[Edmond Dantès]

Pretty significant news regarding The Hobbit and the future of film in general, so a separate thread seems appropriate.

Impressions so far:

The 48fps footage I saw looked terrible. It looked completely non-cinematic. The sets looked like sets. I've been on sets of movies on the scale of The Hobbit, and sets don't even look like sets when you're on them live... but these looked like sets. The other comparison I kept coming to, as I was watching the footage, was that it all looked like behind the scenes video. The magical illusion of cinema is stripped away completely.

http://badassdigest.com/2012/04/24/c...mes-per-secon/

In the opening minutes, I thought to myself "this looks like the TV department when they turn on 120Hz or TruMotion or whatever they call it". At once, it really doesn’t look like that. The smooth motion clarity is similar, but the 120Hz TV setting is the TV inventing visual information to fill in loads of completely nonexistent frames, creating the bullshit garbage you see walking through most TV departments in stores. Again, there is an element that 48fps and TruMotion share (which is where the comparison comes from), but 48 fps does not simply “look like Korean soap operas” or TruMotion-enhanced TV images. That’s a reductive, sensationalist, utterly bullshit equivocation. To be honest, it kind of terrified me at first. In his pre-recorded intro, Peter Jackson said that the reason we were seeing 10 minutes of content was that "it takes your eyes a little bit to adjust", and that is absolutely the case. The immersive experience was not immediate, but gradual. I felt much more comfortable toward the end of the presentation, but still disconcerted and outside a comfort zone. I have major reservations, but at the same time am beyond awed at many elements of what hit my visual cortex. Recalling the sweeping landscape shots they opened with now, I almost feel tears welling, and I can’t explain why. It was overwhelming in the most literal sense. It directly assaults your synapses with twice as much information through your retinas as you have become conditioned to expect. I did not see the digital seams around creatures like Gollum and the trolls, a major benefit over 24fps. The creatures had a sense of mass in the environment, which was disconcerting in a good way.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/55212

I felt astonished & amazed...the term is WOWED...and yet a bit uncertain about the 48 fps 3D footage from Peter Jackson's "The Hobbit." The fact is that 48 fps 3D is the most startlingly "real" 3D I've ever seen in my life. The downside for older types is that it's too real. In a word, 48 fps 3D looks like high-def video. It doesn't look "cinematic", lacking that filtered or gauzy look we're all accustomed to. And yet it's breathtaking, especially w/ action scenes and CG stuff. Younger auds will cream in their pants. Older viewers not so much. Our sense of cnema as we know it changed radically today. Henceforth 48 fps will not just become the norm but we're going to hear calls...

https://twitter.com/#!/wellshwood

RE: the 48 frames. I think it will take a bit of adjusting our expectations, but I've never a movie that jumps off the screen and immerses you in the film the way this 10 minute piece did. RE: the performances. On par with Lord of the Rings, with Martin Freeman appearing to be the perfect Bilbo.

http://movies.about.com/b/2012/04/24...e-screened.htm


=========================================================================== =========================================================

48fps examples - Credit goes to bluerei for the amazing footage.

Video Files
GIF of 24fps
GIF of 48fps

[Ceebs]

As someone who hates 3D this will probably only be worth it for CG animated stuff. The impressions from the on set stuff sounds as bad as expected.

[Crunched]

Unsurprising impressions. I think the most salient comment is about younger audiences being wowed and older ones put off.

[strafer]

:(

[Sir Fragula]

Really hope people learn to love 48fps. I hate how temporal resolution just hasn't improved in decades.

[krameriffic]

So it's gonna be that thread, where we all argue about cinematic "purity".

I can't wait for the Half in the Bag review of The Hobbit just to hear them talk about this. It's the only place I know to get a relatable, candid conversation about this kind of stuff from people with filmmaking experience.

[mrkgoo]

Interesting.

Not a fan of tru-motion stuff, and from first impressions, the initial vibe you get is that it's similar. I will give it a go though.

[rozay]

Considering how most people eat up the TruMotoion 120hz bullcrap for 24fps movies, I think it'll be accepted just fine. Can't wait to see this, even though I know my brain isn't going to take well to it.

[cutmeamango]

Good thing we have quotes to please both extremes!

It is a gorgeous stunning what the fuck is this shit? looks like a set, a beautiful one that is and this sucks but it feels so good that right now all I can feel is apathy.

[MattKeil]

Really hope people learn to love 48fps. I hate how temporal resolution just hasn't improved in decades.

Yes, I can't wait for movies to look like someone's backyard home videos. I hope this trend dies even faster than 3D.

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

Jackson has trended downwards. I'm inclined to believe the apprehensive takes on his styles usage of 48fps.

[Flo_Evans]

I think it could really be amazing for certain types of movies.

Kung Fu flicks would be awesome. I think it might actually hinder a fantasy setting like LoTR.

[squidyj]

48fps wtf? why not 60? this is a ploy to sell more 240hz tvs :l

[Kud Dukan]

Yes, I can't wait for movies to look like someone's backyard home videos. I hope this trend dies even faster than 3D.

Yes, that's exactly what it looks like.

[dbztrk]

I'm intrigued...

[ThatCrazyGuy]

Yes, I can't wait for movies to look like someone's backyard home videos. I hope this trend dies even faster than 3D.

You really think it will look like backyard movies? OK......

[Foliorum Viridum]

Is there any footage of it online? I'd like to see it for myself.

24fps really looks jarring to me lots of times. I don't buy that 48fps would look like a soap if done right.

I'm inclined to think the 24 > 48 people will be like the nutters who believe 30 > 60 when it comes to gaming.

[FLEABttn]

Is 48fps something that can be released on current home video or is this the first movie that will force me to see it in the theater in 2 years?

