|
|
Post by CrepedCrusader on Oct 9, 2019 17:36:10 GMT
Apparently Gemini Man is the latest movie being shown with a high frame-rate, and most people seem to think it looks weird.
Audiences: "We don't like the way it looks."
Hollywood: "It looks BETTER, damn it!!!"
LOL.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Oct 9, 2019 17:58:21 GMT
What's considered "high frame"? 60 FPS? Most people can't really tell the difference once you go past that.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Oct 9, 2019 19:27:46 GMT
I noticed the film looking more clean-cut and polished just off the trailers. Is that a result of the high frame-rate?
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Oct 9, 2019 19:40:22 GMT
I noticed the film looking more clean-cut and polished just off the trailers. Is that a result of the high frame-rate? A high frame rate can make a movie look more "fluid", though a lot of "polish" actually has to do with camera lighting as well as how much light the camera itself captures. That's why movies nowadays look more "polished" that ones from decades ago. Don't forget most films today are filmed on digital cameras rather than film from the older days.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Oct 9, 2019 20:42:18 GMT
I think the last director to try to do this was Peter Jackson with the first Hobbit film.
|
|
|
|
Post by vegalyra on Oct 9, 2019 21:14:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Oct 9, 2019 22:55:26 GMT
Because they're so busy asking if they could that they never stop to ask if they should.
|
|
|
|
Post by gw on Oct 9, 2019 23:25:19 GMT
Maybe it's a conspiracy against hand drawn and stop motion animation. They want to make it twice as hard or more to make an animated film so they decided to up the general accepted standard of frame rate.  |
|
|
|
Post by jonesjxd on Oct 9, 2019 23:36:04 GMT
HFR will eventually become the standard for all movies, because that's the aesthetic filmmakers will use. I just got a new iPhone and see that it can shoot video in 4K in 60fps, which means 16 year olds are shooting short movies that way, which means they'll grow into filmmakers using movie cameras to shoot that way.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Oct 9, 2019 23:53:09 GMT
They are not, do a handful out of thousands count
|
|
|
|
Post by vegalyra on Oct 9, 2019 23:54:28 GMT
It definitely aids in the making of action films for the attention deficit generation. Another reason why I tend to prefer films from the 1980's and earlier.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Oct 10, 2019 14:28:38 GMT
For a film from a two-time Oscar winning director, it looks totally uninteresting.
|
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Oct 10, 2019 14:53:20 GMT
High frame rates remind me of when I booted up my first PC back in the mid 90's. My Packard Bell came with a CD-ROM anatomy guide (webMD had to come from somewhere?) and I remember the motion looking really weird. You could digitally look and pan around wireframe kidneys, and the motion was too fast to seem normal. I think the same when I see some of the 4K TVs at the stores.
A little grain and distortion is fine with me any day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Oct 10, 2019 14:59:53 GMT
High frame rates remind me of when I booted up my first PC back in the mid 90's. My Packard Bell came with a CD-ROM anatomy guide (webMD had to come from somewhere?) and I remember the motion looking really weird. You could digitally look and pan around wireframe kidneys, and the motion was too fast to seem normal. I think the same when I see some of the 4K TVs at the stores. A little grain and distortion is fine with me any day. Yeah, my 4K TV at home came with a feature called Motionflow already enabled. I turned it off immediately.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Oct 10, 2019 15:02:03 GMT
For a film from a two-time Oscar winning director, it looks totally uninteresting. Yeah even if he's done other blockbusters before, it's still weird seeing Ang Lee attached to this. It'd be like if Terence Malick was attached to a Taken movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Oct 10, 2019 15:05:54 GMT
For a film from a two-time Oscar winning director, it looks totally uninteresting. It'd be like if Terence Malick was attached to a Taken movie. Neeson would be too lost in the sunset and fields of wheat to forget he has a daughter to save.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Oct 10, 2019 22:39:57 GMT
You can notice the smoothness of movement going from 24-30fps(a typical movie or TV show) to 60fps. but beyond 60fps you basically can't see the difference since 60fps is liquid smooth.
I think 60fps is more beneficial for stuff that's more fast action oriented, like sports, and not as much with movies.
p.s. but frame rate is much more important in video games as going from 30fps to 60fps is a rather big difference as 30fps is playable but 60fps is basically perfect as you can see movement really smooths out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Caesar Roberto on Oct 11, 2019 1:20:59 GMT
What are you talking about? Peter Jackson pushed for 48fps in 2012-2014, and then pretty much nothing happened as far as I am aware until now, when Ang Lee filmed Gemini Man in 120fps. And James Cameron is probably filming the Avatar sequels in high fps too.
I don't see how like 4 movies in the last 7 years or so that use high fps by the choice of the directors themselves is "Hollywood pushing high fps".
|
|
|
|
Post by kingkoopa on Oct 11, 2019 10:31:29 GMT
You can notice the smoothness of movement going from 24-30fps(a typical movie or TV show) to 60fps. but beyond 60fps you basically can't see the difference since 60fps is liquid smooth. I think 60fps is more beneficial for stuff that's more fast action oriented, like sports, and not as much with movies. p.s. but frame rate is much more important in video games as going from 30fps to 60fps is a rather big difference as 30fps is playable but 60fps is basically perfect as you can see movement really smooths out. This is a good point. I am not a huge sports fan, but I like casually catching basketball, hockey, or the Olympics. The higher FPS (guessing 60) complements sports, big time. It looks so real it's ridiculous. That might be why I dislike it in movies...seems the fiction gets sucked out of it. That said, I remember being overwhelmed by IMAX when it first came out. And my first surround-sound experience. Maybe I'll come around, but higher than normal FPS takes me out of the experience and reminds me of something like Max Headroom. Hard to explain, but if I had to offer a comparison, it would be that some movies got a bad digital transfer to DVD (and now to Blu-Ray). The warmth is replaced by detail I didn't really want to see. I'm around 40, eyes are starting to get weird. Maybe it's just me, but the motion being that smooth confuses my brain in a movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Oct 11, 2019 11:13:21 GMT
Does anyone ever really use that Smooth Motion, Motion Flow, etc. feature on their HDTV/4K TV at all? Seems like a useless feature since most people find it annoying and ghastly and turn it off.
|
|
