4 ms·
The blurry mess of fast CGI is NOT down to the 24fps problem. As the action is so fast, it's faster to render complex scenes in lower detail CGI as the eye (mos
by mattowen_uk 5y ago
The blurry mess of fast CGI is NOT down to the 24fps problem. As the action is so fast, it's faster to render complex scenes in lower detail CGI as the eye (mostly) can't see it.
However if you pause the action, you can clearly see where the rendering shortcuts have been made (The Transformers movies are a good example of this).
- kuschku 5y agoI'm not just talking about CGI, even e.g. taking my own a6300 and recording a moving scene has this effect (even with the 180° shutter rule). It's just as choppy as 24Hz at 1/1600 shutter, but in traditional film, it's choppy and blurry due to the slow shutter, so I can barely see anything. For quite se time I'd run upscalers to pre process all movies I was watching to 60Hz or 75Hz just because it was noticeably easier to watch.
- mattowen_uk 5y agoThe 24Hz/fps thing is a legacy from original film where it was the sweet spot that created the effect of a moving image without too much flicker, unfortunately you seem to be one of those people who are sensitive to this frame rate. The argument is that the general populous are used to the 'film look' of 24fps, that anything else diminishes the impact of watching a film. Films that have tried high fps (The Hobbit for example) received negative reviews for picture quality; people just didn't like it. Also, when increasing the framerate, you should try to stick to a multiple of 24 (i.e. 48, 72, 96) to prevent judder when the shot is panning a scene.