or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Will movies filmed in 48fps require new home theater equipment?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Will movies filmed in 48fps require new home theater equipment? - Page 6

post #151 of 190
Easy.....



Have you been a bad boy? biggrin.gif

.
post #152 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

Jackson says it was shot and presented at 48Hz. There was no double or triple flashing.
That article makes no sense btw but feel free to take their word over the director's..


link
I think the people who make and sell the projectors (which is what that website was) would know whether their projectors are double flashing (for 3D 48 fps) or triple flashing (3D 24 fps) each frame for each eye.
Quote:
Jackson says it was shot and presented at 48Hz
He said 48 fps not Hz. He's trying to get the point across in a simple way. It's the first 48 fps film, so of course he's going to say they are presenting it, in some places, at 48 fps. He doesn't mention how many times the projectors flash each frame of the 48/24 fps versions.
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 7/26/13 at 10:58am
post #153 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

That is what i get - blocked - when i try to download the file.

You'll have to go here

If it doesn't work then something's going on with mediafire.
If you were referring to the video in the "2K by 4K" post, it's the same video.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

I think the people who make and sell the projectors (which is what that website was) would know whether their projectors are double flashing

I would love to hear your explanation for the Hobbit's look.
post #154 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

I would love to hear your explanation for the Hobbit's look.
Filming parameters, post production processes, how it is displayed.

Frame rate (shooting & display), shutter settings, 2D or 3D, colour grading and other post production processes/FX, lighting, CGI, lenses used, cameras used/other camera settings, colour space/levels, camerawork (how it was shot, pan speed, etc.), aspect ratio, set design and more.
Edited by Joe Bloggs - 7/27/13 at 4:01am
post #155 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Motion interpolation (and other motion algorithms) do *something* to the images themselves to enhance their look as if they were shot on video.  Even *if* the source feed of the movie Looper on HBO is put on pause (at my DVR), there's something going by the TV on with each of those duplicate identical frames sent to the tv that keeps it consistently SOE.  Otherwise things would be non-uniform between moving and stationary objects (in screen space).
The only thing they do is insert intermediate frames which smooths out the appearance of motion. Some people equate this smoother motion with "looking like a soap opera" because that's where they are used to seeing that kind of fluid motion.

With a paused image, there's no movement, so interpolation isn't doing anything. You can only see the "soap opera effect" that interpolation can introduce (not all sets do it) when things are moving.


I reiterate; what you are describing are things like set design and lighting. You can see that when the image is paused - but that's not something interpolation can affect.
post #156 of 190
When you pause a interpolated film you pause on a fake frame or on a real frame. I don't believe someone would be able to telll the difference between a fake frame or a real frame smile.gif
post #157 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

Motion interpolation (and other motion algorithms) do *something* to the images themselves to enhance their look as if they were shot on video.  Even *if* the source feed of the movie Looper on HBO is put on pause (at my DVR), there's something going by the TV on with each of those duplicate identical frames sent to the tv that keeps it consistently SOE.  Otherwise things would be non-uniform between moving and stationary objects (in screen space).
The only thing they do is insert intermediate frames which smooths out the appearance of motion.

 

No, I still think you're oversimplifying this.  You cannot just "insert" the intermediate frames flawlessly.  Those frames are going to be drawn, and none of those intermediate frames are going to be perfect, and they will have whatever artifacts are inherent in the shape/edge isolation algorithms they're using.

 

I don't know the algorithm they're using in particular, but I do know instinctively based on other edge detection stuff I've done in the distant past.  An edge tends to be a sharp barrier unless you're careful. Any pulling out and replacing of the item contained by that edge will lose whatever natural antialiasing that happens by the pixels originally containing half the object and half the background, for instance.

 

Actually, you don't need to be a software engineer to see this: anyone who has carelessly tried to remove a person from a photo using a edge identification algorithm in an image editor has seen this effect in person.  The person looks like they would had you used scissors and cannot be moved elsewhere realistically unless some kind of feathering with the destination is built in.

 

By the way, you're the one to ask here: do you know the algorithm they're using?


