Jump to content
Andrew Reid

NAB 2016. Can Ang Lee’s cinematic reality of laser projected 3D 120fps make 24p film obsolete?

Recommended Posts

Meh, I've found that the younger generation who has grown up with this HDTV "Smoothscan" tech abomination actually PREFERS the artificial and sped-up "soap opera" look, and they prefer the higher frame rates. That said, most theater projectors sold in the past few years can do lower framerate HFR, but this latest format is going to be VERY expensive for theaters to adopt.  It requires two very expensive projectors linked together, so only the very large venues in the very large cities will upgrade.  Keep in mind that an entry level, 9000 lumen 2k DCI projector with IMB costs about $32,000.  Hooking up two of these Barco 4k Laser HFR HDR 3-D projectors will probably cost at least $350,000.  Granted, the price will come down, but still, it'll take 7-10 years to pay off such a large investment for early adopters.  One big tech item to keep an eye on is MagicLeap and their new hyper-virtual reality glasses.  Magicleap is talking about putting photons on glass directly without "pixels" and totally augmenting reality without goggles.  A MagicLeap-like tech, combined with HFR and HDR is probably going to be the norm in less than ten years.  It would be cool to see the technologies combined.  The projected image on the screen could provide depth, and the VR could provide the "wow" factor of stuff literally flying around in the room.  But what's most interesting, is that from what I've read about MagicLeap is that it could simply replace the projector entirely, since the image in the MagicLeap headset is entirely recreated from reality.  People would just come into a theater, put on the glasses, and stare at a calibration screen/image on a wall, and everything else would be VR.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

Those who DON'T enjoy 3D are often vocal about it.  But, there are thousands more that love 3D and are looking forward to the advancement of movie tech from 100 year old frame rates.  3D still sells very big (or it would have stopped years ago) so it will continue and probably grow.  FINALLY more big names are all over HFR.  It's coming.  Evolve or go extinct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wwjd said:

Those who DON'T enjoy 3D are often vocal about it.  But, there are thousands more that love 3D and are looking forward to the advancement of movie tech from 100 year old frame rates.  3D still sells very big (or it would have stopped years ago) so it will continue and probably grow.  FINALLY more big names are all over HFR.  It's coming.  Evolve or go extinct.

3D grosses have declined over the last few years, accounting for just 14% of the overall grosses in 2014. The market has spoken, the fad is dying. It's a niche market compared to 2d and it's fading, just like those goofy 3D TV's. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Pussycat said:

Ang Lee rocks!

But I don't think 24p film will die...that soon.

I am still listening LP, I think CD will die before LP. Why should 24 fps die, traditional movies will remain for long. 3D video, 360 Video, VR, I do not think they will replace traditional film, they are something different.

I hope though 24, 25, 50 fps would be replaced by 30 and 60 fps. 30 fps and 60 fps are much better suited for computer monitors that usually run at 60 Hz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think HFR 3d is just more crap because the headsets hurt your eyes.  

VR is an entirely new artform.  I just shot a commercial in VR using the Nokia OZO - I'm a believing in VR technology as long as it doesn't cause eye strain.  It feels like the early days of film.  I just wish it was only 270 degrees - having to look behind you is awkward.

But all this 3d stuff - just seems like the cinema trying to compete.  I saw Avatar in 3d and it blew me away, but I also saw a bunch of other films in 3d and was less than impressed.

It's the same old argument - it's content that matters and finding directors who can utilize this to an advantage, vs the gimmick of it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw an interesting piece on the BBC about VR & Binaural Sound - one without the other just won't make too much sense for fiction.

If you can watch this, go to 5.20min - it will freak you out!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b078jryn/click-23042016

If not google some clips or read the following:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/researchanddevelopment/2013/03/listen-up-binaural-sound.shtml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎22‎/‎2016 at 8:19 PM, filmvoltage said:

Meh, I've found that the younger generation who has grown up with this HDTV "Smoothscan" tech abomination actually PREFERS the artificial and sped-up "soap opera" look, and they prefer the higher frame rates.

 

That is because low frame rates look unnatural and usually like crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, tugela said:

That is because low frame rates look unnatural and usually like crap.

That's not quite true though. During the '90s and early 2000's we were enamored with 24p. Every camera had to have 24p, otherwise it wasn't cinematic.

Remember that we've been actually shooting 50/60p (although interlaced, the actual fps was 50/60) for a very, very long time. Every one who wanted to do cinema was always into the 24fps look. That's why the DVX100 was so popular. If you did a regular over the shoulder shot with two people talking, one at 24fps vs 60, the 24fps seems to be better. Try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, hmcindie said:

That's not quite true though. During the '90s and early 2000's we were enamored with 24p. Every camera had to have 24p, otherwise it wasn't cinematic.

