4 ms·
Certainly audiences might come to reject some new techniques and accept others. But what current generations think of as "film look" will eventually be a histo
by mbrubeck 14y ago
Certainly audiences might come to reject some new techniques and accept others. But what current generations think of as "film look" will eventually be a historical curiousity, just as past generations' "film look" is a curiousity today. Future generations will have their own "film look" that will probably be more realistic and high-fidelity in at least some ways.
Though there are a few exceptions, generally people today don't spend a lot of time watching black-and-white 35mm silent films. When color film was first introduced it disrupted the look of film, but eventually filmmakers tamed color and found ways to make it as real or unreal as needed.
Maybe high-frame-rate video will be similar. Some scenes might demand different interpolation or blurring than others, and I think we've hardly begun exploring that space of possibilities.
EDIT: I can't resist this link: "Screen realism may be a little too real" -- newspaper review of Citizen Kane from February 1942. http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/8231805 http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/8231805
- anigbrowl 14y agoTo be honest, we have already been doing this with video for a long time. The two biggest things you do to video for a 'film look' are to shoot at 24 fps (or fake it in post) and set your shutter speed to 1/48 second to mimic the behavior of a film shutter. this gives a particular kind of motion blur that can be dispensed with on video (and film, incidentally, since many film cameras have adjustable shutters), but which people in the audience strongly prefer in most cases. The alternative is the HD look of sports and entertainment programming. It's boring, because it's too similar to real life.
- lucian1900 14y agoI've pretty much stopped watching "action" films because they're too blurry to make out anything. A clear not-blurry image actually helps my suspension of disbelief.
- Swizec 14y agoAnd yet, the movie that took the most oscars in 2012 was a silent black&white film.
- brodney 14y ago"The Artist" may have won oscars, but it didn't even make the top 10 in the box office that year.
- mattebb 14y agoI'd like to get to the point where frame rate is a creative choice and not a technical limitation. Perhaps some kinds of films/scenes/shots are better suited to different frame rates, for the impression and feeling they impart on the viewer. It was great to see Ang Lee start doing this a bit (but with aspect ratio) in Life of Pi, using it as another tool in the tool box, not an absolute right or wrong way to do things.
- galaktor 14y agoThanks for the link. The parallels are interesting.