Edited by tgm1024 - 7/27/13 at 8:17am
post #158 of 190
None of display panels (either plasma or LCD) has refresh rate of 24 or 48 Hz. So what you see is a result of interpolation anyway. The question is WHERE this interpolation is done - in production house, when source material is converted to 50/60 FPS for distribution on BD or in your TV, when it converts incoming video stream to whatever native refresh rate of panel is.
post #159 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

When you pause a interpolated film you pause on a fake frame or on a real frame. I don't believe someone would be able to telll the difference between a fake frame or a real frame smile.gif
No, when you pause the film, you are pausing a 24fps native source. The television is what's doing the interpolation, so unless you are using a freeze-frame feature of the TV rather than the pause button on the player, it won't be possible to pause on an interpolated frame.
And I bet even if your TV has a freeze-frame function, it will only freeze on real frames and not interpolated ones.

And if there is no movement in the image, the "interpolated" frames will be identical to the original frames.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

Currently most films are 24 fps. For television the current ITU specs go up to 120 fps for UHDTV1. Judder will be more noticeable on TVs at 4K, which is why they're looking at higher frame rates for TV.
There's already a test station broadcasting UHDTV at 50 fps.

When the broadcasters will be using 50 fps or more for UHDTV, why would people want to be limited to a TV that can only accept 30Hz max?
I am all for increasing the native framerates. But it is unrealistic to hold back the next generation of games consoles to wait for HDMI 2.0 when they have no need for anything above 30Hz at 4K. They are not powerful enough to be running games above 30fps at 4K (you'll be lucky to even see that happen) and 99.999% of all films in existence are 24fps.

And if high framerate content ever does happen, they will just release updated hardware, like the Xbox 360 getting an HDMI output.

Currently, the only use-case where going above 30Hz at 4K actually matters, is connecting a PC up to the display - and this can already be achieved using DisplayPort.

And just because a panel may only accept a 30Hz input, that does not limit the panel to refreshing at 30Hz. Most televisions today are still limited to a 60Hz input, but they can refresh at 120Hz and even 240Hz using interpolation.
post #160 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

When you pause a interpolated film you pause on a fake frame or on a real frame. I don't believe someone would be able to telll the difference between a fake frame or a real frame smile.gif
No, when you pause the film, you are pausing a 24fps native source. The television is what's doing the interpolation, so unless you are using a freeze-frame feature of the TV rather than the pause button on the player, it won't be possible to pause on an interpolated frame.
And I bet even if your TV has a freeze-frame function, it will only freeze on real frames and not interpolated ones.

 

Yep.

 

Chronoptimist continues:
And if there is no movement in the image, the "interpolated" frames will be identical to the original frames.

 

Well, it could well be that the interpolation mechanism alters all the frames including original ones to make sure that the artifacts are evenly applied.

 

But to be clear: the effect that I'm seeing in particular is from FIOS (1080i) premium channel.

 

When motion interpolation is ramped to 11 on my TV, the items/characters/etc. seem "punched out", even when paused.

 

Chron, have you attempted this very same thing on your TV?  Look at a source where your TV is yielding a pronounced SOE.  Then hit pause.  I see the SOE staying put.  You don't I assume?  The SOE suddenly goes away for unmoving frames (and stationary items)?

post #161 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

When motion interpolation is ramped to 11 on my TV, the items/characters/etc. seem "punched out", even when paused.

Chron, have you attempted this very same thing on your TV?  Look at a source where your TV is yielding a pronounced SOE.  Then hit pause.  I see the SOE staying put.  You don't I assume?  The SOE suddenly goes away for unmoving frames (and stationary items)?
What display are you using? It sounds like it's doing more than just motion interpolation with that preference.
post #162 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Bloggs View Post

Filming parameters, post production processes, how it is displayed.

Frame rate (shooting & display), shutter settings, 2D or 3D, colour grading and other post production processes/FX, lighting, CGI, lenses used, cameras used/other camera settings, colour space/levels, camerawork (how it was shot, pan speed, etc.), aspect ratio, set design and more.

Never said those weren't factors, but the Hobbit's look was all about 48fps and the elimination of double / triple flash judder.
T. Schmidt was chief designer for the Hobbit's projection system and says right here how they eliminated "double flashing".


Quote:
Dual-projector 3-D shows continuous images to each eye, replicating the “real world” more closely than so-called “double flash” techniques used for HFR 3-D single-projector presentations.

