Support NeoGAF

[Raistlin]

9G Kuros have a frame interpolation mode called "smooth". It only refreshes at 60/72hz though so it isn't nearly as agregious as an LCD refreshing more often.

There are LCD's that do that as well.

Again, not all interpolation is the same. Not by a long shot.

 

[gohepcat]

Then you want 120Hz.

Movies are traditionally shot at 24fps.
A standard TV displays at 60fps.

60/24 = 2.5
Since you cannot have half a frame, you cannot display a movie on a standard TV in the same way its displayed in theaters. You have to do pulldown, which results in uneven frame lengths. It has to insert 'frames that aren't there'.

However, 120/24 = 5, therefore you can display a movie exactly as it was in theaters.

It drives me NUTS that people don't understand this.



Motionflow is just interpolation. You could do that with any frame count. They just tend to do it with 120Hz TVs because there isn't 120Hz content, aside from 3D stuff.

Ohhh god thank you for posting this. I was just going to post this.

I love the fact that 10 or 15 years ago people were spending 25 grand for this type of interpolation.

I don't have a 120Hz TV, so I don't know if this would bother me, but I do realize that people think it looks weird because of 30FPS sitcoms and soap operas. It has nothing to do with the actual quality.

 

[Sonki.]

How come everyone agrees that on movies it's shit, but the same cheap soap opera effect on video games is good?

Damn, you dumb

 

[Fenderputty]

Wipeout HD is already smooth as it is.

It still looks better on full motion plus. Video games and sports do. Nothing else does.

I totally agree with the premise of this thread though. Motion Plus sucks for watching cinema and regular old TV. I also agree that it isn't the tech that sucks, but the fact that I'm accustomed to seeing movie a certain way. Full or even half motion plus changes things and the look can be jarring.

 

[Esperado]

Interpolation definitely kills off the "dreamlike" effect of movie watching. With it on I really see every subtlety in the facial expressions and movements an actor makes and it turns these on screen characters in my head into real life performers. This really takes my head out of the fantasy that the movie is creating visually and lets me focus on things such as the unevenness of a camera movement and the backgrounds behind the characters. I can't explain it any better than just saying that you notice camera shakes that your brain doesn't process with 24 fps, and sets actually look like sets instead of actual places.

Oh yeah, and anytime live action is mixed with computer generated characters the difference in weight and motion between the two is amplified.

 

[moniker]

This video seems like an attempt: http://vimeo.com/12638783 (Jump to 37 seconds)

Most of that video seemed to be 24fps (or max 30). I don't understand German, but I see "120 fps" is mentioned. So they shot it at 120 fps and threw away most of the frames in post processing? What's the point of that?

 

[luoapp]

The worst part is that once you see it, you can't unsee it.

No interpolation algorithm can compete with the human brain's ability to interpolate the images correctly. No thank you, keep your artifacts to yourself.

If I tell you only 1 out of 15 frames is "real" image, others are all "interpolated", will you be surprised and throw out all your DVDs? Or you'd rather watch a slideshow and interpolate in your brain?

 

[Bömb]

Look at the "ee" laughing at us tv peasants.

?

 

[Slavik81]

What surprises me is how so many people think interpolation makes things look more 'real'. I didn't think the interpolation in current sets would be all that good. Interpolation is literally just upscaling, and given how badly most sets suck at upscaling over width and height, you'd think that they'd suck just as much at upscaling over time.

I'd like to see a comparison between real frames and Motionflow frames. Just capture some 120Hz footage, strip out every second frame and feed it through Motionflow. Then compare the intermediate frames Motionflow creates to the actual frames you removed.

Surely someone somewhere has done this.

Ohhh god thank you for posting this. I was just going to post this.

I love the fact that 10 or 15 years ago people were spending 25 grand for this type of interpolation.

I don't have a 120Hz TV, so I don't know if this would bother me, but I do realize that people think it looks weird because of 30FPS sitcoms and soap operas. It has nothing to do with the actual quality.

To be clear, my post was specifically how 120Hz allows you to avoid the 2:3 pull-up, which is basically nearest neighbor up-sampling.

You seem to be exposing the benefits of Motionflow-like interpolation, which is something that 120Hz makes possible, but is completely separate. I have not made any comments on the quality of interpolated 120Hz content because I have never seen it.

 

[MetalAlien]

Haters gonna hate. I love this mode. =)

..

