Author Topic: The Hobbit (2011)  (Read 49953 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Plastiq

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2200
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #720 on: April 25, 2012, 03:09:15 PM »
The extra frames really detract from it that much?

Offline amysrevenge

  • Baseball-Cap-Beard-Baby Guy
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5932
  • The Warhammeriest
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #721 on: April 25, 2012, 03:38:04 PM »
The extra frames really detract from it that much?

I've got a hunch that if tested it would turn out a lot like wine tasting - blind everyone involved and the ability to tell the difference would quickly drop away for almost everyone.
Big Mike
Grande Prairie AB Canada

Offline Eternally Learning

  • Master Mr. a.k.a. Methodical Loaf
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9035
  • Break a leg, badger!
    • Get Past The 140 Character Limit!
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #722 on: April 25, 2012, 03:42:34 PM »
The extra frames really detract from it that much?

I've got a hunch that if tested it would turn out a lot like wine tasting - blind everyone involved and the ability to tell the difference would quickly drop away for almost everyone.

Well sure; they'd all be looking at blindfolds :P.  Seriously though, I don't think the difference in frame rates is as subjective as taste where actually perceiving a difference is concerned.  Cut the standard frame rate in half and I'm sure you'd notice a difference, so why not when doubling it?  Also, I don't think I've seen anyone dispute how different the experience is, only how they responded to it.  Jackson himself intro'd the montage by acknowledging that it will take some getting used to.

Offline MisterMarc

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7508
  • The universe seems ...merely indifferent.
    • Schlock Treatment
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #723 on: April 25, 2012, 04:30:56 PM »
The extra frames really detract from it that much?

I've got a hunch that if tested it would turn out a lot like wine tasting - blind everyone involved and the ability to tell the difference would quickly drop away for almost everyone.

Well sure; they'd all be looking at blindfolds :P.  Seriously though, I don't think the difference in frame rates is as subjective as taste where actually perceiving a difference is concerned.  Cut the standard frame rate in half and I'm sure you'd notice a difference, so why not when doubling it?  Also, I don't think I've seen anyone dispute how different the experience is, only how they responded to it.  Jackson himself intro'd the montage by acknowledging that it will take some getting used to.

Yeah, it's definitely noticeable. I've seen the same thing in TV showrooms, and on some movies the frame rate bump makes it looks very strange. The difference in quality makes it appear much more....staged. It's possible that the industry will adjust, but I think it's akin to newscasters on HD stations wearing makeup for old definition television. When you see them on HD, you sometimes go "WTF is wrong with their faces?"

Offline Neon Genesis

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4851
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #724 on: April 25, 2012, 05:01:15 PM »


Lol!  Two and a half months later and he comes through!!
I had forgotten all about this thread until I saw the update today.

Offline amysrevenge

  • Baseball-Cap-Beard-Baby Guy
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5932
  • The Warhammeriest
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #725 on: April 25, 2012, 06:16:14 PM »
A middle of the road discussion of the released video:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/story/2012/04/25/hobbit-movie-peter-jackson.html

Quote
Indeed, the footage was vivid, with grass blades, facial lines and soaring mountains appearing luminous and pronounced. The actors looked almost touchable, as if they were performing live on stage.

...

Jackson warned the new approach would take time to adjust to. Some bloggers agreed, quickly branding the footage released Tuesday as a failure in digital technology. The critics claimed the unfinished scenes looked like a low-budget TV show.

...

The footage of the hobbit's hometown is stunning, with each colour having almost a neon glow.

Big Mike
Grande Prairie AB Canada

Offline DeepGlue

  • Well Established
  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #726 on: April 25, 2012, 07:51:48 PM »
I've never gotten used to seeing movies higher than 24 fps. 120 Hz technology in modern TVs works great for sports, nature documentaries, and video games. But for movies I always have it off. No matter how much blur I get I just can't stand it. Makes me feel like I'm not watching a movie. I anxiously await OLED TVs with greatly improved response time.

So this movie will only be shown at 48 fps? Sucks.

Well... perhaps 120 Hz bothers me because of the interpolation, and maybe it wouldn't if those things were actually filmed at 120 or 60 fps. And/or perhaps I will get used to it with time.

Offline Neon Genesis

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4851
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #727 on: April 25, 2012, 09:37:22 PM »
Quote
The critics claimed the unfinished scenes looked like a low-budget TV show.
Maybe the bolded part is the key word here...

Offline stretcher

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
  • Learned it from watching you, dad
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #728 on: April 26, 2012, 01:02:42 AM »
It reminds me of when HD was first spreading, and some people were comparing it to the traditionally 30 fps soap operas and saying that it appeared cheap or low budget. I'm excited to see it in action.

Offline MisterMarc

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7508
  • The universe seems ...merely indifferent.
    • Schlock Treatment
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #729 on: April 26, 2012, 11:09:51 AM »
It reminds me of when HD was first spreading, and some people were comparing it to the traditionally 30 fps soap operas and saying that it appeared cheap or low budget. I'm excited to see it in action.

The comparison to soap operas is not something people did with all HD. It was a comparison that cropped up with HD televisions that employed auto-motion plus, which was a technology that artificially increased the frame rate. I think it was on certain samsung TVs.

Offline DeepGlue

  • Well Established
  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #730 on: April 26, 2012, 02:35:40 PM »
Yeah, that's 120 Hz (or some have 240 Hz) technology. Every brand has their own slick term for it.

Offline amysrevenge

  • Baseball-Cap-Beard-Baby Guy
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5932
  • The Warhammeriest
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #731 on: April 26, 2012, 04:40:32 PM »
Today's Ain't It Cool video has an effects guy talking about increased frame rates.

Big Mike
Grande Prairie AB Canada

Offline D'oh!

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2449
  • Pope of Chili Town
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #732 on: April 27, 2012, 02:36:28 AM »
That was an insightful interview, but I don't get how eliminating blur is supposed to look more "real" when in real life, fast-moving objects appear blurred.

I'm curious to see the technology in action, however.
"The power of Christ compels you!"

Offline Ah.hell

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 13108
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #733 on: April 27, 2012, 11:04:54 AM »
I wasn't all that excited to see the hobbit until I found out about this 48fps thing.  I can't wait to see it now.

Offline Rai

  • PIZZASAURUS
  • Global Moderator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 6762
Re: The Hobbit (2011)
« Reply #734 on: July 11, 2012, 07:53:43 AM »
An awesome promo image with a lot of new stuff:

http://www.ew.com/ew/special/0,,20399642_20610399,00.html

 

personate-rain
personate-rain