3 ms·

I saw the Hobbit movies at 48fps and it was not good. There is something about our brains that makes us reject higher frame rate footage as being... subjective

I saw the Hobbit movies at 48fps and it was not good. There is something about our brains that makes us reject higher frame rate footage as being... subjectively unappealing. A casual perusal of the reviews of the Hobbit HFR films, reveals that most people agree with this assessment. I don't think anyone who paid extra to go and see one of the HFR showings could be labeled as "stuck in the past", but at this point I am definitely not going to advocate for 60fps in the future. Not because I am resistant to new formats but because I like movies that I watch to be "good" and higher frame rate presentations (whether by frame interpolation or by original photography) seem to be less good.

twoodfin 8y ago
I believe Kubrick would have loved the challenge of exploiting HFR. NASA cameras for Barry Lyndon and all that... The Hobbit films were a terrible choice to introduce the tech to a mainstream audience for any number of reasons, the heavy dependence on makeup and other “artifice” for the production not least.
tgb 8y ago
On the other hand, I feel almost nauseous every time I see a panning shot in a standard 24fps film. They look choppy to an extreme that makes me wonder how anyone let that through production but I guess it's just standard now. I would really like to see the switch to higher frame rates made for that problem alone.
sp332 8y ago
I think it's because of the motion blur. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8793346#8794004 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8793346#8794004 With only 24 fps, we have come to depend on motion blur on each frame to give us motion information. It can be manipulated intentionally (like removing motion blur to make moves in a fight scene feel more abrupt), but if changes don't match what we expect it can feel weird.
baby 8y ago
Watch all the hobbits in 48FPS and then try to go back to 24fps and you will see that 24fps now looks laggy and unnatural

twoodfin 8y ago

I believe Kubrick would have loved the challenge of exploiting HFR. NASA cameras for Barry Lyndon and all that... The Hobbit films were a terrible choice to introduce the tech to a mainstream audience for any number of reasons, the heavy dependence on makeup and other “artifice” for the production not least.

tgb 8y ago

On the other hand, I feel almost nauseous every time I see a panning shot in a standard 24fps film. They look choppy to an extreme that makes me wonder how anyone let that through production but I guess it's just standard now. I would really like to see the switch to higher frame rates made for that problem alone.

sp332 8y ago

I think it's because of the motion blur. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8793346#8794004 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8793346#8794004 With only 24 fps, we have come to depend on motion blur on each frame to give us motion information. It can be manipulated intentionally (like removing motion blur to make moves in a fight scene feel more abrupt), but if changes don't match what we expect it can feel weird.

baby 8y ago

Watch all the hobbits in 48FPS and then try to go back to 24fps and you will see that 24fps now looks laggy and unnatural