The Soap Opera Effect - Yay or Nay? - Blu-ray Forum

JayEmm · 01-31-2016, 01:15 PM

Any form of motion interpolation is the devil's work and we must stop this nonsense.

Regarding Miami Vice and a number of other films acquired digitally, Geoff is correct in saying it is a wider shutter angle that is responsible for the natural amount of extra blur. I do not like the look, and it is something which bugs the living daylights out of me. Film cameras are physically incapable of doing that kind of thing, so it's a dead giveaway a film is shot digitally and therefore one reason I think it should be avoided. Punters, educated or not, tend to pick up on these things even subconsciously.

Not as bad as the blatant GoPro shot in the Hobbit, mind...

Speaking of the Hobbit, it was acquired at 48fps with a 270 degree shutter... meaning when viewed in 48fps it might look similar to 24fps stuff with no shutter on - or 50i material for that matter, however when reduced to 24fps (by eliminating every other frame) it looks roughly similar to "regular" 24fps content.

If you've become used to a motion interpolated signal it can take some getting used to a proper 24fps signal. Some screens display it better than others. Bear in mind 24fps and 24hz are not the same thing. Most cinemas are 72hz.

There are actually a lot of very strict rules as to how fast one should pan when shooting 24fps, in order to avoid strobing artifacts. As you can guess, most of these rules went out the window in the 60s.

01-31-2016, 01:15 PM	#11
JayEmm Active Member Member since:Dec 2015	Any form of motion interpolation is the devil's work and we must stop this nonsense. Regarding Miami Vice and a number of other films acquired digitally, Geoff is correct in saying it is a wider shutter angle that is responsible for the natural amount of extra blur. I do not like the look, and it is something which bugs the living daylights out of me. Film cameras are physically incapable of doing that kind of thing, so it's a dead giveaway a film is shot digitally and therefore one reason I think it should be avoided. Punters, educated or not, tend to pick up on these things even subconsciously. Not as bad as the blatant GoPro shot in the Hobbit, mind... Speaking of the Hobbit, it was acquired at 48fps with a 270 degree shutter... meaning when viewed in 48fps it might look similar to 24fps stuff with no shutter on - or 50i material for that matter, however when reduced to 24fps (by eliminating every other frame) it looks roughly similar to "regular" 24fps content. If you've become used to a motion interpolated signal it can take some getting used to a proper 24fps signal. Some screens display it better than others. Bear in mind 24fps and 24hz are not the same thing. Most cinemas are 72hz. There are actually a lot of very strict rules as to how fast one should pan when shooting 24fps, in order to avoid strobing artifacts. As you can guess, most of these rules went out the window in the 60s.

Best 4K Blu-ray Deals