Slashdot Mirror
Hobbit Film Underwhelms At 48 Frames Per Second
bonch writes "Warner Bros. aired ten minutes of footage from The Hobbit at CinemaCon, and reactions have been mixed. The problem? Peter Jackson is filming the movie at 48 frames per second, twice the industry standard 24 frames per second, lending the film a '70s era BBC-video look.' However, if the negative response from film bloggers and theater owners is any indication, the way most people will see the movie is in standard 24fps."
I mean, the "it looks like a 70's era BBC documentary" gives you a hint there. Who the heck knows what a 70's era BBC documentary even looks like?
I'm sure it will be hated on as much as 3d though. "It looks too much like real life! Also it's new and therefore I hate it."
No, he's frame-capped!
ba-dum-dum! The next show's at eleven!
lending the film a '70s era BBC-video look
Well, it's a story about olden-times in England, isn't it?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
This is exactly I am unable to leave the basement. The frame-rates "outside" literally make my brain hurt.
No, "Hobbit".
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
24 FPS ought to be enough for anybody.
Film grain is ugly when you have a cinematographer who doesn't understand it well. It can be beautiful if done well. Check out Kubrick's Barry Lyndon or just about anything else he did to see examples of beautiful grain. Avoid the Blu-ray releases. Most have removed the grain because too many modern viewers don't appreciate it. Kubrick would be rolling in his grave if such a thing were possible. Video has taught us that grain is bad because of the poor low light rendering of digital cameras compared to film and noisy compression that can't handle the dynamic range necessary for smooth gradients that film has no trouble with.
I totally understand. When I got my HDTV I found the wide aspect ratio to be completely annoying. So I taped black construction paper to the left and right side of the screen, and while it isn't perfect, it is a lot less visually jarring.
I want it to look like a fantasy and that is what 24 fps makes it look like.
Fair enough. For a nominal fee, your local movie theater will set your 3D glasses to black out every other frame, so you can enjoy 48FPS Hobbits at 24FPS.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Is that what happened to the original trilogy for LotR too?
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
Strobe lighting, obviously.
The studio has announced that the movie will be released in two parts. The general audience will see the 24 frame-per second "A" frames version in theaters, and only die-hard fans will be given an entirely new perspective with the $65 collecter's edition "B" version of the movie.
You mean Bilbo is wearing a brown knitted tank-top plus dungerees and a bowler hat ?
You could of been nicer about that, you know.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
So... 240 fps ought to be enough for anybody.
As long as Han shots first and the dinosaurs don't make an appearance I'll be happy.
This is exactly I am unable to leave the basement. The frame-rates "outside" literally make my brain hurt.
Well, I like the great resolution they have "outside", but the graphics for people and critters aren't very realistic. I saw something they called a "squirrel" and it didn't have any tentacles!
Your quotation marks are inconsistent.
I think this is evolutions way of saying "Don't have children, dudes."
I'm in that category for other reasons. (Autoimmune. Besides I'd rather build a robot with my own AI)
So you think he shouldn't reproduce just because he's unable to watch certain types of television? WTF? That's one of the lamest criteria for deciding whether to reproduce. Hell, I bet some people would say that's a sign he should reproduce like crazy and create a bunch of kids who are physiologically forced to go outside and play.
"Then" and "than" are basically the same, for all intensive purposes.
People are used to high frame rates. Its not like 3D where it actually makes some people feel sick.
As for the GP stating "Every time I see a high fps recording of something the motion looks like it's going to fast.", I don't see that at all. It just looks normal, it doesn't look faster at all. Its just smooth and realistic.
The physical universe has a pretty good framerate -- about 8.3*10^16fps, according to Planck -- and it's in 3D too! I've never heard a sober person complain about either of these two things.