"The footage I saw looked terrible … completely non-cinematic," wrote Devin Faraci
The problem is our expectations. We are not used to seeing anything more than 24FPS in a theatre, and when we do see something better, it weirds us out a bit. But you could simply replace the word "Cinematic" with "Jerky and Blurry" and that brings into perspective what is really going on here. 24FPS is almost as archaic as black and white. When a current movie wants to make something look "old timey" they often show it in black and white. In the future, I predict that they will drop to 24 FPS to make something look "old".
Most modern action video games run at 60 FPS. I went out of my way to get a 3D computer monitor (link
), not for 3D, but so I could run my 2D games and my desktop at 120 FPS/Hz. The difference is dramatically noticeable. All you have to do is drag a window across the desktop and it will make you go "whooow. that was smooth."
Sony did an experiment at a trade show with 4 PS3s wired together to produce a fluid 240 FPS version of their Grand Turismo 5 game running on a special monitor with a 240Hz input (here is a link
). The result was people were trying to look behind the monitor because they thought it was a window into something else.
So I see moving cinema from 24FPS to 48FPS as a baby-step in the right direction. Yes, there will be hiccups, such as the costumes and sets demanding more realism to successfully convey the illusion of reality, but this is a GOOD thing.
48 FPS is definitely going to look weird to people at first. Some will balk at it, etc. But once we all get used to higher frame rate content, we will not want to go back. I have a Sony camera that takes 1080/60p video (link
), and it makes 30p content just seem jittery. The only thing that makes film look decent is motion-blur. But if you crank up the frame rate, you don't need the blur, and then your eyes pick up a LOT more detail. It's awesome! It might even make movies that use lots of shaky cam and quick editing watchable (I hate that stuff... to me, it's just an exploit of how crappy 24FPS really is)
And like someone else mentioned earlier. 24FPS will remain in the toolbox. If they want a "cinematic" moment, drop to 24. As long as the newer format is a multiple of 24, it would look exactly the same.
So here's me looking to the future, and I see 240 FPS to be the end game. That is the perfect number as every other standard divides evenly into it... and as far as I can tell, it's finally fast enough that any human can't distinguish it from real-life motion.