KETCH ROSSi

[KETCH ROSSi]

Except that the issue isn't grading or anything else, it is the motion cadence of 48fps that was offputting to those in attendance. The motion cadence won't suddenly change in December because the effects work or the grade is complete. You don't seem to understand what people are having an issue with if you actually believe the unfinished nature of the material had anything to do with it. The truth is that 48fps content played back at 48fps produces a visual aesthetic that is jarring to people expecting a narrative cinema "look".

You might want to take a bit more time to consider the actual complaints being lodged here by those who saw this particular demonstration. I've personally seen a lot of finished work originated and displayed at 48/60 and it is very different in the way it "feels" compared to 24fps content. It will take a long time before people are willing to view HFR footage as being a proper cinematic framerate because we've all grown up with 24fps as the standard for narrative cinema.

The theater owners and managers who were at the screening were hoping that 48fps would be the next big thing to draw people into their cinemas as attendance has been flat or in decline the last few years. What they saw was a look that they know won't go over well with the audience. The problem here is that you are emotionally invested in 48fps 3D as you yourself have chosen to use it for your forthcoming film. You lack the objectivity to listen to the comments being made and see why they may be valid opinions and instead deflect and say "Oh, its unfinished material. Obviously that is the problem!"

Quiete the contrary Andrew, I do understand exactly what they are saying, since you see, we are about to launch a GLOABL THEATER CHAIN, well, when I say about this still will require years, however my research has been intensive, and we wil provide 48fps, and even up to 120fps, what ever the needs would be.

Fact is that I have seen my own 48fps shot material, Uncolored, Ungraded, and unprocessed, and then seen the same material finished... TRUST ME it makes a HUGE difference, it did to me, and it will to any one else!!


Have you ever seen 48fps acquired material shown at 48fps??

[AndrewThomas]

Yes, I have seen work shot and displayed at 48fps. My opinion isn't what is important here, nor is your opinion of 48fps material important. The issue I'm addressing is your assertion that the negative reaction is based on the material screen being unfinished. The issue of the motion cadence doesn't change with the work being finished or not. I really think you are intentionally ignoring the complaint. There is a reason people have been clamoring for 24fps video cameras once DV dropped. People associate higher framerates with soap operas and reality programming (sports, news, etc). You can't expect that bell to be unrung over night. One viewing of high quality 48fps content will not change people's perceptions of the motion cadence, only continued exposure to it in narrative cinema will do it. That is why it is flat out wrong to point out "it's unfinished!" as having any meaningful impact, or in your case the primary cause of the negative reaction.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Yes, I have seen work shot and displayed at 48fps. My opinion isn't what is important here, nor is your opinion of 48fps material important. The issue I'm addressing is your assertion that the negative reaction is based on the material screen being unfinished. The issue of the motion cadence doesn't change with the work being finished or not. I really think you are intentionally ignoring the complaint. There is a reason people have been clamoring for 24fps video cameras once DV dropped. People associate higher framerates with soap operas and reality programming (sports, news, etc). You can't expect that bell to be unrung over night. One viewing of high quality 48fps content will not change people's perceptions of the motion cadence, only continued exposure to it in narrative cinema will do it. That is why it is flat out wrong to point out "it's unfinished!" as having any meaningful impact, or in your case the primary cause of the negative reaction.

Okay I guess you didn't understood me at all...

I was curious if you did, and it does matter.

However to answer your question again, YES it does matter to present UNFINISHED WORK, the way it looks changes perspective PERIOD, no matter the frame rate, so no matter how much you argue with me, it will not make me change my opinion, if I can't change yours then no problem we each have ours, but I stand firm, that the fact that something is not finished will change the perspective in which is viewed and understood, and if the same work is FINISHED and represented @ 48fps to the same people they will have different perspective of such material!!


I respect you opinion, I just have a different one, and I voice it, and there is no way some one can changed, as I know is right, because I have seen it and done it my self, so I know what is right for me, if it is not right for you, then cool, but my opinion stands.


BTW, I do agree on this points you are making, well, on some at list, as they are the exact same ones I voiced and agree with the viewers of this previewing material from THE HOBBITS, however, if you read my first post about it you'll see it... ;)

[AndrewThomas]

You do understand that people psychologically equate higher frame rates with non narrative cinema, right? That is all that those who saw it are saying, that the motion cadence was not like the narrative cinematic cadence of 24fps and so it looked more like soap operas or reality TV. Several people even commented that they thought it looked great, but for things like nature documentaries.

