Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn
Lucas was as wrong about that as he was about Jar Jar Binks. 30 fps IS better than 24 fps. The "look" of film comes from severe limitations in technology and the desire to minimize the amount of film used back in the 1920s and 1930s. There is NO EXCUSE and NO REASON to be tied to 24 fps.
Speaking as a guy who's worked in film for more than 30 years, I would disagree. I think the very unreality of 24fps is one of the things that psychologically gives it an emotional feeling. I'm generally opposed to higher frame rates for scripted entertainment for the simple reason that it takes me out of the experience and calls too much attention to itself.
Sometimes, the flaws
are what make it interesting. I think you have to step back and realize that there's more to what makes up an image than just how it measures or what the technical specs are. When we do color-correction in the mastering room, I don't necessarily speak of "warm" or "blue" or bright; we talk about what the emotion of the scene is. Is it sad? Is it poignant? Is it frightening? That's what sets the tone for the experience -- not points on a scope or pixels on a vectorscope.
24 frames is part of that. I have no problem for 30fps and higher frame rates for certain kinds of entertainment, particularly live TV, documentaries, theme park rides, and things like that. But for regular movies, I think it calls too much attention to itself. I think we've been ingrained for more than 90 years to understand that 24fps images are a fantasy world, and it works for communicating those kinds of stories.
I'd draw a parallel to high shutter speeds, like the 90-degree or 45-degree shutter used in Saving Private Ryan
and similar action sequences. Initially, this kind of hyper-sharp look was electric, grabbed our attention, and looked very cool; now, it's used in every cheap TV show to the point where you go, "ah, high-speed shutter. Now the show will get exciting." It's become a total cliche.
Does the clarity of the image make those shots better? Not to me. Sometimes, it winds up merely as different
... not better. And I don't think the motion-compensation circuits in TV sets help.