Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Default Tom Cruise Wants You To Turn Off Motion Smoothing and Here's How!

    Tired of watching movies with the "soap opera effect" turned on? This guide is here to help you deactivate it!


    https://www.highdefdigest.com/news/s...eres-how/43130
    Check out my award winning experimental short film Broken Records

  2. #2

    Default

    I hate the effect. It makes motion and panning scenes blurry and appear to skip on my LG OLED set and is very distracting. What I hate worse is it being turned back on all the time when switching sources. Really annoying.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    12,645

    Default

    Although I agree with the final resolution of not using motion smoothing, watching a film in 24fps at times can be distracting with the judder we see on the screen, most noticeable during a camera pan movement.

    I have seen 48fps movies as well and feel they seem unnatural too, so are they using true 48fps or are they interpolating on their side of things?
    Keep Physical Media Alive, Just say NO to digital "ownership"

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    Posts
    13,329

    Default

    Its mind-boggling that these TV manufacturers, who are SUPPOSED to be creating a product that can replicate the cinema experience at home, routinely keep including motion smoothing on these sets and have them on by default.

    What's even worse is on some brands, like LG and Panasonic, turning it off doesn't fully turn it off. With LG, their RealCinema adds a slight soap opera effect and you CANNOT turn it off during HDR/Dolby Vision playback. It's not quite as bad as the actual motion setting, and a lot of people don't even notice it, but I do. Panasonic, not sure what was going on but I had to return that one well because turning it off still had the effect.

    Seriously, this year I purchased 4 OLEDs and returned 3 of them because they wouldn't let you turn it off completely. Finally settled on the Sony A9F.

    I get that some people actually like this effect,, and sometimes turning it on at the bare minimum can be helpful with certain things, but it really drives me bonkers where these so called filmbuffs on YouTube show off their systems/settings and the motion stuff is just cranked to the max. It didn't look that way in the theater, and it's not the way the filmmaker intended, so it's not an accurate representation of the film.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    12,645

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Landy View Post
    Seriously, this year I purchased 4 OLEDs and returned 3 of them because they wouldn't let you turn it off completely. Finally settled on the Sony A9F.

    I get that some people actually like this effect,, and sometimes turning it on at the bare minimum can be helpful with certain things, but it really drives me bonkers where these so called filmbuffs on YouTube show off their systems/settings and the motion stuff is just cranked to the max. It didn't look that way in the theater, and it's not the way the filmmaker intended, so it's not an accurate representation of the film.
    Very nice set you ended up with! If I were to settle on a flagship TV today, it would likely be the A9F. There are still a few technical obstacles I would like to see resolved before I spend that kind of money.

    Remember these "film buffs" years ago were angry because the picture did not fill their 4:3 TV screen? Yeah.
    Keep Physical Media Alive, Just say NO to digital "ownership"

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krawk View Post
    Although I agree with the final resolution of not using motion smoothing, watching a film in 24fps at times can be distracting with the judder we see on the screen, most noticeable during a camera pan movement.

    I have seen 48fps movies as well and feel they seem unnatural too, so are they using true 48fps or are they interpolating on their side of things?
    If you're talking about the Hobbit films (which are the only films I know that have been presented in 48fps) then yes, they were shot that way and the effect wasn't interpolation - unless you're watching the Blu-Rays which were encoded at 24fps.

    I think they seemed unnatural because you're used to seeing movies in 24fps. Our brains can sometimes have a tough time coming to terms with the smoother motion, which is why many people see the film as being in "fast forward" when it's not. I'd like to see a study on why this is, but I don't know if one has ever been done.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Landy View Post
    I get that some people actually like this effect,, and sometimes turning it on at the bare minimum can be helpful with certain things, but it really drives me bonkers where these so called filmbuffs on YouTube show off their systems/settings and the motion stuff is just cranked to the max. It didn't look that way in the theater, and it's not the way the filmmaker intended, so it's not an accurate representation of the film.
    I take issue with the idea that one cannot be a "film buff" and want to see movies in anything other than 24fps. The closest analogy I can think of is with the colourization of old black & white films. Perhaps the film maker didn't intend it to be shown in anything other than black & white, but does it mean you're not a film buff if you prefer a colourized version? At the end of the day that representation was more from a technical limitation (life doesn't happen in B/W or 24fps; it was just captured that way) than an inherently superior form of presenting the medium. Some will agree and some won't, but who has the right to make that call on what a film buff can and can't enjoy?

    I've been watching and enjoying movies for over 30 years and my friends would all call me a film buff because of the amount that I've seen and the interest I have in the industry, and I much prefer the look of interpolated video for the movies I watch. I've become used to it (it happened fairly quickly) and it doesn't look odd at all to me now. It doesn't look like a soap opera or home video, and the props don't look fake. I just see the original movie in the same way that I would the 24fps version, except that I don't have to deal with judder when things move across the screen or the camera pans. It's just all pleasant, smooth motion.

    At the end of the day, I think the "film makers intent" argument is just because people don't like the look and want to use whatever ammunition they have in order to attack it. People change slowly, but I hope that someday soon 24fps will go the way of black & white movies and square aspect ratio. At the very least it would be nice if they increased the frame rate for movies, and people could artificially drop frames to make it 24fps if they wan rather than artificially create frames to make it 48 or 60fps. I doubt it'll happen soon, but one can hope.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •