When will we get better 24p motion-resolution?

[TheSweetieMan]

I know this isn't exactly the correct sub-forum to post this thread -- but considering the general inactivity in the display theories sub-forum, and the way this topic correlates significantly with UHD/HDR, I thought this would be a better spot to ask this question.

I know TCL is going something called TrueCut Motion to help eliminate judder in 24P/Cinematic content (although it looks like It'll be for streaming, I believe) so I don't think this is so much an advancement in processing technology than it is one related to software.

We've had sample-and-hold for quite a while now. So this thread is really about discussing when we will get something that will evolve beyond that. I know that the days of plasma and CRT had better motion-handling -- but in the case of the former, the 24p/96hz feature could result in a dimmer picture and flickering for some, not too dissimilar to BFI in modern panels. Which, again, will have a negative impact on the brightness of HDR content.

It's just frustrating right now, because motion-handling for 24p content seems so archaic right now when compared to how far UHD and HDR have come -- as well as the improvement in 4K panels from 2015 to now. The overall PQ still looks remarkably impressive, but I think we can all agree that the days of unwanted motion judder to be gone.

[Geoff D]

Just so's we're clear: you're not talking about HFR per se but better motion resolution of 24p on our home displays?

[TheSweetieMan]

Definitely the latter.

HFR looks fine to me.

I just want to see a marriage of 4K/24p with the cinematic motion clarity that plasma provided.

[Geoff D]

Oh. I didn't like plasma for motion. I could see 'rainbows' whenever I moved my eyes, kinda like what you get with DLP projektion.

[TheSweetieMan]

I had a late-gen Samsung plasma that could do 24p/96hz. I don't recall seeing any artifacts like that, personally. I did like the way the motion looked in slow panning shots compared to what I see through sample-and-hold.

I'm curious if there's a way BFI or something similar could be used without actually effecting the brightness.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

I had a late-gen Samsung plasma that could do 24p/96hz. I don't recall seeing any artifacts like that, personally. I did like the way the motion looked in slow panning shots compared to what I see through sample-and-hold.

I'm curious if there's a way BFI or something similar could be used without actually effecting the brightness.

Mine was a Pioneer plasma and it had similar 48/72Hz modes to deal with 24p content. But it's how plasma generates the image with its sub field drive by redrawing each frame x amount of times to keep the pixels lit (leading to all that 600Hz marketing drivel, not sure there's been a bigger pile of bullshit in the history of TV manufacturer sizzle) that was a distraction for me, not a chronic issue but always lurking in the corner of my eye and it was worse on black and white content for some reason. So as soon as LCDs stopped smearing the motion as badly as they did (separate from frame rate/refresh rate, I mean the panel response time) when they first broke through to market I switched over and never looked back.

HDR has exposed the shortcomings of sample and hold technology for sure, the added brightness/range is brutal for such low temporal resolution because it literally makes it more apparent that there's nothing inbetween, but it's gonna need a completely different type of display tech to work around it and maybe even a switch to HFR or some kind of 'TruCut' blended motion system (Avatar 2 is gonna be interesting in that regard). Filmmakers generally know to avoid slow panning shots though because of the inherent issues with 24fps capture and a typical 180-degree shutter, there are very basic rules of cinematography that govern this, but some still get through like the opening shot of Hell and High Water.

[TheSweetieMan]

If I may ask, what's this talk of 'Avatar 2' and TrueCut?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

If I may ask, what's this talk of 'Avatar 2' and TrueCut?

A2 isn't using TrueCut (that I know of) but it's been shot at 48fps. Thing is, El Cameroon doesn't like that hyper smooth 'HFR' look for drama stuff so it'll be a variable frame rate kinda deal, that they'll crank up the frame rate for action but dial it back down in the quieter moments. Whether they'll just drop every other frame to get 24fps for the drama bits or use a motion interpolation type system is unclear at this point. (The deliverable itself won't be VFR, it'll be in fixed 48fps but they'll frame double any stuff that's at 24fps so it goes into the 48fps 'container'.)

[TheSweetieMan]

I completely forgot that Cameron was doing portions of A2 in 48FPS.

Curious to see how that turns out since the film will still be projected at 24FPS.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

I completely forgot that Cameron was doing portions of A2 in 48FPS.

Curious to see how that turns out since the film will still be projected at 24FPS.

It'll get 24fps deliverables as well as 48fps ones, they'll just do what was done on the Hobbitses and drop every other frame from the actual 48fps scenes to make it fit 24fps and maybe do some interpolation as well.

