Why I LOVE the Soap Opera Effect!! It is here to stay.............unless the luddites win. - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 35 Old 07-31-2012, 12:52 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/337506/20120504/hdtv-hd-frame-rate-soap-opera-effect.htm'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_interpolation
http://www.studiodaily.com/2012/04/the-hobbit-the-soap-opera-effect-and-the-48fps-and-faster-future-of-movies/
http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2012/04/the-hobbit-debuted-some-footage-in-48-fps-and-everyone-hated-it


Read this and do more research. Get used to it. It isn't going away.

It is going to be everywhere because of the eye-popping clarity offered to you when the frames-per-second are raised. When all movies and TV are shot and projected digitally in the near-future, it will be everywhere you go.


-Will aka Babylon5fan (Hope they remaster it digitally some day and raise the fps)
b5fan001 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 35 Old 07-31-2012, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Otto Pylot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 7,271
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 241
And the point of your post is to show the superiority of motion interpolation with childish statements and large fonts? Motion interpolation is fine if that's your personal choice, but until ALL television manufacturers can implement it effectively the same way, that's all it's ever going to be, a choice.
Otto Pylot is online now  
post #3 of 35 Old 07-31-2012, 01:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gremmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 3,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by b5fan001 View Post

Get used to it.

No.

By the way, a luddite is a person who dislikes technological change IN GENERAL. It's not appropriate to use the term to refer to a person's dislike of one particular thing just because THAT THING happens to use technology. If that were appropriate, we could call you a Luddite because you don't like to wear shoes with flashing lights in them.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

gremmy is offline  
post #4 of 35 Old 07-31-2012, 02:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,443
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Liked: 285
Troll bait... rolleyes.gif
Ratman is offline  
post #5 of 35 Old 07-31-2012, 09:28 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
You missed the point. Motion Interpolation isn't the problem. It is how 48 fps (or more) looks to you. The fact is that the TV and the film industry have the ability to create content a much higher frame rates than before and the new HDTVs have the ability to deliver a near real picture. Film is produced at a much lower frame rate. New digital technology will replace film as we know it and deliver the incredible clarity & brilliance of HD it all its glory.

If you read the articles, you see that rejecting the soap opera effect is not the answer. What you are seeing is the future of film and TV.

My silly enthusiasm for it has nothing to do with the technological progress this represents.
b5fan001 is offline  
post #6 of 35 Old 07-31-2012, 09:39 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/luddite


I beg to differ. A Luddite is a person opposed to "technological change." I can read a dictionary as well as you can.
BUT that is NOT the point of the links I posted and the message I sought to convey.



The soap opera effect is not a degradation of the picture. It is part of a movement to improve display technology. People used "line-doublers" in the old days to improve 480i displays.

HDTVs are simply fixing a problem with the display when motion interpolation is employed. That fix actually improves the picture. It mimics the coming look of newer HD presentations.


-Will
b5fan001 is offline  
post #7 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 02:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19

That's good. Now begone (the bridge is that ---> way).

Rammitinski is offline  
post #8 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 07:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
gremmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 3,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Can't tell if trolling or just....


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

gremmy is offline  
post #9 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 07:15 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rammitinski View Post

That's good. Now begone (the bridge is that ---> way).

I'm not going away. This is an important subject that must be explored, rather than dismissed. I believe that when some folks learn about the real future of higher frames- per-second TV and cinema, they will accept that the picture has been IMPROVED. The picture isn't being cheapened as some seem to think. As frame rates go up, the more "real" the picture will look.

Again, I think everyone should read this before passing judgement:

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/337506/20120504/hdtv-hd-frame-rate-soap-opera-effect.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_interpolation
http://www.studiodaily.com/2012/04/the-hobbit-the-soap-opera-effect-and-the-48fps-and-faster-future-of-movies/
http://filmdrunk.uproxx.com/2012/04/the-hobbit-debuted-some-footage-in-48-fps-and-everyone-hated-it


-Will
b5fan001 is offline  
post #10 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 07:17 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by gremmy View Post

Can't tell if trolling or just....