Full article here

The Christie link you gave was bugging me. It makes sense now because there was a third projector at the premier (not shown) which double flashed unlike the main units. It was dimmed and essentially not seen, I suspect to help with flicker. Jackson was essentially right though. The Hobbit was projected at 48fps without double / triple flashing. The third unit was probably a necessary compromise.
In any case I no longer think of the 48fps frame rate as just a catalyst. I take that one back. Low frame rates like 24fps do judder in the specific case of non-tracked motion (peripheral judder). If tracking is employed the judder is gone since there is no motion relative to the eye. The higher frame rate would help there.
post #163 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist 
No, when you pause the film, you are pausing a 24fps native source. The television is what's doing the interpolation, so unless you are using a freeze-frame feature of the TV rather than the pause button on the player, it won't be possible to pause on an interpolated frame.
And I bet even if your TV has a freeze-frame function, it will only freeze on real frames and not interpolated ones.

And if there is no movement in the image, the "interpolated" frames will be identical to the original frames.
So a blu-ray player can not display fake frames in a 24fps source in pause mode and SOE won't be visible on a blu-ray player's 24fps source real frame in pause mode.

In this Youtube video difference can be seen between frame doubling interpolation ON and OFF and frame doubling interpolation ON and OFF when paused.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=882c25af2hM

So, question is, how was tmg able to make SOE visible in a frozen picture.


btw my TV, blu-ray player and sat-receiver are able to freeze/pause picture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm102 

Perhaps this is appropriate to bring up here.

When my TV has it's motion handling turned up, the SOE is pronounced.

When I pause the video feed, the frozen picture I see has the same level of SOE.  It's not related to frame rate per se in this case, it's the motion handling / interpolative effects: the drawing of each of the images is altered and the effect is visible even one frame at a time.

I'm not saying that boosted native frame rate can't cause SOE or an SOE-like effect.  I'm just giving an observation.
post #164 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronoptimist View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

When motion interpolation is ramped to 11 on my TV, the items/characters/etc. seem "punched out", even when paused.

Chron, have you attempted this very same thing on your TV?  Look at a source where your TV is yielding a pronounced SOE.  Then hit pause.  I see the SOE staying put.  You don't I assume?  The SOE suddenly goes away for unmoving frames (and stationary items)?
What display are you using? It sounds like it's doing more than just motion interpolation with that preference.

 

KDL-60R550A.  But I still don't know your answer:  If you configure your system to show SOE, and then you hit pause, do you suddenly see the SOE go away?  BDP only?  Cablebox only?

post #165 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

Never said those weren't factors, but the Hobbit's look was all about 48fps and the elimination of double / triple flash judder.
T. Schmidt was chief designer for the Hobbit's projection system and says right here how they eliminated "double flashing".
You are confused by different technologies.
What the Chrisite Tech describes is the Dual 3D projector set-up at the world premier in New Zeeland.
Such a system is only used for special exebithions and premiers for "by invitation only" people and was also done for some of the Avatar premiers.

No cinema is running such a system for regular screening of The Hobbit. They are running one projector which are used with a large variety of 3D systems.

As for the look of The Hobbit; in addition to the technical facts that have already been posted; Peter Jackson wanted The Hobbit to be "a window into Middle Earth", not the usual "soft" Film Look.

Originally PJ wanted to shoot LOTR in 70mm, but had to abandon the idea because there where no Laboratories in New Zeeland that could develop 70mm film. Which of course is a loss to film history.
If they had known how popular LOTR would be they surely would have built 70mm capacity into the NZ lab.

Peter Jackson is a technical geek like James Cameron and always want to push the technical side of movie making.

Some days ago...........
Quote:
*

The Hobbit has been shot on Red's Epic cameras. We used prototype cameras in our first weeks of shooting, after conducting extensive testing. They were then replaced with production models as the shoot progressed.

Now, in our last week of shooting, Jim Jannard at Red has sent us an early model of their next generation camera "The Dragon". The Hobbit is Jim's favourite book, so I suspect the name is more than a co-incidence!

We won't be using the Dragon for Hobbit shooting during our last two days, but it gave the camera team a welcome diversion, and they have launched into full-on testing, including having the new camera positioned alongside our Epics so we can compare the two images directly under the same lighting.

