Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(E! Online)   Peter Jackson screens ten minutes of The Hobbit. Fans say it looks good. Almost *too* good   (eonline.com) divider line 90
    More: Interesting, Fashion Police, The Hobbit, hobbits, gallery, frame rate, partners, feature films  
•       •       •

7040 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 25 Apr 2012 at 10:26 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-25 09:30:38 AM  
Oh yeah? Well I'm going to make movie that has 96 frames per second! So there!
 
2012-04-25 09:47:05 AM  
What is the esmated release date? Anyone know?
 
2012-04-25 09:48:02 AM  

namegoeshere: What is the esmated release date? Anyone know?


First part this holiday season, second next holiday season.
 
2012-04-25 09:48:04 AM  

namegoeshere: esmated


I swear to FSM I typed all the letters.

Keyboard must be getting sticky...
 
2012-04-25 09:48:56 AM  

exick: namegoeshere: What is the esmated release date? Anyone know?

First part this holiday season, second next holiday season.


Tks!
 
2012-04-25 10:00:23 AM  
I don't really care about The Hobbit but I'm looking forward to seeing what 48 fps looks like. People are biatching that it's different but that doesn't mean it isn't better.
 
2012-04-25 10:02:03 AM  
Honestly, all the stuff I've read about this strikes me as simply people not being used to it. I remember similar reactions when HD first came out, including from me. It just looked weird and hyper-real, and I felt like a lot of the great films had lost some of their cinematic-ness. A month later I can't ever go back to SD.
 
2012-04-25 10:09:06 AM  
I had the same problem with Public Enemies, which was apparently shot in HD rather than 35mm. It's not the first movie to be shot in video but the higher framerate was unusually obvious with that movie. Certain scenes reminded me of a soap opera or home video. But that's something people will just have to get used to unless we ask directors to remove video information from every shot.
 
2012-04-25 10:18:04 AM  

Lumpmoose: I had the same problem with Public Enemies, which was apparently shot in HD rather than 35mm. It's not the first movie to be shot in video but the higher framerate was unusually obvious with that movie.


Actually the frame rate is still 24 fps, HD is about the number of lines in each frame. So each frame is more dense with information. The 48 fps change is about how many frames are thrown up in each second. So each second is more dense with frames.
 
2012-04-25 10:27:14 AM  

namegoeshere: namegoeshere: esmated

I swear to FSM I typed all the letters.

Keyboard must be getting sticky...


Sounds like a personal problem.
 
2012-04-25 10:30:09 AM  
I remember Gandolf being a bit of an idiot and an ahole on the hobbit. Is he going to be a wise old wizard now? Or am I misremembering?
 
2012-04-25 10:33:29 AM  

LarryDan43: I remember Gandolf being a bit of an idiot and an ahole on the hobbit. Is he going to be a wise old wizard now? Or am I misremembering?


Gandalf was actually exceptionally intelligent...its just that he's got a lot on his mind. He didn't always like some of the hobbits. Perri was kind of a moron and did nearly get them all killed at least a couple of times.
 
2012-04-25 10:34:17 AM  

DamnYankees: Honestly, all the stuff I've read about this strikes me as simply people not being used to it. I remember similar reactions when HD first came out, including from me. It just looked weird and hyper-real, and I felt like a lot of the great films had lost some of their cinematic-ness. A month later I can't ever go back to SD.


I bought a new plasma T.V. recently and I bought one with 2000+ mhz output cause I watch football and didn't want that jerking that sometimes happens on LCD/LED. My brother was watching Thor last night and you weren't kidding about the hyper real. Everything was so smooth, it was like I was on the set watching them film it. What really surprised me was I thought it was a BD and it was just a DVD. It's taking some getting used to. It's as if all films are now cut scenes from a video game.

/ wish the picture was brighter though and I need to do something about the glare.
 
2012-04-25 10:35:16 AM  
As someone who frequently notices the flickering and other garbage, bring this on please. I also loved HD from the moment I saw it so hopefully that will come over.

I still have not tried 3-D as I get too many headaches without help.
 
2012-04-25 10:41:25 AM  

Cythraul: Oh yeah? Well I'm going to make movie that has 96 frames per second! So there!


96, 96 and a half- whatever it takes.
 
2012-04-25 10:43:10 AM  
I bought a new plasma T.V. recently and I bought one with 2000+ mhz output

HDTV noob here - finally about to buy a new LCD HDTV. I've seen this high mhz rate at a couple of friend's houses, and I absolutely hate it.

Is there any way to turn it off? Or do I have to shop strictly for low mhz sets?

Mucho thanks FARK,

-Znuh
 
2012-04-25 10:44:20 AM  

Mugato: I don't really care about The Hobbit but I'm looking forward to seeing what 48 fps looks like. People are biatching that it's different but that doesn't mean it isn't better.


