3 ms·
People need to take a step back and remember that film is art, it's not always meant to be the best possible depiction of reality. 48 fps can be better, but 24
by MLR 12y ago
People need to take a step back and remember that film is art, it's not always meant to be the best possible depiction of reality.
48 fps can be better, but 24 fps can too, it's another tool for a director to use.
The issue is when people start trying to proscribe 48 fps, or 24 fps, as inherently superior, it's all situational.
- baby 12y agoWe can still watch old Chaplin movie and love it. Because it's good. But if new movies were going to be released in 16fps then nobody would watch that (if it's just one movie people might go because of the novelty). Especially for action movies, there is no excuse not to reach 48, and better 60 fps, since we now have the technology to do this. Peter Jackson and James Cameron are precursors and they will have the knowledge and the technique before everyone else when everyone will start making 60fps movies.