Red have singlehandedly pushed digital cinematography into realms undreamed of 5 years ago, and we're looking forward to getting our first glimpse of images from The Dragon.


Link to Peter Jackson's Facebook
post #166 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

So a blu-ray player can not display fake frames in a 24fps source in pause mode and SOE won't be visible on a blu-ray player's 24fps source real frame in pause mode.
Not unless the player is performing motion interpolation and outputting to (I guess) 60Hz. Which as far as I am aware, no player does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

In this Youtube video difference can be seen between frame doubling interpolation ON and OFF and frame doubling interpolation ON and OFF when paused.
You're looking at a video that has been processed by SVP, so the interpolation is encoded into the file itself. Normally interpolation is performed by the television and not the player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

btw my TV, blu-ray player and sat-receiver are able to freeze/pause picture.
But only the TV will be doing motion interpolation. If you pause satellite or a blu-ray, you are pausing the native framerate source, not the post-interpolation video.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 View Post

KDL-60R550A. But I still don't know your answer: If you configure your system to show SOE, and then you hit pause, do you suddenly see the SOE go away? BDP only? Cablebox only?
The "soap opera effect" only refers to the smoothness of motion. Whatever it is that you are seeing, is not what is commonly referred to as the "soap opera effect" and is some other kind of processing that your set is doing in addition to motion interpolation.
post #167 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

No cinema is running such a system for regular screening of The Hobbit.

Maybe for the 2-D version which is presented normally (i think). Do you have a link describing the specific projection system / process used with the 48fps 3-d verson if it is not the same dual 3-d system?
post #168 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTguru3 View Post


Isn't a film purist one who prefers a picture like the director intended it? I would also assume most plasma owners would like the best picture possible that's not artificially created.

+1,000
post #169 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

Maybe for the 2-D version which is presented normally (i think).
There is no "maybe".
No cinema use two projectors for regular 3D or HFR 3D, except some of the largest IMAX screens.

About 900 screens worldwide could show The Hobbit in HFR 3D.
The rest of the 3D capable cinemas showed the regular 24fps. 3D version.
No 48fps. 2D version of The hobbit was released.
Quote:
Do you have a link describing the specific projection system / process used with the 48fps 3-d verson if it is not the same dual 3-d system?

From your own link. The third projector they had as a backup in NZ.
Quote:
........while a third backup projector was schemed in to run a standard sequential flashing 3-D configuration, with a standard master timed for 4.5 ft-L brightness.

Article and interviews with representatives for several DLP projector manufacturers around the time The Hobbit opened; The Hobbit & The Dawn of High Frame Rate Cinema

There are several 3D systems used with projectors.
RealD and Dolby 3D passive systems, XPAND 3D active system
and Sony Over/Under that can be use with both active and passive 3D systems.

You are kind of a year too late to go deep into 3D systems in general and HFR in particular, because these discussions where most active up to about six months ago and nobody really care much any more.

There is still a 3D section at AVS where there are some occasional activity, maybe you get some more satisfactory engagement there; http://www.avsforum.com/f/193/3d-central
post #170 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

There is no "maybe".
No cinema use two projectors for regular 3D or HFR 3D, except some of the largest IMAX screens.

You're wrong actually. They are all over, a couple where I live. Whats more, where one projector is used, the picture is very dim, which is almost proof positive they are not double / triple flashing like you say. If they were double / triple flashing, brightness would be comparable.

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/mixmaster/2012/05/the_lie_of_imax_digital_the_da.php
http://www.stltoday.com/entertainment/movies/joe-williams/tonight-the-chesterfield-galaxy-has-maximum-hobbit-tude/article_60204b5b-dfc5-5ba9-8a09-3d62d24cf904.html
http://donism.wordpress.com/2012/12/11/watching-the-hobbit-in-korea/

Brigtness loss was probably the compromise Jackson decided on to maintain the look he envisioned without repeat frame judder. In any case I now have learned more about the Hobbit's projection system than had ever cared to. In the end what we have is the director telling us the key to understanding the Hobbit's look is that it was "shot and projected" at 48fps (without double flashing). We also have the lead projection engineer telling us that this technique "replicates the “real world” more closely than so-called “double flash” techniques". We have the projection system used and we have videos you haven't watched. Finally we have you disagreeing with everybody. At this point, i'll leave it up to you to believe what you want.
post #171 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan

There is no "maybe".
No cinema use two projectors for regular 3D or HFR 3D, except some of the largest IMAX screens.
You're wrong actually.
No! I am not wrong. (I don't even know which of these two statements I made are the wrong one according to you. Who even care to argue the number of IMAX cinemas with dual projection systems?)