Not trolling, I'm just baffled at the response to high frames-per-second display of HD.



-Will
b5fan001 is offline  
post #11 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 07:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: In the ATL
Posts: 4,279
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 209
Please don't feed the troll, and the thread will die off as it should.
slowbiscuit is offline  
post #12 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 07:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
gremmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 3,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Most of the people who dislike the soap opera effect (I count myself among them) are already aware of the information you posted at those links. Either you are not aware of this, or you're trolling.

Given your low post count, I doubt very many people are going to give you the benefit of the doubt.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

gremmy is offline  
post #13 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 07:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
gremmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 3,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowbiscuit View Post

Please don't feed the troll, and the thread will die off as it should.

Agreed. I will not be posting further.

Edit: this of course is a lie.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

gremmy is offline  
post #14 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 08:07 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by gremmy View Post

Most of the people who dislike the soap opera effect (I count myself among them) are already aware of the information you posted at those links. Either you are not aware of this, or you're trolling.
Given your low post count, I doubt very many people are going to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Again, I'm not trolling. Those articles are new to me and when I see discussions about this subject, I don't see these points being made in the clear concise way that these web pages made them. They made the subject easier to get a handle on and no matter what some think about the way I made the point, I just wanted to get the information in front of eyes that might care so that some minds might be changed.

Thanks for listening with an open mind,
-Will
b5fan001 is offline  
post #15 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 08:22 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 14,443
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Liked: 285
If you're not trolling, then keep your links and opinions on this subject to ONE thread. Thanks.
Ratman is offline  
post #16 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 03:20 PM
DAP
AVS Special Member
 
DAP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,226
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
What is needed is a "Film" mode in televisions that reduces the frame rate of everything to 24 frames per second and adds motion blur so that those who hate the soap opera effect can continue to live in the past and stop being an obstacle to those who wish to move forward.
DAP is offline  
post #17 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 03:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Beerstalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Peoria, IL
Posts: 1,978
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 23
I have no problem with faster screen refresh rates. I just hate frame interpolation and all of the horrible effects it can create.

If something was shot at 24fps I want to see it on my TV at 24fps, or at a multiple of 24fps by repeating the same frame multiple times (show me the same frame 5 times on a 120fps TV).

If something was shot at 60fps, I want to see it on my TV at 60fps, or at a multiple of 60fps by repeating the same frame multiple times (show me the same frame twice on a 120fps TV).

If something was shot at 120fps, I want to see it on my TV at 120fps.

I don't want 3:2 pulldown, I don't want the TV to make up stuff for how it "thinks" the frame in between two frames would be, etc.

I guess maybe we should call this OFR (Original Frame Rate). Then I can admit to being a OFR and OAR snob:D
Beerstalker is offline  
post #18 of 35 Old 08-01-2012, 07:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gremmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 3,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAP View Post

What is needed is a "Film" mode in televisions that reduces the frame rate of everything to 24 frames per second and adds motion blur so that those who hate the soap opera effect can continue to live in the past and stop being an obstacle to those who wish to move forward.

I feel compelled to make three points about we detractors of frame interpolation:

1) We are not living in the past. I doubt you'd find a single detractor of frame interpolation who would characterize their motivations as such. Rather, we have specific reasons for disliking this PARTICULAR technology which have been covered in countless threads in other sub-forums.

2) We are not acting as "an obstacle for those who wish to move forward." Most of us just want to be able to turn frame interpolation off. On some televisions, this cannot be done, and on others, the menu "off" item does not appear to function properly. I've never heard anyone suggest that frame interpolation should not exist as an option for those who want it. If you want to interpolate frames all the live long day, knock yourself out.

3) We certainly are not fans of motion blur. There are really two types of motion blur that are relevant here. The first is the motion blur that is actually captured on film. This "blur" is actually one of the reasons (another being low brightness) that you can go to the movies and watch film at 24fps without being distracted by judder. However, I have no problem with films being shot at higher frame rates. The second type of relevant blur is caused by the LCD sample and hold effect. It just so happens, this latter is precisely the motivation for the initial consumer implementations of frame interpolation. To be honest, sample and hold never bothered me all that much, so I would rather watch an LCD with bad sample and hold than one with frame interpolation, simply because I find the effect the less objectionable of the two evils.