I'm hoping it makes the 3D look better, but I'll have to see how he does it.

You know how soap operas on TV look different than the other shows you watch? That's what higher FPS looked like to me the few times I've seen it demoed. I doubt Jackson is going to put out something that looks like that.
 
2012-04-25 10:48:09 AM  
I'm going in the other direction, 3 frames per second, gives my films a retro feel.
 
2012-04-25 10:48:25 AM  

Mugato: Lumpmoose: I had the same problem with Public Enemies, which was apparently shot in HD rather than 35mm. It's not the first movie to be shot in video but the higher framerate was unusually obvious with that movie.

Actually the frame rate is still 24 fps, HD is about the number of lines in each frame. So each frame is more dense with information. The 48 fps change is about how many frames are thrown up in each second. So each second is more dense with frames.


Can't some HD cameras shoot at 29.97 or 30? I swear some shots looked like it jumped to 30 fps or at least the motion onscreen was suddenly different. Maybe Mann changed cameras.
 
2012-04-25 10:51:04 AM  

Straelbora: Cythraul: Oh yeah? Well I'm going to make movie that has 96 frames per second! So there!

96, 96 and a half- whatever it takes.


*likes*
 
2012-04-25 10:52:52 AM  

Znuh: I bought a new plasma T.V. recently and I bought one with 2000+ mhz output

HDTV noob here - finally about to buy a new LCD HDTV. I've seen this high mhz rate at a couple of friend's houses, and I absolutely hate it.

Is there any way to turn it off? Or do I have to shop strictly for low mhz sets?

Mucho thanks FARK,

-Znuh


It's not

Znuh: I bought a new plasma T.V. recently and I bought one with 2000+ mhz output

HDTV noob here - finally about to buy a new LCD HDTV. I've seen this high mhz rate at a couple of friend's houses, and I absolutely hate it.

Is there any way to turn it off? Or do I have to shop strictly for low mhz sets?

Mucho thanks FARK,

-Znuh


You could turn it off with the early sets, I don't see why they'd remove that as an option.

Most of the problems I've seen with LCD tvs of any refresh rate are because of shiatty image processing. The onboard chips can't keep up with what's being displayed, so everything looks a millisecond off. The first thing I've done with any of our LCD tvs is turned off anything that even hints it might crap up the picture: TrueTV, MotionPlay, ColorBand, LiveVideo or whatever the hell the manufacturer calls their inept attempt at correction.

If it doesn't look right in the store, have the clerk disable all the bells and whistles and see if you like the picture. If you do, then the TV will work for you.

Our main TV is an old plasma and it still does a better job at fast moving scenes, but it sucks up a lot of power.
 
2012-04-25 10:53:17 AM  
24-fps provides a warmth and immediacy that 48-fps cannot. The latter is too sterile.
 
2012-04-25 10:53:53 AM  
The high frame-rates do take a little getting used to. For a while everything looks like a soap opera. Once you do get used to it, though, it's a better experience.
 
2012-04-25 10:54:01 AM  
after the whole "film to digital" photography ordeal, the lesson is the skill of the photographer/cinematographer always trumps what the technology being used is actually capable of - for suck or for awesomeness

so who cares what framerate something is
 
2012-04-25 11:01:44 AM  

LarryDan43: I remember Gandolf being a bit of an idiot and an ahole on the hobbit. Is he going to be a wise old wizard now? Or am I misremembering?


Eh, they're adding all the shiat from ROTK's Appendices so he'll likely be a genius and Bilbo will look like the ahole.
 
2012-04-25 11:02:26 AM  

Wellon Dowd: 24-fps provides a warmth and immediacy that 48-fps cannot. The latter is too sterile.


I read about that in Videophile magazine.
 
2012-04-25 11:03:11 AM  

Lsherm: You know how soap operas on TV look different than the other shows you watch? That's what higher FPS looked like to me the few times I've seen it demoed.


Yeah soaps and video are shot at 30 fps
 
2012-04-25 11:05:48 AM  

moothemagiccow: LarryDan43: I remember Gandolf being a bit of an idiot and an ahole on the hobbit. Is he going to be a wise old wizard now? Or am I misremembering?

Eh, they're adding all the shiat from ROTK's Appendices so he'll likely be a genius and Bilbo will look like the ahole.


Bilbo is an asshole. He stole some guy's jewelry and then lied about it for 50 years.
 
2012-04-25 11:08:08 AM  

Straelbora: Cythraul: Oh yeah? Well I'm going to make movie that has 96 frames per second! So there!

96, 96 and a half- whatever it takes.