 

[ScientificNinja]

Thank fucking Christ I'm not the only one who hates this shit. My father tried to make me watch Casino Royale on his mega-expensive 240Hz Samsung. Awful, awful stuff; I spent the rest of the week asking how/why this is desirable in home theater and determined that I must be getting old.

 

[MetalAlien]

I like it because it's like being there watching the event happen versus watching a movie of the event happening. Raiders of the Lost ark opening for example.

Gives you the effect that 3D is trying (and failing) to give. Placing you in the movie.

You also get the same effect with Imax 60fps. 24fps is horrible. I've never liked it.

 

[kevm3]

I turn the Motion Plus setting down to 2 or so on my Samsung.

Yeah pretty much this. Motion Blur reduction is set to 10 and dejudder is set to 2. Looks fantastic.

 

[Hixx]

I like it because it's like being there watching the event happen versus watching a movie of the event happening. Raiders of the Lost ark opening for example.

Gives you the effect that 3D is trying (and failing) to give. Placing you in the movie.

You also get the same effect with Imax 60fps. 24fps is horrible. I've never liked it.

Totally. I watched Inglourious Basterds on our new tv the other day with TruMotion on and the first scene was fucking stunning, like I was looking through a window.

 

[MattKeil]

I like it because it's like being there watching the event happen versus watching a movie of the event happening. Raiders of the Lost ark opening for example.

Gives you the effect that 3D is trying (and failing) to give. Placing you in the movie.

You also get the same effect with Imax 60fps. 24fps is horrible. I've never liked it.

Absurd. Film is 24fps, and should be viewed as such. I want to watch a James Bond movie, not someone filming Daniel Craig with a fucking handicam. Has reality TV just completely fucked the younger generation in the head or what? Is this an extension of how kids today don't find something funny unless it "really happened"?

 

[FunkyPajamas]

I'm probably going to be crucified here. I enjoyed watching dark knight with motionflow on. I enjoyed playing borderlands with motionflow on (yes, I turned off game mode just to test this. It looked like 60fps to me). Every other movie I've watched just feels wrong, be it dvd or bluray.

 

[MetalAlien]

Absurd. Film is 24fps, and should be viewed as such. I want to watch a James Bond movie, not someone filming Daniel Craig with a fucking handicam. Has reality TV just completely fucked the younger generation in the head or what? Is this an extension of how kids today don't find something funny unless it "really happened"?

I'm 40.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

interesting thread. I am glad I finally learned about this. I thought it was just my eyes messing with me.. my tv has been doing this for 2-3 years. I will see if I can turn it on. Mine is a samsung 40 1080i LCD!


I always thought it was a higher framerate.. that was what it looked like to me. it was like more frames was being added, and it took away from the film look with 24/25 that we are so used to in our ficton and perception of visual beauty on cinema on and on TV.


but dont listen to me. I am a borderline retard who didn't even finished highscool:lol

 

[NekoFever]

I am a fan of 120Hz because it can display all major framerates natively (30, 60, and 24 fps) without pulldown and the resulting motion judder. Not a fan of your TV adding stuff that isn't there through interpolation though.

600Hz is the lowest that can do all major frame rates. 50Hz is still the standard in many PAL territories and a 600Hz TV can do 24, 30, 50 and 60 without pulldown.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_vhZTivufXLc/S7Uvy-dTuSI/AAAAAAAAALU/W1MGUkJrSeI/s1600/TrollFace.png ?

Goddammit. Can't unsee it.

 

[BananaBomb]

can i get a video of this please?

 

[Fusebox]

Welcome to 1990's Loewe TV processing.

I agree with the haters, it makes Hollywood films look like 'the making of' special about the film.

 

[DonMigs85]

Welcome to 1990's Loewe TV processing.

I agree with the haters, it makes Hollywood films look like 'the making of' special about the film.

It has no place in games either. It wasn't intended by the developers, and it can increase input lag as well.

 

[Dan]

Threads like this reinforce my strong belief that kids need to be taught fundamentals of media consumption, and how and why our visual arts operate the way they do.

And another thing....everything a film maker does is to make their scene/movie as real as possible.

Yeah... absolutely false. There is no shortage of extremely common techniques that have no relevance to how we see the world but when on film we click over to thinking it mimics reality.

I personally love the fact that Forza 3's replays look like they're running at 60fps. I also love the fact that most of my games, which ran at 30fps, are given a frame rate boost. Gears of War 2, Alan Wake, even Uncharted 2 look so much better.

