With the new 48 and 60 fps movies. - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 52 Old 01-24-2012, 09:34 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
H8nXTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Pacific Palisades, CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 1,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 11
So the Hobbit is being filmed in 48 fps, I'm wondering what things I'll need to upgrade to run them at full resolution when they come out on Blu-Ray? Low end video card (at 48 or 60 fps at 1080p)? TV? Projector? How about if they're filmed in 3D?
http://news.yahoo.com/jacksons-hobbi...162203308.html
H8nXTC is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 52 Old 01-24-2012, 09:44 PM
 
audio/videoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 353
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I believe the sequel to avatar is being filmed at 48 fps as well.

This means that pulldown judder will be an issue for both 60 and 120 hz tv sets. An upgrade to 240 hz tv's will be necessary to avoid pulldown judder.

Resolution will be unchanged: it will still be at 1080p for blu ray.
audio/videoman is offline  
post #3 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 02:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nevcairiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 110
Blu-ray does not support 48p, you'll most likely still get 24p on the Blu-ray discs.
Blu-ray also doesn't support 60p, the best they could do is 60i.
Nevcairiel is offline  
post #4 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 05:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jeffkro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Yup BR is going to be the limiting factor for new formats like 4K. Unfortunately we are going to need another new media format.

By the way the new OLED TVs from LG don't have the motion blur problems of LCD panels. So 24fps should look better.

PS the thing I don't get is 30fps is known to be the minimum for smooth fast action so why did they make the standard 24fps?
jeffkro is offline  
post #5 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 05:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Theresa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,430
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkro View Post

Yup BR is going to be the limiting factor for new formats like 4K. Unfortunately we are going to need another new media format.

By the way the new OLED TVs from LG don't have the motion blur problems of LCD panels. So 24fps should look better.

PS the thing I don't get is 30fps is known to be the minimum for smooth fast action so why did they make the standard 24fps?

24fps is a hold over from film. It is archaic. I've always been bothered by flicker when watching movies in the theater. Hopefully they will go to p60 eventually.
Theresa is offline  
post #6 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 05:35 AM
Advanced Member
 
tman247's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 863
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 29
I believe a 4K version of BR is in development. It will use multi-layer discs, but you will need a new player to output at that resolution. Not sure if a standard player will downscale to 1080P or not though.
tman247 is online now  
post #7 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 06:00 AM
Newbie
 
icstm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Out of interest - Is 48p 48 or 47.952?

Also:

"By the way the new OLED TVs from LG don't have the motion blur problems of LCD panels. So 24fps should look better. " But there is inherent motion issues in 24p content as 24frames is too slow for motion (either action or panning). Purists used to call that the beauty of film...
icstm is offline  
post #8 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 06:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Theresa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,430
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
60p playback is more important to me than 4k which would provide no benefit for me since I have "only" a 50" plasma.
Theresa is offline  
post #9 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 06:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jeffkro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

60p playback is more important to me than 4k which would provide no benefit for me since I have "only" a 50" plasma.

I'm with you, I won't be getting rid of a perfectly good 1080p TV to buy 4k, 60fps, or 3D. That being said when you are in the market for a new TV it makes sense to get the one with all the new features.

PS - pretty sure plasma doesn't have the motion blur issue of LCD either. Plasma has the better picture but LCD has other advantages.
jeffkro is offline  
post #10 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 06:52 AM
Senior Member
 
knutinh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I am willing to bet that once "48p" is touted as the new video format, our existing tvs, receivers and disc players will have to be upgraded to support it fully, even though they are capable of 1080p60 today.

It ought to be possible to "bake" 48i into existing 24p formats. Might not be ideal, but given good de-interlacing, it might be a better compromise between spatial and temporal resolution once 48p Hollywood sources are available.

Seems to me that the industry bakes in minimal future proofing in their products, hoping that people will purchase minor respins of the same functionality again and again...

-k
knutinh is offline  
post #11 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 07:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
whiteboy714's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,601
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio/videoman View Post

I believe the sequel to avatar is being filmed at 48 fps as well.

This means that pulldown judder will be an issue for both 60 and 120 hz tv sets. An upgrade to 240 hz tv's will be necessary to avoid pulldown judder.

Resolution will be unchanged: it will still be at 1080p for blu ray.