[Branduil]

Bah, moving pictures, they say? The people will never accept this, just look at how inferior it looks compared to still fotographs. These so-called "move-ies" are a fad, a childish novelty for the fat cats just like the aero-plane and the horseless carriage.

[Jarmel]

Wow at those impressions not nearly as positive as I imagined.

[Crunched]

You really think it will look like backyard movies? OK......

Hey, these are big budget backyard movies alright

[Spiffy_1st]

I'd prefer if 48fps were to be tested on a more low profile film, so if it really does ruin the film, no one would care.

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

Baby steps. Hopefully we'll graduate to 60fps soon enough.

Action movies are going to be so much better.

[Futureman]

In Nolan We Trust.

[Ceebs]

I still do not get the need for all this new cinema tech. Well made movies still shot the old fashioned way still look stunning on a big screen. Put your tech advances into the CG space as that still looks off in certain applications.

[Ferrio]

I really dislike the hate to higher framerate movies.

I'd prefer if 48fps were to be tested on a more low profile film, so if it really does ruin the film, no one would care.

No one would give it a chance.

[darthbob]

48fps wtf? why not 60? this is a ploy to sell more 240hz tvs :l

Because film is shot at 24FPS.

[Grakl]

Good thing we have quotes to please both extremes! It is a gorgeous stunning what the fuck is this shit? looks like a set, a beautiful one that is and this sucks but it feels so good that right now all I can feel is apathy.

sounds exactly what I hate to love

Can't wait for the glorious 48fps revolution.

[ThatCrazyGuy]

Hey, these are big budget backyard movies alright

Well, if you put it that way, the set is probably SOMEBODY'S backyard. We are all doomed!

[shagg_187]

Doesn't 48p means 24p for each eye on 3D. If so, sign me up. If not then no thanks.

[ViewtifulJC]

Expendable Am Cry

[Discotheque]

I'd prefer if 48fps were to be tested on a more low profile film, so if it really does ruin the film, no one would care.

Yeah same. It's probably some amazing tech but I'm a bit apprehensive about it being applied to a fantasy setting. Especially my movie of the year.

[Crunched]

Is there any footage of it online? I'd like to see it for myself. 24fps really looks jarring to me lots of times. I don't buy that 48fps would look like a soap if done right. I'm inclined to think the 24 > 48 people will be like the nutters who believe 30 > 60 when it comes to gaming.

24 fps suffers during some camera movements, but there is a dreamlike, almost creamy quality about slower frame rates that's very appealing in film. It's not really an analogue to gaming, where lower frame rates directly affect user input.

That said, I'm hoping it will impress more than 24 fps 3D.

[WillyFive]

I'd prefer if 48fps were to be tested on a more low profile film, so if it really does ruin the film, no one would care.

That's the best way to make sure it is never accepted.

[civilstrife]

Oh god, I hope the studios don't axe 48 fps before the movie comes out.

[PaleFolklore]

I'd prefer if 48fps were to be tested on a more low profile film, so if it really does ruin the film, no one would care.

It's relatively easy to project 48 fps at 24 fps and I wouldn't be surprised if most theaters were slow to adopt the software update required to project at 48 fps. I imagine most theaters will be playing it at 24 fps.

[Marty Chinn]

Man, I called it. Just exactly as I feared.

[EmSeta]

I find the negativity baffling. You guys realize that the ONLY reason you're bashing this is because you're not used to it, don't you?

It's like turning down HD because it looks "unfamiliar". Just get used to it - and you won't want to go back.

[Plywood]

First two impressions can go fuck right off.

[Discotheque]

I hope these mofos do a public preview or release a 48fps trailer or something. I really want to see what this looks like. Pre-judgement is already beginning.

[Foliorum Viridum]

24 fps suffers during some camera movements, but there is a dreamlike, almost creamy quality about slower frame rates that's very appealing in film. It's not really an analogue to gaming, where lower frame rates directly affect user input.

It certainly doesn't impact your enjoyment as much as it does in gaming, but I honestly don't think I'd miss it. I can only imagine 48fps would be a complete improvement.

There are SO many examples where I've watched a film and the framerate has taken me out of the moment. I'll take that being fixed over a huge leap in CGI or something.

[Gattsu25]

Why is this only 48fps?

[Ferrio]

Wonder if the same thing happened with the shift from black&white to color?

[Loxley]

I think for the time being I'll sit back let the initial wave of non-Hobbit OT reading GAF come in with the expected "Pff, I knew it would suck, Jackson's a hack." comments and chime in later on once the first few pages have gone by.

[a Master Ninja]

Will higher framerates make shaky-cam movies more watchable or less?

[Marty Chinn]

Will higher framerates make shaky-cam movies more watchable or less?

In some ways more, in some ways less. Depends on your tolerance to motion sickness.

Wonder if the same thing happened with the shift from black&white to color?

Nope, Wizard of Oz was met with amazement.

[Branduil]

Will higher framerates make shaky-cam movies more watchable or less?

Well, they would be less blurry, at least.

[Draconian]

I think for the time being I'll sit back let the initial wave of non-Hobbit OT reading GAF come in with the expected "Pff, I knew it would suck, Jackson's a hack." comments and chime in later on once the first few pages have gone by.

Probably a safe idea with just about any OT of popular films really.

[WillyFive]

Will higher framerates make shaky-cam movies more watchable or less?

It doesn't change how watchable it is, it's just more obvious what is going on on-screen. Which judging from shows like Kamen Rider, it makes it seem a lot cheaper because your vision is no longer obscured by motion blur. But it should be noted that those shows were not 48fps, just higher than 24fps.

[shagg_187]

Why is this only 48fps?

24p per eye for 3D if I am correct.