P.S.

I know I said I wouldn't post in this thread again, but I should have known better. I can't help myself.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

gremmy is offline  
post #19 of 35 Old 08-02-2012, 10:12 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by gremmy View Post

I feel compelled to make three points about we detractors of frame interpolation:
1) We are not living in the past. I doubt you'd find a single detractor of frame interpolation who would characterize their motivations as such. Rather, we have specific reasons for disliking this PARTICULAR technology which have been covered in countless threads in other sub-forums.
2) We are not acting as "an obstacle for those who wish to move forward." Most of us just want to be able to turn frame interpolation off. On some televisions, this cannot be done, and on others, the menu "off" item does not appear to function properly. I've never heard anyone suggest that frame interpolation should not exist as an option for those who want it. If you want to interpolate frames all the live long day, knock yourself out.
3) We certainly are not fans of motion blur. There are really two types of motion blur that are relevant here. The first is the motion blur that is actually captured on film. This "blur" is actually one of the reasons (another being low brightness) that you can go to the movies and watch film at 24fps without being distracted by judder. However, I have no problem with films being shot at higher frame rates. The second type of relevant blur is caused by the LCD sample and hold effect. It just so happens, this latter is precisely the motivation for the initial consumer implementations of frame interpolation. To be honest, sample and hold never bothered me all that much, so I would rather watch an LCD with bad sample and hold than one with frame interpolation, simply because I find the effect the less objectionable of the two evils.
P.S.
I know I said I wouldn't post in this thread again, but I should have known better. I can't help myself.

Thanks for responding. Yours are points that make sense and help me understand the opinion that is opposite of mine. I shouldn't have added the luddites comment. I thought it was funny. I didn't realize others would take it seriously. Nevertheless, while I disagree with you, I still enjoyed reading your points.

-Will
b5fan001 is offline  
post #20 of 35 Old 08-02-2012, 10:44 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,079
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 354
The most ridiculous thread on all of AVSForum.

I take it that the o/p is also a fan of colorizing black & white movies and adding CGI crap to films made in the '70s? Or, as is sadly probably the case, he would never watch a black & white movie or a film made in the '70s in the first place.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)
Curator,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #21 of 35 Old 08-02-2012, 03:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bdfox18doe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 6,464
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The most ridiculous thread on all of AVSForum..

There may very well be a clue to that in his sig: "Will aka Babylon5fan (Hope they remaster it digitally some day and raise the fps)" tongue.gif

Bob

The views expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent those of the FOX,ABC,CBS,or CW Networks,MeTv, my employer or its parent company. Nor my wife for that matter!
bdfox18doe is offline  
post #22 of 35 Old 08-02-2012, 03:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sneals2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 7,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerstalker View Post

I have no problem with faster screen refresh rates. I just hate frame interpolation and all of the horrible effects it can create.
If something was shot at 24fps I want to see it on my TV at 24fps, or at a multiple of 24fps by repeating the same frame multiple times (show me the same frame 5 times on a 120fps TV).
If something was shot at 60fps, I want to see it on my TV at 60fps, or at a multiple of 60fps by repeating the same frame multiple times (show me the same frame twice on a 120fps TV).
If something was shot at 120fps, I want to see it on my TV at 120fps.
I don't want 3:2 pulldown, I don't want the TV to make up stuff for how it "thinks" the frame in between two frames would be, etc.
I guess maybe we should call this OFR (Original Frame Rate). Then I can admit to being a OFR and OAR snob:D

The definitive post on the subject - which I agree with 100%. (Though I'd add the 50Hz multiples!)

Different content and different genres can benefit from, or be diminished by, different frame rate (and shutter speed/angle choices) However I want to watch the material as it was original shot, originally composed and watch it in the way that those creating the content did.