*facepalm*

 

[Dreams-Visions]

I visited a friend's house and he wanted to show me Transformers 2 on bluray on his new Samsung LCD 52" TV. And as we're watching it, the motion looked really weird: Like hyper-real, and the picture looked like everyone was on a stage, in a play. It looked really wack, for lack of a better word.

My verbal reaction was, "Why does it look like that?" To which he replied, "Because it's Bluray." And I was like, "No, it looks funny." As reference, I have a PS3 and a Panasonic Plasma.

I grabbed his remote and noticed he had 120hz mode on. I shut it off and everything went back to normal: The scenes looked as they did in the theater, and the strange "stage" effect was removed.

So I have to ask LCD users out there: How on earth can you watch anything in 120hz mode?? It's so unnatural and uncanny looking?

Thoughts?

I turned that "feature" down so low it's almost off.

and yes, it makes movies look terrible. like they were recorded with a handycam.

 

[Slavik81]

Threads like this reinforce my strong belief that kids need to be taught fundamentals of media consumption, and how and why our visual arts operate the way they do.

I'd prefer Discrete Signals & Systems.

 

[Why For?]

Motion Flow and all that other bullshit just ups the framerate basically.

It's the most retarted thing to happen to TVs. It was brought it for older LCDs that couldn't handle motion very well, and for some fucked up reason they persist with it in newer LCDs, and even put it in Plasmas:lol :lol :lol

Anyone who watches HDTV with an increased frame rate needs their head examined.

 

[Pimpwerx]

WTF is wrong with you people? I have a A650 and leave it on all the time. I think the smoothness is amazing. The problem is the glitching. It really wasn't perfected on the model I own. I think the 240Hz sets look amazing. PEACE.

 

[abstract alien]

I love it on animations, nature shows and some action scenes...not so much on movies with nothing going on(such as a standard comedy, drama, etc) or horror films.

 

[ExMachina]

600Hz is the lowest that can do all major frame rates. 50Hz is still the standard in many PAL territories and a 600Hz TV can do 24, 30, 50 and 60 without pulldown.

Whoops, sorry. Should've said "in my region" after that statement. ^^;

I thought all 24fps material was converted to 25fps when released in PAL regions anyways, so there never was a problem with pulldown judder for movies since PAL sets are 50 or 100Hz.

 

[Fusebox]

It's the most retarted thing to happen to TVs. It was brought it for older LCDs that couldn't handle motion very well, and for some fucked up reason they persist with it in newer LCDs, and even put it in Plasmas:lol :lol :lol

Anyone who watches HDTV with an increased frame rate needs their head examined.

What? Loewe have been using motion processing like this in their CRT range long before LCDs.

 

[Pimpwerx]

The worst part is that once you see it, you can't unsee it.

No interpolation algorithm can compete with the human brain's ability to interpolate the images correctly. No thank you, keep your artifacts to yourself.

There's a nice way of saying no tv set can compete with rose-tinted glasses. Just because our brains are hardwired a certain way doesn't make the resulting image inferior. Some sets do indeed have shitty blending, but I'd say a DSP can do a hell of a lot better interpreting motion than our brains. If our brains did a better job, the difference with smoothing turned on wouldn't be so jarring. All this is doing is blending frames that are already there. PEACE.

 

[vicissitudes]

That's what I said. At either time = 49ms or time = 51ms it's going to have a different frame than what the original source had at that time. It's a frame that did not exist in that place in the original source. Well, technically only half the frame.

We agree entirely on what is happening. The only part we disagree one is what it means for a frame from the output to exist in the original source. I include both content and the interval of time over which its displayed in my definition, while you only include its content.

Perhaps your definition is better, but the idea I'm trying to make clear is that some frames in a 60Hz viewing of a 24p movie will be different from what you'd see if you were watching a native 24Hz display, but a 120Hz display will be identical to the native one.

Okay yeah, we're talking about the same thing. Just making sure.

I don't know a thing about film so what does being a prick accomplish?

Post processing is a huge part of film making magic. Color filters and whatever else they do. I don't see how better motion completely kills the cinema effect everyone loves.

Thus, that's why i'm asking.

Haha, relax I was trying to make a joke because it seemed like you wanted to go from 24fps to 60fps and then make it look like it's filmed in 24fps. I don't know, maybe that would be better than what we have now. But I'm of the opinion that if it's not broken, don't fix it, and it seems like everyone likes the 24fps look so why bother messing with it.