Came here for a Mr Mom reference. Leaving satisfied. . .
 
2012-04-25 11:11:29 AM  

Wellon Dowd: 24-fps provides a warmth and immediacy that 48-fps cannot. The latter is too sterile.


Frame rate has NOTHING to do with "warmth and immediacy," whatever that means. We hardly shoot movies on film any more, but most of those movies (yes, even digital) are still shot at 24fps, or more precisely, 23.976fps (or 25fps in PAL land). I can't wait to work on something shot at 48fps. Goodbye jittery motion. Do you folks know that at 24fps we are limited in how fast a camera can pan or how fast something can cross the frame?

Lighting, story, acting, and direction can change how "warm," "immediate," or "sterile" a film looks, but not frame rate. And something shot at 48 can be easily down-converted to 24fps.
 
2012-04-25 11:15:49 AM  

QFarker: Wellon Dowd: 24-fps provides a warmth and immediacy that 48-fps cannot. The latter is too sterile.

Frame rate has NOTHING to do with "warmth and immediacy," whatever that means. We hardly shoot movies on film any more, but most of those movies (yes, even digital) are still shot at 24fps, or more precisely, 23.976fps (or 25fps in PAL land). I can't wait to work on something shot at 48fps. Goodbye jittery motion. Do you folks know that at 24fps we are limited in how fast a camera can pan or how fast something can cross the frame?

Lighting, story, acting, and direction can change how "warm," "immediate," or "sterile" a film looks, but not frame rate. And something shot at 48 can be easily down-converted to 24fps.


Whoooosh!
 
2012-04-25 11:16:31 AM  

QFarker: Wellon Dowd: 24-fps provides a warmth and immediacy that 48-fps cannot. The latter is too sterile.

Frame rate has NOTHING to do with "warmth and immediacy," whatever that means. We hardly shoot movies on film any more, but most of those movies (yes, even digital) are still shot at 24fps, or more precisely, 23.976fps (or 25fps in PAL land). I can't wait to work on something shot at 48fps. Goodbye jittery motion. Do you folks know that at 24fps we are limited in how fast a camera can pan or how fast something can cross the frame?

Lighting, story, acting, and direction can change how "warm," "immediate," or "sterile" a film looks, but not frame rate. And something shot at 48 can be easily down-converted to 24fps.


i sort of get what he means here. I like HD... but I find myself converting HD movies down to DVD because I find that i prefer the "grain" of a dvd formatted film.

weird, because i prefer my tv shows in HD.
 
2012-04-25 11:18:34 AM  
As an avid enjoyer of 60fps porn I'm really looking forward to this. It looks really good.
 
2012-04-25 11:21:39 AM  

Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired: As an avid enjoyer of 60fps porn I'm really looking forward to this. It looks really good.


THAT EXISTS?
 
2012-04-25 11:23:55 AM  
Oh boy! Two more movies of people walking!
 
2012-04-25 11:25:33 AM  
Nerds complaining about a Sci-Fi/Fantasy movie? I don't believe it.
 
2012-04-25 11:30:01 AM  

DamnYankees: Honestly, all the stuff I've read about this strikes me as simply people not being used to it. I remember similar reactions when HD first came out, including from me. It just looked weird and hyper-real, and I felt like a lot of the great films had lost some of their cinematic-ness. A month later I can't ever go back to SD.



This. Also, this is a movie which is particularly attractive to us nerds, and while there's always going to be someone who doesn't like whatever technological change is being made just because it's change (and change is scary) us nerds can be particularly nitpicky and flat out biatchy.

Personally, I love watching movies in 3D, I'm anxiously awaiting The Hobbit and I'm looking forward to a higher FPS.
 
2012-04-25 11:30:22 AM  
fark 3D. I don't care what the fps is, all 3D is shiat.
 
2012-04-25 11:31:43 AM  

QFarker: Wellon Dowd: 24-fps provides a warmth and immediacy that 48-fps cannot. The latter is too sterile.

Frame rate has NOTHING to do with "warmth and immediacy," whatever that means. We hardly shoot movies on film any more, but most of those movies (yes, even digital) are still shot at 24fps, or more precisely, 23.976fps (or 25fps in PAL land). I can't wait to work on something shot at 48fps. Goodbye jittery motion. Do you folks know that at 24fps we are limited in how fast a camera can pan or how fast something can cross the frame?

Lighting, story, acting, and direction can change how "warm," "immediate," or "sterile" a film looks, but not frame rate. And something shot at 48 can be easily down-converted to 24fps.



Dude, he was mocking the people who listen to their music on vinyl. You missed it, and I thought that subtle mockery was pretty great actually.
 