[Synchg]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

El Cameroon doesn't like that hyper smooth 'HFR' look for drama stuff so it'll be a variable frame rate kinda deal, that they'll crank up the frame rate for action but dial it back down in the quieter moments. Whether they'll just drop every other frame to get 24fps for the drama bits or use a motion interpolation type system is unclear at this point. (The deliverable itself won't be VFR, it'll be in fixed 48fps but they'll frame double any stuff that's at 24fps so it goes into the 48fps 'container'.)

[Geoff D]

Heh. It's variable frame rate but not in the sense of, say, gaming where the frame rate being produced by the playback device is ramping up and down. Video formats don't do that, they can't do that. The frame rate from the cinema's server will be locked to 48fps so if you're making a version to fit that spec then you can't have it changing from 24 to 48 on the fly. How do you represent your 24fps scenes inside that 48fps version then? By frame doubling them.

[Synchg]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Heh. It's variable frame rate but not in the sense of, say, gaming where the frame rate being produced by the playback device is ramping up and down. Video formats don't do that, they can't do that. The frame rate from the cinema's server will be locked to 48fps so if you're making a version to fit that spec then you can't have it changing from 24 to 48 on the fly. How do you represent your 24fps scenes inside that 48fps version then? By frame doubling them.

so people weren't in the wrong when they said the hobbit looked like it had the 'soap opera' effect during its theatrical HFR run? because some footage had been in fact interpolated? and not tru48fps.

i thought they were just nitpicking the new format

[ctujackbauer]

Am I the only one who immediately turns off motion interpolation on a TV set? I tried it for like half an hour.

I don't know all of the details and terminology, but I know I don't like it.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by ctujackbauer

Am I the only one who immediately turns off motion interpolation on a TV set?

This is the way.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Synchg

so people weren't in the wrong when they said the hobbit looked like it had the 'soap opera' effect during its theatrical HFR run? because some footage had been in fact interpolated? and not tru48fps.

i thought they were just nitpicking the new format

No sir. Hobbit was shot for and projekted at a ‘true’ 48fps frame rate in HFR. As said, Cameron doesn’t like the inherent soap opera effect of a higher frame rate but because he doesn’t like strobing on fast motion in 3D either he’ll use it selectively for action scenes and dial it back for the drama.

[Ben_UK]

Could you not just do a deliverable of 48fps, but if you had 24fps footage to mix in, just repeat every other frame during those segments?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Ben_UK

Could you not just do a deliverable of 48fps, but if you had 24fps footage to mix in, just repeat every other frame during those segments?

If only someone had said that earlier

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Heh. It's variable frame rate but not in the sense of, say, gaming where the frame rate being produced by the playback device is ramping up and down. Video formats don't do that, they can't do that. The frame rate from the cinema's server will be locked to 48fps so if you're making a version to fit that spec then you can't have it changing from 24 to 48 on the fly. How do you represent your 24fps scenes inside that 48fps version then? By frame doubling them.

(Not to be a snarky cnut but it's times like these I wish I could just beam info into people's brains because teknikal explanayshuns is hardd)

[TheSweetieMan]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

No sir. Hobbit was shot for and projekted at a ‘true’ 48fps frame rate in HFR. As said, Cameron doesn’t like the inherent soap opera effect of a higher frame rate but because he doesn’t like strobing on fast motion in 3D either he’ll use it selectively for action scenes and dial it back for the drama.

So, in essence, mainly the action will be projected and displayed in HFR? That may work well since I though the HFR in ‘Gemini Man’ worked best during its action sequences.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by TheSweetieMan

So, in essence, mainly the action will be projected and displayed in HFR? That may work well since I though the HFR in ‘Gemini Man’ worked best during its action sequences.

That's his thinking on it, yes, as well as for slow panning shots and stuff like that. This is from an interview he gave to Empire in 2014:

Originally Posted by El Cameroon

I also think I might use it a little differently than Peter. I don't think I'll apply it to the entire film any more than I would put music all the way through the film. I'll use it where I need to use it. If I have panning shots like that I'll use it on those shots, but I won't use it on everything. And I actually think there's a slight negative impact at times, where things look a little too hyper-real and you no longer feel like you're watching a movie, but you feel like you're watching reality. And that reality is that you're on a soundstage with a bunch of people in make-up. Peter and I have talked about this and we have our theories. I'm going to try mine out and see if that works, and if that doesn't work, then it'll probably all fade away.