The Hobbit.

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > The Hobbit.

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

henpod posted:

I wonder what Gandalf would think. Do you guys think he would like 24 or 48 fps?

He'd just light up his pipe and enjoy either version at whatever 'speed' he felt like. :350:

# ¿ May 4, 2012 16:48

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:57

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Vid 8 is now on the tubes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1IqqN2yaZw

# ¿ Jul 23, 2012 18:30

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Ok... NOW I see it.

# ¿ Sep 19, 2012 00:57

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Colonel Whitey posted:

I was under the impression most theaters were already equipped for it, as everything is digital now. Does it require a special digital projector or something?

One tech article dug into that some months back, the short of it being that most digital projectors sold over the past few years could support 48fps... after a ~$10,000 upgrade.

# ¿ Nov 8, 2012 00:01

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Fat Guy Sexting posted:

Don't most HDTV's have native 24p from bluray now?

One method is to run at double 60hz to get 120 "frames" and then show each frame 5 times. voila, 24fps on 60hz.

Maybe in the future we'll all need quad rate 240hz TVs? :pcgaming:

Nill fucked around with this message at 07:51 on Nov 8, 2012

# ¿ Nov 8, 2012 07:49

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

It wouldn't hurt to double check with the theater if you're just going by online info and ticketing. My first choice was listed by the franchise as offering a HighFrameRate showing but when I went to pick up some tickets the manager insisted it wasn't.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2012 23:27

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

TheBigBudgetSequel posted:

No. There will be HFR(High Frame Rate) and HFR3D. Obviously not at all theaters, but there will be screenings in just 48.

That doesn't jive with the FAQ letter they circulated.

# ¿ Nov 11, 2012 21:46

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

DragQueenofAngmar posted:

Am I the only one who thinks that orcs with plates screwed into their heads is silly? That's not armor, that's a liability in a fight + too steampunky/hardcore dude! for me :/

It's not armor. It's a bandage. :black101:

# ¿ Nov 12, 2012 02:52

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

an idiot posted:

13 year olds who have grown up in a world of motion smoothing TVs and 60fps video games.

loving PONG was 60fps.

Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:

Is it conceivable that 48fps is going to die a quiet death now, considering that basically no critic is really embracing it, and most appear to be outright disliking or even venomously hating it?

With the millions spent already by theater chains upgrading their projectors to support it? Doubtful.

# ¿ Dec 4, 2012 21:47

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:

If not enough people care for it, there's nothing else theatre owners can do to make HFR attractive, so it will die regardless of how much money has been spent on it.

My guess is that if the debut HFR film had been Cameron's upcoming Avatar sequel critics would be slobbering over the technology, espousing how "real" everything looked, with a rash of films trying to cash in on the buzz by being post-converted into fake interpolated 48fps.

# ¿ Dec 4, 2012 22:11

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

The problem with the "high frame rate" TVs is that they are not really using high frame rate source material, it's all software interpolation inserting fake motion-estimated frames in between real ones.
Trying to compare what is literally a computer 'sliding' elements around to fudge half the pictures you see to something that was actually filmed at a higher frame rate is a bit deceptive.

Again, this also should not be confused with a TV that uses its higher refresh rate to show the same frame multiple times to reduce ghosting, which is what many new HDTVs now default to out of the box.

Nill fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Dec 4, 2012

# ¿ Dec 4, 2012 23:21

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Octy posted:

Is there a 48FPS trailer? Aside from some minor eye discomfort at first I had no problems with playing Svaha's trailer at double speed. It felt like I was getting more detail too.

There is something circulating that claims to be a 48fps trailer but it's actually just a 24fps trailer someone has interpolated using software. It looks 'fake' and 'sped up' because it actually is both Fake and Sped Up.

