7 ms·
No, at least not as a hard rule. This is most noticeable when a camera pans horizontally along a very close vertical object very quickly (~1s for a full screen
by tpxl 4y ago
No, at least not as a hard rule.
This is most noticeable when a camera pans horizontally along a very close vertical object very quickly (~1s for a full screen pan). This will give you more than a meter per frame on a movie screen and is very jarring (to me).
- jerf 4y agoI personally am a bit boggled by how hard people will go to bat for "movies must be 24 fps as God intended" because I also have many places like big pans where it's just jarring to me in 2022 to see things jerking across the screen like that, and I'm as used to 24 fps movies as anyone else. There's other things like actions scenes to where I can see the frame rate, motion blur notwithstanding, and I find that quite jarring.
- kllrnohj 4y agoPeople reacted kinda strongly to The Hobbit being 48fps for having a "soap opera" look, and I think nobody has really bothered to try again since then. 60fps YouTube, Twitch, etc.. content looks pretty great, though. Shame Hollywood won't try again.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> People reacted kinda strongly to The Hobbit being 48fps for having a “soap opera” look, and I think nobody has really bothered to try again since then. Ang Lee has done a couple of HFR films since, but neither was a box office success. I’ve read that Avatar: The Way of Water (which Cameron previously said would not be released in HFR) will be released in 48fps, which would AFAIK be the first big-budget HFR release since the Hobbit trilogy.