And its official, Cameron to shoot Avatar 2 in 48-60fps

[Lee Stewart]

48 Frames Changes Everything

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2012/...ames_chang.php

[twonunpackmule]

48 Frames Changes Everything

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2012/...ames_chang.php

Still hold onto that flag. It'll burn eventually.

[rm082e]

Still hold onto that flag. It'll burn eventually.

Yep. There are still people out there defending the Motion Smoothing bullshit on new TVs saying they prefer the Soap Opera look it gives films. No accounting for taste I guess.

[twonunpackmule]

Yep. There are still people out there defending the Motion Smoothing bullshit on new TVs saying they prefer the Soap Opera look it gives films. No accounting for taste I guess.

I can only see 120fps/Cinemotion/Anti Judder/Smooth Motion being something useful for sports when displayed on a LCD or LED. Both technologies are too slow for that type of extreme movement, that the increased framerate eases the refresh of the monitor. If those two display techs become even more dominant with no end in sight, I can see companies moving to shooting those events with increased framerates.

Plasma is much better and faster. It's my preferred tech.

Certainly excited about purchasable OLED. Oh, I wait patiently for that tech.

[Lee Stewart]

I can only see 120fps/Cinemotion/Anti Judder/Smooth Motion being something useful for sports when displayed on a LCD or LED. Both technologies are too slow for that type of extreme movement, that the increased framerate eases the refresh of the monitor. If those two display techs become even more dominant with no end in sight, I can see companies moving to shooting those events with increased framerates.

Plasma is much better and faster. It's my preferred tech.

Certainly excited about purchasable OLED. Oh, I wait patiently for that tech.

The purpose of 48 FPS 3D is to offer the public something they can't see in their homes.

[Lee Stewart]

Still hold onto that flag. It'll burn eventually.

And won't you be surprised when it doesn't.

[Lee Stewart]

Yep. There are still people out there defending the Motion Smoothing bullshit on new TVs saying they prefer the Soap Opera look it gives films. No accounting for taste I guess.

Ever hear of the word . . . subjective? Do you need the definition?

[rm082e]

Ever hear of the word . . . subjective? Do you need the definition?

Sure, but if you're in the minority, don't act like someone with a majority opinion is factually wrong. They're not wrong - you're just in the minority.

It's perfectly acceptable to say "I know you guys don't like this, but I really enjoy it." That's a perfectly respectable position to take.

[Lee Stewart]

Sure, but if you're in the minority, don't act like someone with a majority opinion is factually wrong. They're not wrong - you're just in the minority.

It's perfectly acceptable to say "I know you guys don't like this, but I really enjoy it." That's a perfectly respectable position to take.

The minority being a portion of this forum right? All 7 people that respond. Not much of a pool is that.

Of course here is the real issue. No one has seen the finished product - THE HOBBITT being shown at 48 FPS in 3D in a commerical theater that anyone can attend.

So the majority as you call it is getting it's data from . . . where?

[Favelle]

At least they are TRYING something new. I'm sure there were people that cried bloody murder when surround sound was invented, or people that said "talkies" were just gimmick.

I'll see it before I make a single opinion about it. I trust my own eyes before anyone elses. I mean, three quarters of the fcking people on this forum think console-level graphics are good enough. That right there tells me to only trust my own eyes first.

I do hope its not like a soap opera though.

[Lee Stewart]

THE HOBBIT Director Peter Jackson Responds To Negative Reaction Of 48 FPS Footage

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansit.../news/?a=58742

[chris gerhard]

Not to toot my own horn, but I told you so.



http://movies.ign.com/articles/122/1223523p1.html

Nobody doubted there would be a negative reaction by many but it is way too early to toot your own horn, nothing regarding how good or bad this will look to the average viewer is clear yet. I expect the overall reaction to ultimately be positive by the film going public, Peter Jackson and James Cameron haven't been proven wrong yet and you haven't been proven correct yet.

I have an open mind about the matter and haven't watched any soap operas to have a negative bias going in, not that I ever believed these filmmakers with budgets in the hundreds of millions were aiming for a soap opera look. I still can't grasp the concept that if early cheaply made 48fps video looks bad, it must all look bad.

[twonunpackmule]

Nobody doubted there would be a negative reaction by many but it is way too early to toot your own horn, nothing regarding how good or bad this will look to the average viewer is clear yet. I expect the overall reaction to ultimately be positive by the film going public, Peter Jackson and James Cameron haven't been proven wrong yet and you haven't been proven correct yet.

I have been proven correct. You'll see.

Or you can just re-read everything I already posted.

[twonunpackmule]

At least they are TRYING something new.

Just making a good movie would be good enough. That's what Hollywood tends to forget.

They will continue to lose to TV if they don't grasp that concept.

[twonunpackmule]

The purpose of 48 FPS 3D is to offer the public something they can't see in their homes.

Except they can. It's called Anti Judder.