Personally I think that 24/25Hz motion has been inappropriately used in some genres - but I wouldn't advocate converting this material to higher frame rates. I might advocate originating at the higher frame rate - but not conversion.

Classic example is the 'wagon wheels going backwards' artefact. If you motion interpolate this from 24fps to 60fps they'll still go backwards, just more smoothly, and the artefact, if anything, becomes less obvious. If you shoot at 60fps they may well go in the right direction...

I'm looking forward to The Hobbit. I recently watched a 50fps costume drama shot in Sweden - and a lot of costume drama in the UK in the 80s was shot on video. It can be more involving - as it has a more realistic feel. However it may also reduce the 'suspension of disbelief' effect?
sneals2000 is offline  
post #23 of 35 Old 08-02-2012, 06:28 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

The most ridiculous thread on all of AVSForum.
I take it that the o/p is also a fan of colorizing black & white movies and adding CGI crap to films made in the '70s? Or, as is sadly probably the case, he would never watch a black & white movie or a film made in the '70s in the first place.

Hello,

The truth is I LOVE many old black and white films. I fell in love with Loretta Young as a young man seeing her old movies. Irene Dunne is a marvel to behold in her old films. I have a copy of the movie Tall in The Saddle that I yank out to watch at least once a year. My favorite film of all time is Superman: The Motion Picture. I love that film because of its uplifting view of America and its incredibly imaginative special effects.

I am NOT in favor of colorizing movies. The technology ruins perfectly good films. The Philadelphia Story and High Society tell the same story but do it in very different styles. It's a Wonderful Life and White Christmas
(Vera Ellen is yummy!) are the best holiday movies ever made. I will make nod toward Holiday Inn as almost a great Christmas movie.

You don't know me and don't presume that you understand me at all. I have most likely been watching the progression of cinema longer than you have been alive. I just don't have a problem with crystal clear, sparkling clean, eye-popping technology.

Your post makes me think of what a remastered White Christmas would look like on my Blu-Ray with Motion Interpolation. I have to admit that might be quite jarring!

-Will
b5fan001 is offline  
post #24 of 35 Old 08-02-2012, 06:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
gremmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 3,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by b5fan001 View Post

Hello,
The truth is I LOVE many old black and white films. I fell in love with Loretta Young as a young man seeing her old movies. Irene Dunne is a marvel to behold in her old films. I have a copy of the movie Tall in The Saddle that I yank out to watch at least once a year. My favorite film of all time is Superman: The Motion Picture. I love that film because of its uplifting view of America and its incredibly imaginative special effects.
I am NOT in favor of colorizing movies. The technology ruins perfectly good films. The Philadelphia Story and High Society tell the same story but do it in very different styles. It's a Wonderful Life and White Christmas
(Vera Ellen is yummy!) are the best holiday movies ever made. I will make nod toward Holiday Inn as almost a great Christmas movie.
You don't know me and don't presume that you understand me at all. I have most likely been watching the progression of cinema longer than you have been alive. I just don't have a problem with crystal clear, sparkling clean, eye-popping technology.
Your post makes me think of what a remastered White Christmas would look like on my Blu-Ray with Motion Interpolation. I have to admit that might be quite jarring!
-Will

You must understand how strange a dichotomy you represent. On the one hand, you oppose colorizing black and white films. But on the other hand, you are in favor of adding entire frames that never existed on the original print. Which is the larger distortion? I will not attempt to quantify that except to say that both are gross bastardizations of the original content. And both, by the way, represent poor computerized approximations of images that never existed in the first place and that likely would never have been chosen by the director. What I mean is that a color movie has different filming sensibilities from a black and white one, and a high frame rate movie has different filming sensibilities than a low frame rate one. To add one or the other without ALSO adding the directorial ability to alter images to achieve the desired impact, all one is doing is destroying the original film. And of course it doesn't help that neither colorizing nor frame interpolation technology are very convincing.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

gremmy is offline  
post #25 of 35 Old 08-02-2012, 09:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Otto Pylot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 7,271
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Why must we continue to feed him? If we stop, he will die and go away....
Otto Pylot is online now  
post #26 of 35 Old 08-03-2012, 11:01 AM
DAP
AVS Special Member
 
DAP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,226
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by gremmy View Post


And both, by the way, represent poor computerized approximations of images that never existed in the first place.

