have you ever heard anything named rental company? you buy cameras and rent them..
oh god its enough i quit..enough trollin for myself...
This is the 2nd time you have said you quit. Please be serious this time.
have you ever heard anything named rental company? you buy cameras and rent them..
oh god its enough i quit..enough trollin for myself...
have you ever heard anything named rental company? you buy cameras and rent them..
oh god its enough i quit..enough trollin for myself...
Hahaha, holy shit, wasn't he giving you shit for about not being able to afford things and then he admits he doesn't own it but rents? Holy crap!
Maybe this belongs in the hobbit production thread, but does this mean there will be 4 versions of this movie in theaters?
2d 24p
2d 48p
3d 24p
3d 48p
?
Also I think I can understand why 48p will be better, especially for 3d (I just saw titanic in 3d and anything with fast movement just looked a mess), but (a) I don't care for 3d and (b) I have a hatred of MotionFlow, and even though 48p is technically different since it's actual information, if there is any similarity then it will probably grind my gears.
Last question, what's it gonna take to watch 48p at home? 24p just needs a 120hz display and blu ray right?
After less than glowing audience reaction to clips of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey screened in ultra-high-resolution at CinemaCon in Las Vegas, director Peter Jackson says Nobody is going to stop. This technology is going to keep evolving. But he hopes moviegovers will wait and judge the finished movie when it comes out December 14. Some observers at the CinemaCon presention thought the imagery shot and projected at 48 frames per second was too sharply different visually from the longtime industry standard of 24 frames per second. A three-time Oscar winner echoed Jacksons observation. I think we should let him finish it and see what its like then, but it seems a little like the look of a soap opera. Jackson said he noticed that some in the audience seemed to like it more as the show went on. I just wonder if it they were getting into the dialogue, the characters and the story. Thats what happens in the movie. You settle into it.
Updated the article with the gifs. I still don't think they're long enough to provide a good comparison, but it's better then 30fps youtube videos.
Bluerei that 48fps video was awesome. Really changed my opinion on 48fps. Not impressed that its "technically" better but that it has its own unique look.
Well obviously.
Did we get a huge influx of users from IGN or something in the last couple months?
Are you referring to me?
No. I had multiple tabs open and was meant to be posting in TDKR thread.
Reads like something you'd see on Nolanfans.com
Lets face it, anyone here at neogaf was probably also subbed to IGN at some point.
Lets face it, anyone here at neogaf was probably also subbed to IGN at some point.
Also 4k revs, though I don't know how many versions of that there will be.Maybe this belongs in the hobbit production thread, but does this mean there will be 4 versions of this movie in theaters?
2d 24p
2d 48p
3d 24p
3d 48p
?
Unfortunately HDMI isn't designed to support 48p, so we'll probably need new TV's.Last question, what's it gonna take to watch 48p at home? 24p just needs a 120hz display and blu ray right?
Well, we do have precedent for Middle Earth movies split across multiple discs to preserve image quality.
Could you imagine viewing some of the best fight/actions scenes with such clarity and crispness?
Unfortunately HDMI isn't designed to support 48p, so we'll probably need new TV's.
For those who did not download the video:
24fps
48fps
Simply isn't part of the specification. An HDMI Rx (and further down the pipe, the video processor in the TV) is expecting specific resolutions and framerates so it knows how to process it. The reason it's not there though is because there hasn't been a reason to include it. No content and thus no displays designed to support it directly. Combine those and there's no reason to bother including it in HDMI.Why can it support gamings 60fps or framerate drops though?
What hits me about the acuity of 48fps versus the blurring of 24fps is that it may break the illusion of a fantasy setting, at least initially. This may be good for modern day movies and better yet Sci-Fi but introducing it with an epic fantasy like The Hobbit may be off putting.
Because apparently people were born with vaseline in their eyes during medieval times.
lol i kid
48fps will be great for action movies. Can't wait for Cameron to use this for Battle Angel, to see clear action scenes without the blurriness that 24fps have.
You can have 60fps at 720p.My biggest concern is Blu Ray spec, since it's either 24p or 60i :/ I'd hate to learn that the home version of the movie is just 24p.
Hopefully they'll just update it like they did for 3D...?
None will sync to it natively.I think Cameron is gunning for 60fps here on out.
I think 48fps looks fine but I'm just worried about how 48fps will work on home displays since only a few have refresh rates that will synch properly to it.
Which would produce a telecine judder pattern that's more irregular than 24p on a 60Hz display.You can have 60fps at 720p.
They probably could but it would only work with newer players or limited older ones. Doubling the framerate can increase the decoding requirements quite a bit and would cause other complications as well. (greater storage requirement, won't work with slower drives, though that's mostly irrelevant since newer players mostly have 2x drives at least)My biggest concern is Blu Ray spec, since it's either 24p or 60i :/ I'd hate to learn that the home version of the movie is just 24p.
Hopefully they'll just update it like they did for 3D...?
I bet most people watched the sample vids at 60hz and didn't mind judder too much.Which would produce a telecine judder pattern that's more irregular than 24p on a 60Hz display.
I'll pass.
TVs can handle 1080 48p video just fine over HDMI. If it isn't supported it'll be because content providers will restrict it using HDCP.Simply isn't part of the specification. An HDMI Rx (and further down the pipe, the video processor in the TV) is expecting specific resolutions and framerates so it knows how to process it.
I was talking about for 60fps content. I doubt 48fps content will be released in anything other than 24fps unless our TVs and BR players are changed to officially support it.Which would produce a telecine judder pattern that's more irregular than 24p on a 60Hz display.
I'll pass.
Because apparently people were born with vaseline in their eyes during medieval times.
lol i kid
You can have 60fps at 720p.
It's funny, 48fps films can be released with real 24fps versions, but we currently can't play 48fps at home, 60fps can't be used to make 24fps versions, but we can watch them with our current TVs.
Nope.I thought you could do 1080/60, just not 1080/60/3D?
Nope.
1920×1080 29.97-i 16:9
1920×1080 25-i 16:9
1920×1080 24-p 16:9
1920×1080 23.976-p 16:9
1440×1080 29.97-i 16:9 (anamorphic)
1440×1080 25-i 16:9 (anamorphic)
1440×1080 24-p 16:9 (anamorphic)
1440×1080 23.976-p 16:9 (anamorphic)
1280×720 59.94-p 16:9
1280×720 50-p 16:9
1280×720 24-p 16:9
1280×720 23.976-p 16:9
720×480 29.97-i 4:3/16:9 (anamorphic)
720×576 25-i 4:3/16:9 (anamorphic)
Yeah, it's BR. HDMI 1.3 can support 1080p/60fps.Is that a blu-ray spec issue or an HDMI issue? 1080p/60fps games run fine on modern displays.
48fps will be great for action movies. Can't wait for Cameron to use this for Battle Angel, to see clear action scenes without the blurriness that 24fps have.
Yeah, it's BR. HDMI 1.3 can support 1080p/60fps.