Originally Posted by Chronoptimist
The objective should be being true to the source. Many (I almost want to say most) films are graded in a way specifically so they do not
look like reality, but evoke a certain mood for the scene or film as a whole.
Graded? Aside from certain things that are done for artistic reasons such as using slow motion etc. for emphasis, most of the artifacts of 24fps are due to compromises that have to be made for retaining that archaic standard.
It's not quite accurate to say that they're specifically filmed to NOT look like reality. It's just the compromises that folks have become used to. The inherent jitter is of course, due to the really low frame rate (and it annoys me even when watching movies in a theater).
The blurring during motion is also an artifact of the ridiculously low frame rate. Because the frame rate is so low, the camera's shutter is kept open longer specifically to produce this blurring during fast motion as this reduces the average person's perception of the jitter. If each frame in a 24fps scene with fast motion was sharp, the jerkiness of the movements would be much more apparent to regular viewers.
There is nothing 'sped-up' about the look of FI. If a person runs 20 feet in a second, they're still running 20 feet in a second with FI. The difference is that instead of seeing the person move that 20 feet in hitching, stuttering, completely blurry frames, they now move much more smoothly and can now be more clearly seen, as if you were watching the person in real life.
Unfortunately, there are numerous reasons why directors and film makers are still stuck on this stupidly slow standard. One is simply complacency because they've been stuck on this standard for so long, another reason though, is that many folks have become so programmed to accept the inherent motion artifacts of 24fps to be the norm that they are resistant to a different look (as many claim the soap opera effect of intense FI 'takes them out of the movie experience').
I personally would like the motion in a movie to look like real life because everytime something moves fast in a 24fps movie, that aggravating stuttering and blurring reminds me that I'm in a theater watching a movie filmed at a framerate standard from almost a century ago (it was standardized in the late 1920's). I find it a lot easier to be involved in and 'get lost in' a movie when I'm watching it with FI as the motion artifacts are no longer as distracting (although 2010 level FI still leaves something to be desired).
I do wonder how motion handling is going to be with 24p sources though, and whether there are going to be motionflow options
I really do hope they have some form of it implemented in this device.
I'm glad that we have some directors now looking to change from 24p to higher framerates.
Yes, and hopefully when 48fps movies begin debuting at theaters, we don't get too many folks whining that it looks 'sped-up', or "it looks like I'm watching a soap opera", or "it takes me out of the feeling that I'm watching a movie", because this will just serve to slow the adoption of higher frame rates by studios and other directors.