Is there even such a thjing as a true 240hz tv? Very few are even 120.
whiteboy714 is offline  
post #12 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 07:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nevcairiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 110
No (even remotely affordable) panel today can really refresh at 240Hz, getting them to 120Hz was already a challenge, which is why true 120Hz TVs are so rare as well. Don't believe in the "120Hz", or "240Hz", or even "600Hz" marketing terms they use to advertise their interpolation features

Its more likely that they'll add either a 48Hz mode or 96Hz mode to the TVs.
Nevcairiel is offline  
post #13 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 09:03 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
walford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 16,789
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevcairiel View Post

No (even remotely affordable) panel today can really refresh at 240Hz, getting them to 120Hz was already a challenge, which is why true 120Hz TVs are so rare as well. Don't believe in the "120Hz", or "240Hz", or even "600Hz" marketing terms they use to advertise their interpolation features

Its more likely that they'll add either a 48Hz mode or 96Hz mode to the TVs.

What you say is true for Plasma panels but it is not true for LCD panels.
walford is offline  
post #14 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 10:01 AM
Senior Member
 
khollister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I believe the Sony HX929, for instance, has a native refresh rate of 240 Hz. The Sony spec sheet lists the panel frequency as 240 Hz.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
khollister is offline  
post #15 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 11:05 AM
Senior Member
 
knutinh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by khollister View Post

I believe the Sony HX929, for instance, has a native refresh rate of 240 Hz. The Sony spec sheet lists the panel frequency as 240 Hz.

As long as it does not support 48fps over HDMI, there is no trivial way to exploit that 240Hz for 48fps content.

-k
knutinh is offline  
post #16 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 02:23 PM
Senior Member
 
ericbsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkro View Post

PS the thing I don't get is 30fps is known to be the minimum for smooth fast action so why did they make the standard 24fps?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

24fps is a hold over from film. It is archaic.

Yup. Goes back to the day when film footage was expensive, and 24fps was the minimum you could get away with and still have reasonable looking motion. By reducing the frames by ~6fps they were saving lord knows how many feet of film that would have to be cut and shipped to every theater in the country.

--

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

The future keeps telling us what the past was about. You make the past mean different things by what you do with the time that comes after.
ericbsmith is offline  
post #17 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 02:34 PM
Senior Member
 
ericbsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by knutinh View Post

Seems to me that the industry bakes in minimal future proofing in their products, hoping that people will purchase minor respins of the same functionality again and again...

You have to keep in mind that the industry has to serve many masters. Europe is still using 25/50Hz TVs, while America uses 30/60Hz. No matter what frame rate they choose to shoot movies in somebody is going to have troubles. I'm guessing that 48fps was chosen because it can be downsampled to 24Hz interlaced on existing Blu-Ray/DVD players and time converted to 50Hz without too much trouble (this is what they do with movies anyway - they speed up 24Hz movies to 25Hz so they are compatible with the TVs; speeding up 48Hz to 50Hz is by the same aspect no big deal).

--

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

The future keeps telling us what the past was about. You make the past mean different things by what you do with the time that comes after.
ericbsmith is offline  
post #18 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 02:39 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
renethx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 16,165
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Liked: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericbsmith View Post

24Hz interlaced

What's that? Looks even worse than 24Hz progressive (24 fps).

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

-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
renethx is offline  
post #19 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 03:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
salacious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotland's wet coast
Posts: 516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by icstm View Post

Out of interest - Is 48p 48 or 47.952?

I could be wrong but I believe that in the cinema, film was 24 and slowed to 23.976 on BR. So it should be 48 and 60Hz. I'm not sure on the switch to digital if things changed

__________________________
Blu-Rays 100
HD DVDs 65
DVDs 300+

salacious is offline  
post #20 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 08:50 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
H8nXTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Pacific Palisades, CA, U.S.A.
Posts: 1,142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by audio/videoman View Post

I believe the sequel to avatar is being filmed at 48 fps as well.

I think the article states 60fps.

I've noticed some HDMI cables/products are listed with 4K already.
H8nXTC is offline  
post #21 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 10:21 PM
Member
 
NTNgod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericbsmith View Post

Yup. Goes back to the day when film footage was expensive, and 24fps was the minimum you could get away with and still have reasonable looking motion.

The standardization of frame rate at 24fps - roughly around the dawn of the sound film - was arrived at in large part because it was determined that was the average speed theaters were actually showing the movies at - for scheduling, not technical, reasons.

