View Single Post
  #81  
Old 04-29-2012, 05:20 PM
Vega's Avatar
Vega Vega is offline
Tiger, Tiger, muddy dark
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Space Coast, FL
Posts: 3,604
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Googleshng View Post
Isn't the core problem here that higher frame rates for video cameras were actually first introduced for consumer level cameras, causing audiences to associate the difference (which is damn hard to consciously notice) with cheapness?
I think it goes always back to the beginning of TV, since many people consider film and theaters to be superior to anything to do with TV or video.

Quote:
I'd think speeding it up would only worsen the problem.
If the moviemakers are trying to convince the audience that high frame rate is a good thing, they need to push the frame rate, the amount of onscreen movement and the speed of onscreen movement as far as possible, at least for the first few movies that do it. Despite the fact that Peter Jackson is a pioneer in this area, The Hobbit can't push it far enough not only because it's a lower frame rate than TV but because in the book Bilbo and the dwarves spend most of their time sitting, standing or walking. They only occasionally jog or ride a fast animal and they certainly never race cars. The source material is too slow and the movie has to stay pretty close to it.

Quote:
Totally in favor of someone trying to kill the trend though... so long as people don't suddenly use "Twice as many frames, half as much fits on a disc!" as a new excuse to underfill DVDs and such... which will almost definitely happen.
I've done some DVD recording and read the spec of blu-ray, and I think this will actually be more of a problem for blu-ray than DVD.

NTSC DVDs have only one resolution, scan mode and frame rate: 480i60. The data rate, however, is extremely variable, and the motion compensation algorithm will reduce the data rate a lot when frames are repeated and a little bit when frames are similar, which they would be at a high frame rate. Consumer DVD recorders can make 60 Hz material like news, sports and video games look decent even when cramming six hours onto a single-layer disc. Two hours on a single layer disc approaches lossless quality. A dual layer DVD should be able to do almost four hours of nearly lossless 60 Hz video. The letterboxing of movies should make it even easier.

Blu-ray can do 1080p24, 1080i60 and 720p60 and 720p50 (at least for PAL-region TVs), but not 1080p60. 48 FPS material could be sped up a tiny bit to 50 Hz, but many 60 Hz TVs probably wouldn't display that signal properly, if at all. 60 Hz movies would have to be limited to 720p, so blu-rays of high frame rate movies might have to come with two discs, one at 1080p24 and the other at 720p60. Streaming video might actually do 1080p60 before physical media can.

I'm not sure how motion smoothing TVs fit into this mix. High frame rate should be part of the source material, not applied as a post-production filter, and motion smoothing is unreliable anyway, usually smoothing only part of the picture. High frame rate DVDs and blu-rays should begin with a message to turn off the motion smoothing filter since it's not needed.
Reply With Quote