goodhill was pushing a 3 perf 35mm 48 fps system called Maxivision 48. Roger Ebert was a huge proponent of it after seeing a demo stating how it looked like the screen became a window. The system was touted for it's abiltiy to eliminate motion blur.

Wouldn't this system have had a similar "too real" look as the HFR digital stuff? If so, why did Roger Ebert who was very anti digital especially a few years ago like this system so much?

I don't know if DCI is capable of variable frame rate. My opinion would be that 48 fps should only be used for select shots to eliminate strobing and motion blur.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 12-28-2012 06:07 PM

What did Ebert think of Hobbit 48fps?

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 12-29-2012 01:31 PM

Apparently he didn't review it since he broke his hip and was unable to go see it.

| IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 12-29-2012 01:46 PM

quote: Antti Nayha
OK, finally caught a HFR 3D presentation of The Hobbit a week ago. No surprises there: 48 fps feels exactly as the 50/60 fps stuff we’ve all watched on TV since childhood. Cheap and anti-dramatic.

Have you also seen it in a non-HFR version? If so, what did you think about it? Was the video/soap-opera look entirely gone according to you?

I'm asking this, because I think there is more to the soap-opera/video look than just the higher frame rate (like you seem to be suggesting yourself too). I've seen it in the non-HFR version too, and the video look was still quite present there. And even that might be partly influenced by the shutter angle being used.

Additionally, I've seen this video look now and then in other digitally acquired (non HFR) movies recently, even in Life of Pi in one particular scene.

quote:
Apart from the HFR, the picture looked video-ish and downright ugly a lot of the time. At worst, it was almost like a competitor’s demonstration of how poorly the RED camera handles high-contrast situations. This certainly contributes to the cheap TVish look and feel. It feels like a weird decision to use the RED for such a huge production. In comparison, just look at all the beautiful and cinematic 3D images in Hugo, shot with the Arri Alexa.

I guess it's not all to blame on RED here, let's be honest, other movies shot on RED cameras achieve a more cinematic look. The choice for RED was quite obvious, Jackson and team like to do stuff differently (maybe sometimes just for the sake of it) and they were early adopters of the RED One.

quote: Lyle Romer
I don't know if DCI is capable of variable frame rate. My opinion would be that 48 fps should only be used for select shots to eliminate strobing and motion blur.

A hard switch between frame rates within the same feature is probably not something you would ever want, especially not if you're in 3D mode. But there is no need to switch if you go from 24 FPS to 48 FPS and back. Just repeat every frame for the 24 FPS scenes and you're done.

quote: Joe Redifer
What did Ebert think of Hobbit 48fps?

I guess he's not seen it yet, because he seems to have fractured his left hip recently.

Edit: Chris came to the same conclusion before me [Wink]

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 12-29-2012 06:32 PM

An alternating frame rate would drive me NUTS! That'd really make it look like a videogame as current games are rarely ever locked to a specific framerate. The game industry doesn't care much about consistency.

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 12-29-2012 10:03 PM

quote: Joe Redifer
What did Ebert think of Hobbit 48fps?

Didn't he RAVE about that 48frm film format that never got off the ground? Seems that would have the same issues if it were just a matter of a higher frame rate than 24fps. Was there any negatives re the 30fps rate of ToddAO OKLAHOMA!?

| IP: Logged

Jarod Reddig
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 513
From: Hays, Ks
Registered: Jun 2011

posted 12-30-2012 02:52 AM

I do know Ebert raved about Showscan. I believe it had variable farm rates. I will wait to judge HFR until I see it. And one example of a technology is not enough to right it off or declare it a success. I seen The Hobbit in 24fps RealD and enjoyed the movie and the 3D. I thought it had a smoother than normal and video look at times itself in just 24fps. Sure was long but I had a good time.

| IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 12-30-2012 04:09 PM

quote: Jarod Reddig
I do know Ebert raved about Showscan. I believe it had variable farm rates. I will wait to judge HFR until I see it. And one example of a technology is not enough to right it off or declare it a success. I seen The Hobbit in 24fps RealD and enjoyed the movie and the 3D. I thought it had a smoother than normal and video look at times itself in just 24fps. Sure was long but I had a good time.

I guess you're mixing up Showscan with Maxivision 48. Showscan is a 70mm format running at 60 fps. Maxivision 48 is a 35mm format running at 48 fps.

There has never been a film format that supports multiple frame rates in the same feature, that would be technically almost impossible to achieve. Every projector needs some time to accelerate or decelerate from one frame rate to another.

| IP: Logged

Bajsic Bojan
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 190
From: Ljubljana, Si, Eu
Registered: Aug 2008

posted 12-30-2012 04:20 PM

quote: Marcel Birgelen

There has never been a film format that supports multiple frame rates in the same feature, that would be technically almost impossible to achieve. Every projector needs some time to accelerate or decelerate from one frame rate to another.

Working in a cinemateque I have seen a feature with instructions on when you should "play it back slower to achieve a more dramatic effect" and which sections should be played faster, in the same feature. Dont know what it was as that was some 8 years ago, but it was a silent movie from early 1900, so probably the instructions were for the people hand-cranking the projectors.

But i digress.

| IP: Logged

Marcel Birgelen
Film God

Posts: 3357
From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Registered: Feb 2012

posted 12-30-2012 05:02 PM

quote: Bajsic Bojan
Working in a cinemateque I have seen a feature with instructions on when you should "play it back slower to achieve a more dramatic effect" and which sections should be played faster, in the same feature. Dont know what it was as that was some 8 years ago, but it was a silent movie from early 1900, so probably the instructions were for the people hand-cranking the projectors.

Those were the days when being a projectionist was a serious physical workout and your frame rate was dependent on how lazy or drunk your projectionist was [Wink]

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 12-30-2012 11:29 PM

While Ebert probably loved the hell outta the 48fps film demos, he's never sat through a full length dramatic movie in 48fps. Now he has to sit through one for 3 hours. Not only that, but in 3D. Ebert loves 3D more than life itself so that should not be a problem. But I wonder if he would still be so enthusiastic about 48fps in a full-length dramatic movie setting.

| IP: Logged

Jure Maticic
Film Handler

Posts: 18
From: Ljubljana / Slovenija
Registered: Sep 2012

posted 12-31-2012 08:44 AM

Well, I just saw The Hobbit yesterday on 35mm and it looks just fine, very "cinematic" actually ... a bit dark-ish in terms of contrast, but fine in all other aspects.

| IP: Logged

Manny Knowles
"What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???"

Posts: 4247
From: Bloomington, IN, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 12-31-2012 06:44 PM

I've seen it.

I hate it.

Pretty much everything you've heard is true.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 12-31-2012 07:12 PM

Told ya it was poo.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

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

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.