7 ms·

> is an immediately obvious improvement. Technically, yes. I'm one of those weirdos who thinks movies aesthetically look better at 24 frames for the "dreamlik

• alex_duf 8y ago
  I'm with you, I remember watching the Hobbit at the theater, and being creeped out by how surreal all the movement were. I'm okay with playing video games at 60fps, but my brain keeps rejecting photorealistic content above 30fps
  • Figs 8y ago
    As someone who has watched a lot of Let's Plays, recordings of games done above 30 FPS kind of weird me out. I don't usually have an issue playing them myself, but if I watch a recording of someone else's session (which is interesting to me from a game design perspective -- where did they get stuck, what did they breeze through with no challenge, etc.), I get that same surreal "something's not quite right here" feeling as higher frame rate television.
    • stordoff 8y ago
      Huh, I get the opposite (for games I've seen running at 60) - footage recorded at 30fps looks a little off to me.
• Paperweight 8y ago
  24 fps is an art medium with certain features and incentives. Its moving shots are automatically blurry, and the audience is used to that, so you can use them to, e.g., give the audience's attention a rest between two important still shots. Similarly, just because you can technically put the entire scene into focus all the time doesn't mean you necessarily want to!
  • mrob 8y ago
    >Similarly, just because you can technically put the entire scene into focus all the time doesn't mean you necessarily want to! Sometimes you technically can't put the entire scene into focus. Even if you have unlimited lighting, there's only so far you can stop down the aperture before diffraction wipes out your depth-of-field improvement. Citizen Kane famously used composite shots to achieve extreme deep focus that would have been impossible as a single shot. I'd love to see another attempt at a photorealistic 100% CG movie like Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. We'd be free from the limitations of real world optics, and could produce a "hyperrealistic" style even better than what you can see with the naked eye. I find shallow depth of field almost as annoying as low frame rate.
    • ChrisSD 8y ago
      > I'd love to see another attempt at a photorealistic 100% CG movie Isn't that what Disney's Lion King remake is doing?
      • mrob 8y ago
        I watched the trailer, and it has some impressive CG, but I think it's cheating to use animals. It's easier to spot flaws in CG human characters. I still count FF:TSW as the most ambitious CG animated movie ever made.
        • aidenn0 8y ago
          I hadn't seen it since it was in the theater, so I just watched a trailer. The CG holds up surprisingly well (modulo the uncanny valley) considering it will be old enough to vote next year.
• tw04 8y ago
  Add me to the list! I hate the way movies look at higher frame rates but the broad category of sports (traditional/e/motor/etc) all look much better.
• Chazprime 8y ago
  A movie at a frame rate higher than 24 looks strangely “cheap” to some of us. I believe it’s because on a subliminal level, the higher frame rate reminds us of a television broadcast.
  • fred256 8y ago
    Also known as the "soap opera effect": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_interpolation#Soap_opera_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_interpolation#Soap_oper...
    • josteink 8y ago
      This is definitely real. This was quite noticeable to a trained eye in the finale episode of David Lynch’s Twin Peaks returns season. As I was watching it, somewhere mid episode where the story moves between two realms of reality, I noticed the image suddenly had a much more real (or “cheap”) appearance. I was in awe. That was a super nice touch done a technical level which really helped elevate the story itself.
  • jjeaff 8y ago
    That's why some refer to it as the "soap opera effect". And although I remember 60fps being very noticeable at first, I don't think I notice at all any more.
    • mrhappyunhappy 8y ago
      Same here, I was weirded out by it at first, but overtime got very used to it and it felt natural.
  • Wowfunhappy 8y ago
    I expect that if good high frame rate content was more common, this effect would go away. It's a conditioned response, not an innate one. I also expect the effect to be lesser among younger people who are used to e.g. video games, although I have no actual evidence (anecdotal or otherwise) that this is the case.
• djsumdog 8y ago
  I hate 120Hz, especially TVs that try to add in the missing frames giving you the soap opera effect. Even The Hobbit films in HFR (and I think those were 60fps?) looked weird and unnatural. It was like being on the set where you could just tell how fake it was. I always disable motion smoothing on 120Hz TVs. I think high frame rates are really only good for video games and live sports. For fictional cinema/tv, it just looks weird and unnatural.
• jayflux 8y ago
  > I'm one of those weirdos who thinks movies aesthetically look better at 24 frames for the "dreamlike" quality. That’s not weird, that’s what the majority of people prefer. Otherwise they wouldn’t keep doing it. It would be more weird if you said you preferred films at 60fps
• ksec 8y ago
  >I'm one of those weirdos who thinks movies aesthetically look better at 24 frames for the "dreamlike" quality. Racing/Action Sports, yes, please more frames. No you are not Weirdos. Perfectly normal with great taste in Movies frame rate and Sports Action Frame rates.