Personally I've made the reckless decision of seeing something for myself with my own drat eyes before judging it.

vvv Those are some of the 'faked' videos I'm talking about.
Pause on a frame with a fast moving object and you can see clear artifacts of it being interpolated. (ie: the algorithem will get confused and the object will be copied, appearing twice in the frame, instead of traversing the space in between)

And while there are a couple sample clips in the middle of that page actually shot with a 48fps camera, I'm pretty sure they were not shot with the same shutter.

Nill fucked around with this message at 08:48 on Dec 5, 2012

# ¿ Dec 5, 2012 08:28

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

CelestialScribe posted:

What? It would still get good reviews if it was a good film.

Personally I've found that the frequency of correlation between 'good reviews' and 'good films' is barely discernible from pure random chance.

# ¿ Dec 6, 2012 23:18

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

sebmojo posted:

THE ONE RING 7: WITCH BABES OF THE VALAR

I'm fine with this. :colbert:

# ¿ Dec 12, 2012 03:42

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Go see it in HFR. If you don't like it after the first 15 minutes then just start blinking very fast.

jivjov posted:

And the bricks are plastic as well, then?

Um, yeah, they are. They're artificial pre-fab panels, it's pretty obvious from the sheen and repeating pattern. It's a dumb wall, if it looks fake that's because it is.

Nill fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Dec 13, 2012

# ¿ Dec 13, 2012 03:46

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Other than a few disjointing edits (some shots simply lingered to no effect while others ended markedly abrupt) and what could be considered an excess of long shots framed to 'highlight' the 3d (and probably pad out things), it was a pretty good film.
Though I have to agree with iSheep that one or two of the "HEY! REMEMBER THIS SCENE FROM LotR?" shots were a bit too in your face about it.

As far as the HFR goes it definitely made the 3d a nicer experience than usual and the landscapes were gorgeous, but I can certainly see the problem some might have with the way certain high motion scenes are conveyed. Heck, Bilbo's prologue was probably the worst possible way to acclimate audiences to HFR, what with being almost entirely composed of quick cuts between dense, high action scenes
It became more 'natural' looking after only a few minutes viewing, but some form of adaptive motion blur in post might have improved a couple shots that came off as too crisp and smooth for the eye to normally follow.

Nill fucked around with this message at 11:26 on Dec 14, 2012

# ¿ Dec 14, 2012 11:24

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Nihonniboku posted:

Being a midnight showing, I did fall asleep a couple of times during the movie. I don't think I missed too much, but does anyone know of a scene by scene plot description somewhere just so I can check into it?

Mechafunkzilla posted:

I was always under the impression that several of the dwarves were, in fact, women. I mean, how can you tell they're not?

I thought Fili and Kili made it pretty clear. I mean, they're so pretty...

Nill fucked around with this message at 15:50 on Dec 14, 2012

# ¿ Dec 14, 2012 15:47

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Our showing never bothered to turn on the theater speakers until that trailer was largely over. They were even nice enough to keep the 'advertisement projector' running over the top of it to save our eyes as well.

# ¿ Dec 14, 2012 17:55

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

Baron Bifford posted:

Peter Jackson used a lot of forced perspective shots in LotR to make the hobbits look smaller than the humans. It makes me wonder about the scenes in Bilbo's home: you have a hobbit, a human and a bunch of dwarves running around in the same unbroken shot. Did he use CGI this time?

They had 2 sizes of set, filmed Gandalf in the small (mainly greenscreen) one with scale doubles, Bilbo and the dwarves in the large one, and then composited Gandalf into the main shot.

# ¿ Dec 15, 2012 20:46

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 22:57

Nill: Aug 24, 2003

4000 Dollar Suit posted:

Isn't the reason that the 3d in this movie was so good was because it was filmed in 3d and not in 2d then converted to 3d?

The other part of the equation is that they used a rig that allowed for dynamic adjustment of the distance between the two lenses during a shot so that the 3d could be 'refocused' on the fly instead of being depth locked for the whole take.

# ¿ Dec 17, 2012 01:21

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > The Hobbit.