Prior to standardization, the typical framerate most films were actually shot at - and intended to be shown at - varied around the 16-22fps range.
NTNgod is offline  
post #22 of 52 Old 01-25-2012, 11:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nevcairiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by renethx View Post

What's that? Looks even worse than 24Hz progressive (24 fps).

He probably means 48i, which is encoded as 24 full images (48 fields). It can be argued if full temporal resolution is better then full spatial resolution... I would probably prefer the real 24p over some 48i bastardization.
However, this is not allowed in the Blu-ray standard anyway.

What they could do is speed it up slightly to get 50i, which is a supported format (Think PAL speed up), however i doubt they would because alot of US TV sets probably lack good 50Hz support.

Wonder if they'll come up with some form of Blu-ray Plus or something that just adds support for 4K and higher progressive frame rates.
If you take 3D into account as well, we'll also need a new HDMI, which is being worked on, but who knows when there will be widespread implementation.
Nevcairiel is offline  
post #23 of 52 Old 01-26-2012, 03:37 AM
Senior Member
 
undermined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 211
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
48fps has been proposed since cameras and projectors used for cinema can already handle it and the added fps will reduce judder as compared to just 24fps.

60fps is being pushed by James Cameron for its greater ability to handle motion and again, cameras can do it already and video already being 60fps so rolling it out will sorta fit into workflows.

and HDMI 1.4a can do 4K, but is limited to 3840x2160@24fps

I personally want displays that can take 4K input signals @60hz or at least 1080p@120 and not just the same 60hz we have now.

It is stupid to think a given panel is native 120hz or even 240hz and the highest i can feed it from a PC is 60Hz.

Display port 1.2 can handle the increase already and technically could allow direct addressing of the pixels from the GPU but most displays only have HDMI without even a option to do 120hz from a PC.

Gaming GPUs can already handle 4K and and if the industry want early adopters to but 4k displays it is kinda stupid to think they should only give us displays that will just upscale everything and we'll be happy with that versus allowing native format from a PC since no other source is out there .
undermined is offline  
post #24 of 52 Old 01-26-2012, 03:47 AM
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 knutinh View Post

As long as it does not support 48fps over HDMI, there is no trivial way to exploit that 240Hz for 48fps content.

-k

Though it could be possible to fudge a "48p via 60p" HDMI system (by repeating frames to pad out the signal by 12 frames a second and then discarding them again)
sneals2000 is offline  
post #25 of 52 Old 01-26-2012, 03:48 AM
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
Presumably 8k @ 120Hz (aka Super Hi Vision) is pushing both resolution and frame rate requirements for future formats?

Be interesting to see what the Olympics stuff in SHV looks like later this year.
sneals2000 is offline  
post #26 of 52 Old 01-26-2012, 05:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nevcairiel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,010
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post

Though it could be possible to fudge a "48p via 60p" HDMI system (by repeating frames to pad out the signal by 12 frames a second and then discarding them again)

Doubtful this would ever make any kind of standard, its just too hackish.
Its not too far fetched to just get 48p out of a HDMI signal, they support 1080p60 already, 48 is even lower, so the bandwidth is there - just needs a TV to accept such a refresh rate.
Nevcairiel is offline  
post #27 of 52 Old 01-27-2012, 09:08 AM
Newbie
 
icstm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sneals2000 View Post

Presumably 8k @ 120Hz (aka Super Hi Vision) is pushing both resolution and frame rate requirements for future formats?

Be interesting to see what the Olympics stuff in SHV looks like later this year.

where will you be getting that? I beleive the BBC will be using that for their outdoor broadcasts, but did not realise that it was being beemed into people's homes.
icstm is offline  
post #28 of 52 Old 01-27-2012, 06:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
ymarker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
8k ~ Imax
ymarker is offline  
post #29 of 52 Old 01-27-2012, 09:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jeffkro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by ymarker View Post

8k ~ Imax

Is Imax digital now or are they still shooting on film?
jeffkro is offline  
post #30 of 52 Old 01-27-2012, 09:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
pokekevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 5,065
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkro View Post


Is Imax digital now or are they still shooting on film?

I thought it was still film than scanned

No subwoofer I've heard has been able to produce the bass I've experienced in the Corps!

Must..stop...buying...every bluray release...
pokekevin is offline  
Reply Home Theater Computers

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