You must hate hand animated films where the artists drew the key frames, and sent them over to Korea for cheap labor to paint the in between frames. smile.gif
DAP is offline  
post #27 of 35 Old 08-03-2012, 11:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
Kingcarcas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: East Los Angeles
Posts: 753
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 30
I always wanted movies to use higher frame rates and wondered what it would be like, because watching a few movies back to back can hurt your eyes. Then when i actually gave this stuff a try i was just disgusted...........so no thanks.

Kingcarcas is offline  
post #28 of 35 Old 08-03-2012, 12:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BllDo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Twin Cities
Posts: 1,061
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked: 79
Boxxy_Troll_Thread.PNG

-




Is it solipsistic in here, or is it just me?
BllDo is offline  
post #29 of 35 Old 08-03-2012, 03:15 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by gremmy View Post

You must understand how strange a dichotomy you represent. On the one hand, you oppose colorizing black and white films. But on the other hand, you are in favor of adding entire frames that never existed on the original print. Which is the larger distortion? I will not attempt to quantify that except to say that both are gross bastardizations of the original content. And both, by the way, represent poor computerized approximations of images that never existed in the first place and that likely would never have been chosen by the director. What I mean is that a color movie has different filming sensibilities from a black and white one, and a high frame rate movie has different filming sensibilities than a low frame rate one. To add one or the other without ALSO adding the directorial ability to alter images to achieve the desired impact, all one is doing is destroying the original film. And of course it doesn't help that neither colorizing nor frame interpolation technology are very convincing.


I actually always have had the habit of treating everything based on what I perceive at the time. I don't approach art or technology with a certain mind frame. I don't cling to the past. I don't rush headlong into the next big thing. Colorization of movies look horrible. The movies look washed out. The color isn't vibrant. It all looks unnatural. It truly "bastardizes" movies. As I write this, I'm looking at my mother's old HD Rear-Projection TV (RPTV). My family was watching the TV using composite video for DVD and RF for cable TV. I walked through the door and instantly knew something was wrong. Several new connections later, we have a much better display. That change is what high frames-per-second (fps) looks like to me. For my family, getting a great Hi Def picture wasn't necessary.

At the very least I have heard the objections to soap opera effect (SOE). I don't agree but it is very cool to finally get some perspective. The next time I have a question to ask, I'll look around first. And I swear I had no idea that my opening post would be so honkin' large! Huge mistake. Thanks for being civil.

-Will

P.S. I mean no insult to anyone by using terms and parentheses to write but I have to write technical plans for non-technical people at work. We have a rule to explain jargon in writings before we use acronyms. If I don't do that now when I write, my head explodes. #toooldtochange
b5fan001 is offline  
post #30 of 35 Old 09-05-2012, 12:27 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
b5fan001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 79
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by gremmy View Post

You must understand how strange a dichotomy you represent. On the one hand, you oppose colorizing black and white films. But on the other hand, you are in favor of adding entire frames that never existed on the original print. Which is the larger distortion? I will not attempt to quantify that except to say that both are gross bastardizations of the original content. And both, by the way, represent poor computerized approximations of images that never existed in the first place and that likely would never have been chosen by the director. What I mean is that a color movie has different filming sensibilities from a black and white one, and a high frame rate movie has different filming sensibilities than a low frame rate one. To add one or the other without ALSO adding the directorial ability to alter images to achieve the desired impact, all one is doing is destroying the original film. And of course it doesn't help that neither colorizing nor frame interpolation technology are very convincing.


http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Side-By-Side-Trailer-Showcases-Scorsese-Soderbergh-Cameron-More-Talking-Movies-32711.html

Digital vs.Video: the future debated by the people who use them. Check it out!
b5fan001 is offline  
Reply HDTV Technical

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off