 

[Anth0ny]

It looks horrible, and my neighbor had it on his HDTV for the longest time. It was bad to the point that friends and I wouldn't want to watch movies at his house :lol

Luckily, he fixed it. When I finally invest in an HDTV, I'll be turning that shit off too.

 

[FleckSplat]

I hate the so-called "soap opera" effect.

 

[Why For?]

What? Loewe have been using motion processing like this in their CRT range long before LCDs.

Yeah, forgot about that, not even sure why Loewe introduced it. But Early LCDs had it basically for sport to avoid all the ghosting and shit.

Not sure why TVs made past late 2008/early 2009 have it.

 

[Wario64]

I hope the people who like this mode also like their input lag in their video games

 

[DonMigs85]

Blah blah blah PEACE.

Stop it!

 

[Baraka in the White House]

I had no idea so many people hated 120hz. I walked into the Sony store one day and they had the ending of Rocky 6 playing. I was like, "WTF is going on with the motion? It's like faster than normal movies or something?"

Are movies suppose to be like that?

NO. And you're supposed to hate it! Are you hating it yet? Because if not then you're enjoying it wrong.

I hope the people who like this mode also like their input lag in their video games

Thank goodness for that nifty little, "off" option.

 

[industrian]

I remember once watching an episode of Voyager (nothing else on) and everything looked far too "smooth" and weird. I guess this thread explains why.

 

[MrPliskin]

Spoiler

We're also stuck with blurry, juddery, slow-panning 24fps movies forever because (thanks to 60fps home video) people associate high framerates with camcorders and cheap sitcoms, and thus think good framerates look "fake".

There is a certain 'fantasy' nature that comes with shooting at 24fps. It gives a silky smooth vision with blur and conveys motion considerably better than high frame rates.

 

[mYm|17|]

First time I saw something in 120 was Iron Man. Holy shit did it look weird

 

[bumbillbee]

Mystery solved! I was at a friend's house once and I was really high. When we decided to watch a movie, I almost started freaking out at how weird it looked, but just attributed it to the weed. But I'm sure it was this, now.

 

[optimiss]

I like the motion interpolation. I use PowereDVD to add the effect to stuff I watch on my PC. It was hard to get used to, but once you do, you don't even notice it anymore.

 

[DonMigs85]

I like the motion interpolation. I use PowereDVD to add the effect to stuff I watch on my PC. It was hard to get used to, but once you do, you don't even notice it anymore.

Then shouldn't it just be left off?

 

[BocoDragon]

If I had a TV that supported this, I would definitely leave it off most of the time... but there might be the occasional piece of content where the effect would compliment it?

How does it look during the racing scenes of Speed Racer, for example? It might just add to the trippiness.

 

[DonMigs85]

If I had a TV that supported this, I would definitely leave it off most of the time... but there might be the occasional piece of content where the effect would compliment it?

How does it look during the racing scenes of Speed Racer, for example? It might just add to the trippiness.

not too bad, makes it look even more videogamey. Of course it's terrible in the talking scenes.
Come to think of it even without any "enhancement" this movie had a lot of weird rapidly moving stuff, like the people on Segways.

 

[BocoDragon]

not too bad, makes it look even more videogamey. Of course it's terrible in the talking scenes.
Come to think of it even without any "enhancement" this movie had a lot of weird rapidly moving stuff, like the people on Segways.

I think it would be interesting to try on any show that has strange, unconventional animation, such as A Scanner Darkly, Waking Life, Samurai Jack...

These shows aren't trying to be realistic (unlike live action or even Pixar/Disney), so motionflow might just add another layer of surreality.

 

[bigcheese]

I think I know what you're talking about. I was at Costco and they had Robin Hood playing, and everything that was in motion looked weird, like...fake and out of place.

 

[optimiss]

Then shouldn't it just be left off?

You could probably make that argument for some people, but I like to try to embrace new technologies so I gave it a chance. Turns out it's only weird because it is new. Once it was no longer new, it ceased to be weird, and I started to enjoy the sense of realism that it creates.

 

[BocoDragon]

You could probably make that argument for some people, but I like to try to embrace new technologies so I gave it a chance. Turns out it's only weird because it is new. Once it was no longer new, it ceased to be weird, and I started to enjoy the sense of realism that it creates.

You're worse than Hitler.