This really isn't about you and I having a difference of opinion, the issue here is that you refuse to look at the obvious answer to why people were put off by the demo and instead look to excuses for it. I think this is mainly because of your emotional attachment to 48fps as it is the frame rate you have picked for your own film, but it doesn't really matter. People didn't like how it the 48fps looked not because the sequences were unfinished, they didn't like it for the same reason that filmmakers have wanted digital cinema cameras that shot at 24fps. People associate 24fps with narrative cinema, and 30fps+ with everything else. When you then try and do narrative cinema at 48fps, you are asking people to retrain their brains to accept something vastly different than they expect. Do you really think that come December there won't be a ton of people complaining about the way The Hobbit looks in 48fps/3D? If so, I'd love to make a gentlemen's wager about that.

[KETCH ROSSi]

You do understand that people psychologically equate higher frame rates with non narrative cinema, right? That is all that those who saw it are saying, that the motion cadence was not like the narrative cinematic cadence of 24fps and so it looked more like soap operas or reality TV. Several people even commented that they thought it looked great, but for things like nature documentaries.

This really isn't about you and I having a difference of opinion, the issue here is that you refuse to look at the obvious answer to why people were put off by the demo and instead look to excuses for it. I think this is mainly because of your emotional attachment to 48fps as it is the frame rate you have picked for your own film, but it doesn't really matter. People didn't like how it the 48fps looked not because the sequences were unfinished, they didn't like it for the same reason that filmmakers have wanted digital cinema cameras that shot at 24fps. People associate 24fps with narrative cinema, and 30fps+ with everything else. When you then try and do narrative cinema at 48fps, you are asking people to retrain their brains to accept something vastly different than they expect. Do you really think that come December there won't be a ton of people complaining about the way The Hobbit looks in 48fps/3D? If so, I'd love to make a gentlemen's wager about that.

I do understand it perfectly, same as what people felt with the change to HDTV's, I did felt the same, however most of the times people don't know what is good for them, no exception here.

The difference is that I DO!!

Is not that because I have pick it for my film which of course I am very passionate about it, is because what I believe, and also a small group of people, and couple of articles, will sure not be the determining part of what will happen to 48fps, same as they were not on determining the failure of HDTV, I remember those days to, no different here, and it is not just about you and I discussing our opinions, it is exactly about discussing the opinions given by others, which I disagree with, yet I completely understand, as I my self have been there filling the same, about viewing Movies in HD yet recorded and projected at 24fps.

[Joseph Hutson]

Ketch, keep in mind that a large majority of people who watch HD content do not have their TV's set to the high frequency rate as seen while watching your Samsung TV. Personally, I don't enjoy seeing the slight bit of ghosting (which is a completely other subject) I perceived...but, one could perhaps get used to it after a long while.

I'm hoping I will enjoy the high frame rate with 3D. I don't expect I will like it in 2D though.

[Björn Benckert]

The higher frame rate on 3D stereo is a cheap way to try to get around the annoying flicker feel caused from the poor tech. 48p looks video 30p looks video as well. 24p with 1/48 of black between each frame is looking the best I think, and most people trough history.

I have seen high def 150fps playback (playing from ram in the flame) and that looks like out a window/real etc but it's not at all pleasing to the eyes. 24p lets you see each frame which is simply looking better.

[Evan Starkey]

This is why im in the arts....At my core i truly believe in creative freedom...I understand the need to give people what they want to make money...So what im saying is if you have money or dont mind living without it the worst you could do is not be creative. Theres nothing wrong with having mental sets we all do just encourage those pushing the limits you mite see something new.

lol i didn't mean for that to rhyme.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_(psychology)

[KETCH ROSSi]

This is why im in the arts....At my core i truly believe in creative freedom...I understand the need to give people what they want to make money...So what im saying is if you have money or dont mind living without it the worst you could do is not be creative. Theres nothing wrong with having mental sets we all do just encourage those pushing the limits you mite see something new.

lol i didn't mean for that to rhyme.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_(psychology)

Thanks Evan,

exactly my point, I don't do things for others when it comes to making Movies or capturing Still images, I do it because I love it, if others happen to like it of course that is nothing short of Fantastic.


What I do for others is projects of charity, and anything in assistance of Humanity and our planet, because I'm also a Philantropist at the CORE, but I would never allow others to dictate what I do or how I express my self in the Arts, that is why I have not done anything so far, and finally at my first Movie, because NOW I FINALLY CAN DO AS I PLEASE... ;)

[Josh Snyder]

Thanks Evan,

exactly my point, I don't do things for others when it comes to making Movies or capturing Still images, I do it because I love it, if others happen to like it of course that is nothing short of Fantastic.


What I do for others is projects of charity, and anything in assistance of Humanity and our planet, because I'm also a Philantropist at the CORE, but I would never allow others to dictate what I do or how I express my self in the Arts, that is why I have not done anything so far, and finally at my first Movie, because NOW I FINALLY CAN DO AS I PLEASE... ;)

and that's how it should always be in the arts be it music, filmmaking or what ever. Everything we argue here is just personal tastes :)