Originally Posted by IanD
The only problem is that I don't have any displays that will show 48fps natively or at suitable multiples (damn, I should have held onto that 96Hz capable 21" CRT monitor).
Another reason I'm glad I still have my FW900. The thing is damn-near limitless in its choices of resolutions and refresh rates. It's a travesty that the whole world got duped into accepting 60Hz LCDs as the norm - huge step backward. I digress, sorry.
As I understand it, 48fps is a stopgap anyway to transition toward HFR while still being relatively compatible with 24fps standards. The next two Hobbit films are 48fps (all shot at the same time) and then Animal Farm will probably be 48fps (Serkis and Jackson are tight). Cameron is shooting the Avatar sequels at 60fps and Battle Angel will be at least 60fps (120fps?). Since the long range industry target appears to be Super Hi-Vision (8K 120fps 22.2 surround sound), I imagine that the shelf life of 48fps content will be short (doesn't scale well to anything) compared to 60fps (scales well to 120fps) and eventual native 120fps content. On the one hand, I really want an 8K 120Hz display for gaming, live TV, and computer use. On the other, I don't really like HFR for movies. How to promote one without the other?