2012-04-25 11:33:25 AM  

LarryDan43: I remember Gandolf being a bit of an idiot and an ahole on the hobbit. Is he going to be a wise old wizard now? Or am I misremembering?


Gandalf was the second most powerful Istari next to Saruman. He became the most powerful after he transformed into Gandalf the White.

He was still Gandalf the Grey in The Hobbit.
 
2012-04-25 11:34:42 AM  
I wonder if this will affect the home video version presentation with the different frame rate?
 
2012-04-25 11:35:40 AM  

Vash's Apprentice: Oh boy! Two more movies of people walking!


Yeah.. don't watch it.
 
2012-04-25 11:41:21 AM  
So its like when they transfer 60's tv shows to dvd or BR, and all those wires, wooden sets, and shaky matte lines we never noticed before stand out like sore thumbs.
 
2012-04-25 11:42:02 AM  

Lsherm: Mugato: I don't really care about The Hobbit but I'm looking forward to seeing what 48 fps looks like. People are biatching that it's different but that doesn't mean it isn't better.

I'm hoping it makes the 3D look better, but I'll have to see how he does it.

You know how soap operas on TV look different than the other shows you watch? That's what higher FPS looked like to me the few times I've seen it demoed. I doubt Jackson is going to put out something that looks like that.


Ug, I hate how soap operas look. Some of the older television programs did it as well, and it also annoys me (I love 'I, Claudius', but I hate how it was filmed on a technical level). Hopefully Jackson has figured out a way to make a higher FPS look good instead of, well, off.

Every time I see something with a slightly higher FPS it reminds me of that scene in 'Singing in the Rain' where the actors are watching the test audience screen the movie when they first added sound to it. It's like being a part of that audience and just laughing and giggling over what is obviously supposed to be a serious film, but not being able to help it because of how poorly executed it is.
 
2012-04-25 11:44:57 AM  
Vash's Apprentice
Oh boy! Two more movies of people walking!


Never understood why that's supposed to be a bad thing.
 
2012-04-25 11:49:27 AM  

The Voice of Doom: Vash's Apprentice
Oh boy! Two more movies of people walking!

Never understood why that's supposed to be a bad thing.


Video of people can be quite mesmerizing.

i.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.comi.imgur.com
 
2012-04-25 11:50:02 AM  
Damn!

Video of people walking can be quite mesmerizing.
 
2012-04-25 11:54:31 AM  

mongbiohazard: QFarker: Wellon Dowd: 24-fps provides a warmth and immediacy that 48-fps cannot. The latter is too sterile.

Frame rate has NOTHING to do with "warmth and immediacy," whatever that means. We hardly shoot movies on film any more, but most of those movies (yes, even digital) are still shot at 24fps, or more precisely, 23.976fps (or 25fps in PAL land). I can't wait to work on something shot at 48fps. Goodbye jittery motion. Do you folks know that at 24fps we are limited in how fast a camera can pan or how fast something can cross the frame?

Lighting, story, acting, and direction can change how "warm," "immediate," or "sterile" a film looks, but not frame rate. And something shot at 48 can be easily down-converted to 24fps.


Dude, he was mocking the people who listen to their music on vinyl. You missed it, and I thought that subtle mockery was pretty great actually.


Well, damn!!! I'm short, but stuff don't usually go THAT far over my head. Good job Wellon Dowd.
 
2012-04-25 11:56:37 AM  
I liken it to the refresh rate.... A lot of HD TV's, whether 120 or 240 mHz refresh rates, if not calibrated right, will have that 'soap opera' effect on film... It makes a film look like its video, because we're used to that refresh rate on video. I actually disable the 120 mHz processing on my TV to make it look more like film.
 
2012-04-25 11:57:21 AM  

QFarker: mongbiohazard: QFarker: Wellon Dowd: 24-fps provides a warmth and immediacy that 48-fps cannot. The latter is too sterile.

Frame rate has NOTHING to do with "warmth and immediacy," whatever that means. We hardly shoot movies on film any more, but most of those movies (yes, even digital) are still shot at 24fps, or more precisely, 23.976fps (or 25fps in PAL land). I can't wait to work on something shot at 48fps. Goodbye jittery motion. Do you folks know that at 24fps we are limited in how fast a camera can pan or how fast something can cross the frame?

Lighting, story, acting, and direction can change how "warm," "immediate," or "sterile" a film looks, but not frame rate. And something shot at 48 can be easily down-converted to 24fps.


Dude, he was mocking the people who listen to their music on vinyl. You missed it, and I thought that subtle mockery was pretty great actually.

Well, damn!!! I'm short, but stuff don't usually go THAT far over my head. Good job Wellon Dowd.


Thank you, sir. It was a pleasure trolling you.
 
Displayed 50 of 90 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report