3 ms·

That is because a game's frame is rendered at one absolute time point, while a movie's frame is like a photograph taken with a shutter speed of 1/24th: it inclu

• mryall 16y ago
  That doesn't seem like it could be true. The film is rolling through the camera, and if the shutter were open continuously, the entire film would be a vertical blur of light. The shutter would open and close once per frame, so the film can be advanced. The actual shutter speed of a camera shooting 24 fps would be much faster than 1/24 s.
  • nathos 16y ago
    Correct. There's a simple formula for that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutter_speed#Cinematographic_shutter_formula http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shutter_speed#Cinematographic_s...
    • mryall 16y ago
      Oh, cool. The linked article about the rotary shutter also has a great animation showing how the camera works: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_disc_shutter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_disc_shutter
  • alexqgb 16y ago
    You're right about the continuous roll. Film actually moves through the gate incrementally. There's a really neat mechanism that closes the shutter and advances the film to the next frame in one elegant move. But while the film is exposed, it's exposed for a fraction of a second. Meaning that any motion occurring within that second will register with a blur in that particular frame.
  • VMG 16y ago
    Just hit pause on practically any movie when there is movement
    • Geee 16y ago
      It is really interesting how our brain compensates for the motion blur in films. I mean, you don't usually notice that things are really blurry until you pause the movie.
      • bzbarsky 16y ago
        Our brain compensates for motion blur, period, because everything we see is effectively slightly blurred due to our eyes' response to light changes being non-instantaneous. Specifically, cone response time seems to be on the order of 15-20ms if I read http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14990682 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14990682 correctly. And that's just to go from initial stimulation to peak response; presumably the response also dies off in nonzero time, so the full width of the response in time is more than 20ms. Rods respond slower than cones according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoreceptor_cell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoreceptor_cell though I can't find numbers.
• Florin_Andrei 16y ago
  > That's why a game at 24fps looks bad, but an (action) movie at 24fps looks good. "Looks good"? Maybe passable. And that's only because of a century of experimentation with camera techniques allowing to eschew the limitations of the format. E.g. try giving an amateur a 24 fps camera and ask them to shoot a sequence that involves a lot of panning. The result is going to look like junk. Even in the hands of a professional it still doesn't look good. But we've all trained our brains to shut up and accept it, because we've all watched so much 24 fps content. It's 100% pavlovian conditioning, nothing else. To someone coming from a universe where all motion pictures are shot at 60 fps or above, our movies would look excruciatingly bad.