If you use some more time to actually read read the links i post for your edification instead of protesting, you might learn even more than you want to know.

From the Creative Cow link;
Quote:
According to IMAX Chairman/President of Filmed Entertainment Greg Foster, "Ten to fifteen percent of [IMAX] theatres are showing in 48 fps.
Not only are not all Imax cinemas dual projection, but only some of them showed The Hobbit in HFR.
Quote:
They are all over, a couple where I live. Whats more, where one projector is used, the picture is very dim, which is almost proof positive they are not double / triple flashing like you say. If they were double / triple flashing, brightness would be comparable.
Double or triple flashing one projector has nothing whatsoever to do with brightness.
A projector doesn't magically become brighter by refreshing (flashing) the image multiple times.
post #172 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

You are kind of a year too late to go deep into 3D systems in general and HFR in particular, because these discussions where most active up to about six months ago and nobody really care much any more.

 

I do.  I think a lot of folks do.  HFR isn't going away, and James Cameron was recently debating the Avatar 2 release in 60fps.

post #173 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 

I do.  I think a lot of folks do.  HFR isn't going away, and James Cameron was recently debating the Avatar 2 release in 60fps.

Till 2020+ there will be five hfr movies. When hfr not becomes a part of the 4K stuff you will only see sporadically hfr movies the next 25 years wink.gif

http://www.hfrmovies.com/hfr-movie-list/
post #174 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

Who even care to argue the number of IMAX cinemas with dual projection systems?

You're the one who brought it up confused.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

Double or triple flashing one projector has nothing whatsoever to do with brightness

Wrong again. Increased brightness is one of the main reasons for double / triple flashing in theaters.
In fact, you can see the increased brightness right there in the video (the one you didn't watch).
post #175 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

You're the one who brought it up confused.gif
I tried to tell you that dual projection is only used in some of the largest IMAX cinemas. Then you claimed it was used much more, which was wrong. And now you are confused????

You are confusing yourselves by arguing something that isn't used and never happens. Try to read what is presented you and not be so occupied by arguing something you obviously don't know much about.
Quote:
Wrong again. Increased brightness is one of the main reasons for double / triple flashing in theaters.
Double flash in 2D ~ 48Hz is to smoothen judder and other irregularities in projection. It has been done on film projectors for decades before digital projection.

Triple flash, which is only used for 3D in digital projection is to smoothen the shift between right eye and left eye,

A projector can only deliver the amount of light that the lamp provide. The light doesn't increase with refreshing the image multiple times.

There are no one besides you that ever have claimed that double or triple flash increase brightness or that it is used for such.

I am not arguing here, I am telling you the facts.
Quote:
In fact, you can see the increased brightness right there in the video (the one you didn't watch).
What video?
You haven't posted any video. If you do, please point to timestamp that back up your claims.
post #176 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

Till 2020+ there will be five hfr movies. When hfr not becomes a part of the 4K stuff you will only see sporadically hfr movies the next 25 years wink.gif

http://www.hfrmovies.com/hfr-movie-list/
Sadly that is very possible. There are very few brave film makers in Hollywood and extraordinary many conservatives regarding what a movie should look like. That's why 4K has a steep uphill battle to become a regular finishing resolution in movies.
Even Bryan Singer that shot Jack and the Beanstalk in 5K is now shooting X-Men: Days of Future Past on a 2.8K cameras and will up-converting it to 4K sometime in the future.

What film makers really should do now is to utilise the investments that was done for The Hobbit for HFR in the cinemas, and shoot 48fps. in 2D ~ 4K.
Then we really would see the image quality improvements.

HFR ~ 3D is too full of compromises to really shine.

.
post #177 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

Wrong again. Increased brightness is one of the main reasons for double / triple flashing in theaters.
Do you have a link to a document, such as one from a projector manufacturer that says this? Most sites say it's either to reduce flicker or some say it helps with 3D display/motion rendition.
post #178 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

There are no one besides you that ever have claimed that double or triple flash increase brightness or that it is used for such. I am not arguing here, I am telling you the facts.

