4 ms·
> Cool, so people that want that effect on their movies can use it, it hardly sounds like something everyone would want every time though. That's not what GP s
by baryphonic 4y ago
> Cool, so people that want that effect on their movies can use it, it hardly sounds like something everyone would want every time though.
That's not what GP said. GP was arguing that 24fps is a genuine artistic choice, and that an argument that 48fps is intrinsically superior is absurd. GP was arguing that frame rate is a choice artists can use to tell their stories, that 24fps is Impressionism and 48fps is realism.
Also, cross examining (e.g. "so, you're saying...") is against HN policies. Misrepresenting what someone said is also not great.
- ClumsyPilot 4y ago> GP was arguing that frame rate is a choice artists can use to tell their stories, that 24fps is Impressionism and 48fps is realism Okay, where is 77 FPS movie for surrealism, 12 FPS movie for abstractionism, 174 FPS for cubism? The whole argument is fictitious
- matt-attack 4y agoWell that's just not how the physics works. It's a single dimension that slides from hyper-impressionism (at low low Frame rates) to hyper-realism at high ones. And BTW it's been shown to top out around 75-80fps. Any higher and there's no additional perception of realism. Realism is just the single axis.
- Nursie 4y ago> GP was arguing that 24fps is a genuine artistic choice Yes, and I'm saying that's spurious argument because if it were an artistic choice we'd have a lot more variation of said choice. > cross examining (e.g. "so, you're saying...") Where did I do that? I was making the point that impressionism is not the only art form. I know the GP wasn't arguing it should be, but again, that's where their analogy breaks down.