Remember that we've been actually shooting 50/60p (although interlaced, the actual fps was 50/60) for a very, very long time. Every one who wanted to do cinema was always into the 24fps look. That's why the DVX100 was so popular. If you did a regular over the shoulder shot with two people talking, one at 24fps vs 60, the 24fps seems to be better. Try it.

People who had pretensions about being the next Spielberg were enamored with 24p. Young people who were viewing content on devices that largely displayed at 60Hz were not. And the reason was simple: 24p displayed on a 60Hz screen looks terrible. Who cares if it reminds the shooter of the golden age of movies - no one who watches it owns a film projector. Almost no one shoots (at least, no one who buys a consumer video camera) for the big screen, so the obsession with 24 fps is an anachronism. I find it baffling that enthusiasts want to shoot to conform to a medium that essentially is obsolete, and not to conform to a medium that viewers actually use.

What I always found particularly amusing were the folks who drooled over 24p, but 25p, why, that was no good. No good at all (even though it would be impossible to tell the difference without counting frames).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unnatural is part of the appeal. These days you don't shoot 24p for naturalism, on the contrary. 

Many TVs have a 24p mode, so do some graphics adapters for PCs. Of course, it is best to have choice. Dogmatic obsession with an acquisition framerate is as bad as any other obsession. Also, in Europe a lot of cinema is actually shot 25p because movies also go on air eventually, and pretty much all relatively recent DCP servers handle 25p fine (and 30, and 23.97, and 29.97 for that matter), so there is no need for speed canges and resampling audio.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt many would see the difference between 24 fps on 24 Hz monitor, 25 fps on 25 Hz monitor or even 30 fps on 30 Hz or 60 Hz monitor. However for me 24 fps on 60 Hz monitor is just terrible experience. 24 fps on 24 Hz monitor is for me just fine. I do not think I am alone with this, but apparently not everyone is sensitive for 24 fps on 60 Hz monitor.

It is not a question about the frame rate but about frames shown for uneven time to fit 24 fps to 60 Hz monitor. 120 Hz monitor would solve the problem. with 120 Hz monitor at 24 fps each frame would be shown 5 times, at 30 fps each frame would be shown 4 times, there would be no misalignment of the speed, no ugliness on panning and fast movement and all frames would be shown for the same length of time. Unfortunately most computer monitors are just 60 Hz.

At 60 Hz monitor, when viewing 24 fps, some frames are shown for 33.3 ms, some for 50 ms when they all should be shown for 41.7 ms, I do not much care of that kind of unnatural appeal.

 

Ps. to answer the questions on the headline "NAB 2016. Can Ang Lee’s cinematic reality of laser projected 3D 120fps make 24p film obsolete?" 24 fps film should play back just beautifully with that projector, so it is at least backward compatible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21.4.2016 at 3:07 AM, The Chris said:

3D anything = nauseating and unwatchable for me and many others. This will be a specialty thing at best, like IMAX. 

This! It's just - still not there, like so many times before. 

 

3D gives me a headache, and I will avoid it as long as it can be made to enable a better experience for anyone, preferably without any need for additional gear when watching!

24p2D will live until the holodeck gets invented!  Maybe even longer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's seem this blog posting and all comments (including mine) are speaking about something we haven't seen, eg, pointless!

Did Ang Lee actually show anything at NAB, if so, what is being said by the people who saw it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who like HFR: 

1) Gamers who think that because their vidya is more enjoyable at 60fps so cinema should be.

2) Tech nerds who think that giving their audience a brain hemorrhage = immersion and couldn't give a fig for storytelling.

3) Out of touch directors who spend their days watching test footage in THX certified screening rooms and only sit up when something pops because they likely haven't watched a daytime soap opera in 20+ years.

Literature is no less enjoyable for its use of old style printing. Theatre no worse for its ancient form. By all means push technology, and play with different ways of projecting images into a dark room, but ultimately you'll never reinvent the wheel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Chrisis said:

People who like HFR: 

1) Gamers who think that because their vidya is more enjoyable at 60fps so cinema should be.

2) Tech nerds who think that giving their audience a brain hemorrhage = immersion and couldn't give a fig for storytelling.

3) Out of touch directors who spend their days watching test footage in THX certified screening rooms and only sit up when something pops because they likely haven't watched a daytime soap opera in 20+ years.

Literature is no less enjoyable for its use of old style printing. Theatre no worse for its ancient form. By all means push technology, and play with different ways of projecting images into a dark room, but ultimately you'll never reinvent the wheel. 

Orrrrr

4) People who think 3D and "ride" films like the marvel movies would benefit from the higher frame rate in the action scenes.

Also, just because I appreciate an old book doesn't mean I won't pick up my kindle 99.9 percent of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...