I'm not going to go around looking for links to what is common knowledge. You have a search button.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

What video? You haven't posted any video. If you do, please point to timestamp that back up your claims.

It's been posted like three times already!. Do you not recognize your own post (5 posts ago)?...that video.
The account is down right now. Tell you what, I'll be sure to let you know when they fix it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

You are confusing yourselves by arguing something that isn't used and never happens. Try to read what is presented you and not be so occupied by arguing something you obviously don't know much about.

Nine hundred projectors (probably more as there are two in this town) = never happens? I think your math is off. I'm pretty sure the single projector set-up operates the same way anyway. I'm done with the projector part of this discussion.
post #179 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by borf View Post

I'm not going to go around looking for links to what is common knowledge. You have a search button.
Smartypants. The only "common knowledge" about Double/Triple flash increase in brightness is only "common knowledge" in your head. Show us some facts please!
Quote:
It's been posted like three times already!. Do you not recognize your own post (5 posts ago)?...that video.
There is no video in this thread that claims that Double/Triple flash increase brightness in digital projection.
Quote:
The account is down right now. Tell you what, I'll be sure to let you know when they fix it.
What account?
Quote:
Nine hundred projectors (probably more as there are two in this town) = never happens?
Yes......never happens.......as in the context I wrote this..........dual projection never happens in regular 3D cinemas, HFR or not!
Quote:
I think your math is off.
You either know or you don't know. I know!

Nine hundred HFR capable projectors worldwide (400 of them in the US) according to the Creative Cow article, might have increased after the article was written.
From the artcle; Much has been written about the fact that Warner Bros. has released The Hobbit in "only" 900 screens worldwide, 400 in the U.S. and the rest worldwide. It's instructive to recall that when Disney debuted its first CG 3D film, Chicken Little, in 2005, it played in a mere 84 theatres in 25 markets nationwide. Similarly, the adoption of every new technology from talkies to HDTV and Digital Cinema was far from an overnight phenomenon.

Start counting and see if the number is right; 48 fps HFR 3D Theater List
Quote:
I'm pretty sure the single projector set-up operates the same way anyway. I'm done with the projector part of this discussion.
You are not sure of anything in this regard. You have been friendly corrected of all you wrong assumptions, faulty understanding and fed the facts you need to understand, but keep insisting you still are sure of all that is wrong in your knowledge.

I repeat myself......this is not an argument between you and me........this is me correcting your faulty understanding of the matter.
post #180 of 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tgm1024 

I do.  I think a lot of folks do.  HFR isn't going away, and James Cameron was recently debating the Avatar 2 release in 60fps.

Till 2020+ there will be five hfr movies. When hfr not becomes a part of the 4K stuff you will only see sporadically hfr movies the next 25 years wink.gif

http://www.hfrmovies.com/hfr-movie-list/

 

Did you misread that list?  According to that list, sometime in 2017 we will have had 5 HFR movies:

 

From http://www.hfrmovies.com/hfr-movie-list/:

HFR movie list

Updated list of existing and upcoming high frame rate movies. Any frame rate of 48 fps or higher is considered HFR for the purposes of this list.

2012

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (dir. Peter Jackson)

2013

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (dir. Peter Jackson) (December 13)

2014

X-Men: Days of Future Past (highly rumored for HFR 3D based on Bryan Singer’s comments) (dir. Bryan Singer) (July 18)

The Hobbit: There and Back Again (dir. Peter Jackson) (December 17)

2016

Avatar 2 (dir. James Cameron) (likely to shoot at 60 fps)

2017

Avatar 3 (dir. James Cameron) (likely to shoot at 60 fps)

2020+:

Battle Angel (possible trilogy) (dir. James Cameron) (likely to shoot at 60 fps)

Unknown release dates:

Animal Farm (dir. Andy Serkis) (currently planned to shoot in 48 fps 3D)
Untitled science fiction project (dir. Douglas Trumbull) (planned to shoot in 120 fps 3D “Hypercinema”)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Flat Panels General and OLED Technology › Will movies filmed in 48fps require new home theater equipment?