Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D
I'd be interested in seeing a film where high-motion parts of a scene move at HFR while low-motion parts can stay at 24 FPS. This has a certain visual look when done in old films, but I am curious to see what the effect would be when the lowest effective framerate is 24 FPS.
|
Agree, I’d be extremely interested to see Cameron, or anyone, have a go at using different frame rates within the same shot. Shall we start calling that MFR, Mixed Frame Rate?
When he first announced his VFR a few years ago I naively thought that the “Variable” element of that was going to cover a multitude of different frame rates rather than what he delivered, which was just two. Strictly speaking, I suppose that does make it variable – by only by the bare minimum count!
You could be absolutely right in that it might be down to how individuals perceive motion that makes some people so appalled by HFR. (Maybe worth noting that I’m one of those people who cannot watch single-chip DLPs because of the constant Rainbow Effect swamping the image: It can be a
struggle to understand how others don’t see RBE – to me it’s so obvious!)
Personally, I lean towards thinking that I hate HFR so much primarily because it looks so
ordinary: It strips film of its “magic.” Watching an actor deliver a performance ‘like you’re there on the set’ makes the whole enterprise look ridiculous. That’s just my opinion, of course: Some people don’t even notice this massive clanging clash between art & tech.