4 ms·
> This sounds like pure marketing drivel. Just take a look at video games and the disparity of consoles being (largely) locked around 30 fps and PC that can rea
by moogleii 10y ago
> This sounds like pure marketing drivel. Just take a look at video games and the disparity of consoles being (largely) locked around 30 fps and PC that can reach 100+ fps. While a higher framerate can give the appearance of smoother gameplay -- which is disputed beyond a certain threshold -- it never makes it "unsettling" or more realistic.
That's not the best analogy. Video games inherently don't look realistic (currently). 3000 fps of rendered Mickey the Mouse isn't going to make him suddenly look like live-action. He will only ever be a collection of polygons and textures. Live-action movies, however, use reality as a source. Fiddling with FPS can't add more realism to reality, it only can maintain or obscure it.
Ironically, that's why HFR makes many films actually look worse IMO. Ever watch a behind the scenes of a film and think, those sets look so obviously fake and those costumes look like bad cosplay? With HFR, all those painted sets and lighting tricks they use become apparent for what they actually are. Whereas before you were watching a film, now you are obviously watching actors on a set. Mission successful (or failure, depending on the perspective), realism achieved, you are now sitting on the set in the director's seat, viewing it as he saw it, instead of watching the film from the audiences' eyes. IMO, until filmmakers can get their sets/costumes to look realistic without post processing and lighting, HFR won't help. But judging from the topic of this film, the material lends itself well to HFR.
- spc476 10y agoHeck, I saw Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan in HD several years ago and man, it looked awful. Gone was the Star Ship Enterprise, Kirk and Spock. Instead, I got a half-baked set and some old actors in obvious costumes. It was painful to watch. Ronin (the next film being shown) didn't fare much better, looking like a TV soap opera.
- some-guy 10y agoIf you think that's bad, watching Wizard of Oz in high definition.
- gambiting 10y agoIn Star Wars: New Hope, you can tell that Vader's costume is just some plastic that was very poorly painted and glued together. Only in HD you can see brush marks on the chest plate, and it pulls you out of the experience.
- eridius 10y agoI'm convinced the whole reason for the dwarf song in Bilbo's house at the beginning of The Hobbit was just to distract viewers from the HFR long enough for it to stop looking weird. And at least for me, it worked. The first few minutes of that film everything looked odd, and then the rest of the film looked great.
- seanp2k2 10y agoIMO it still looked like puppets or something and not a movie. I saw it opening night at Sundance Kabuki and it was amazingly clear, but very weird and distracting. I love gaming at 120hz but I'm fine with cinema at 24. It could be awesome for documentaries and nature-type things though, but the bandwidth requirements to do HDR 4K at 120hz seems massive, and I'm not aware of any consumer TVs which even support that right now (Vizio 2016 P series can do 120hz at 1080 but only 60hz at 4K).
- eridius 10y agoOne of the big benefits of HDR is made the 3D effect excellent. Zero eye strain, I didn't notice any ghosting effects, and overall it was a joy to watch.
- eru 10y ago> [...] but the bandwidth requirements to do HDR 4K at 120hz seems massive, [...] Should be too bad? The extra frames that 120Hz squeezes in between the 30Hz frames should not contain too much more information? (Ie 120Hz should use less than 4 times as much bandwidth as 30Hz.) I expect similar sublinear scaling for resolution in space.
- seanp2k2 10y agoIMO it still looked like puppets or something and not a movie. I saw it opening night at Sundance Kabuki and it was amazingly clear, but very weird and distracting. I love gaming at 120hz but I'm fine with cinema at 24. It could be awesome for documentaries and nature-type things though, but the bandwidth requirements to do HDR 4K at 120hz seems massive, and I'm not aware of any consumer TVs which even support that right now (Vizio 2016 P series can do 120hz at 1080 but only 60hz at 4K).