Titanic in Dolby (12.1.17)

[xbs2034]

How do they even do HFR for a film shot on 35mm at 24fps? I guess they can do one of those motion interpolation techniques, but that screams like it will look unnatural and not at all true to its filmic roots (one of the nice things about Titanic in Dolby Cinema 3D is its film roots were still apparent, unlike T2’s 3D Conversion).

[Monterey Jack]

Originally Posted by xbs2034

How do they even do HFR for a film shot on 35mm at 24fps?

I'm wondering this, too. How can one make extra frames out of nothing?

[nesboy43]

Gosh are they going to do the bad "motionflow" technique that TVs do (the effect gives me a headache). Why would Cameron sign off on this. Lets hope we don't get more fake high framerate films.

[bigrob]

Wasn't Avatar 2 being shot in 60fps or something? hence why this version is HFR as well.

[Poya]

Originally Posted by bigrob

Wasn't Avatar 2 being shot in 60fps or something? hence why this version is HFR as well.

Cameron decided not to.

[d3nt0n]

HFR is one thing, but up-converting something shot in 24 FPS to HFR is something I cannot understand.
I am curious to finally see this in 3D, I've heard many people say it's one of the best 3D conversions out there.

[Zillamon51]

Looking forward to seeing this in Dolby! Like Avatar, it's something that I just don't watch at home. It needs the big screen! (Not as much as Avatar, that I think looks actively bad on a TV screen.)

[MovieReviews331]

Crazy that it has been 25 years. I still remember seeing this in theaters in 1998. Missed the previous rereleases, may have to catch this one. Just watched it in 3D on my projector the other day. I forgot that the 3D blu-ray was split between two discs, took me back to the VHS days for a minute…

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Poya

Cameron decided not to.

Eh? Cameron shot the Avadah sequels at 48fps.

[Modren]

Originally Posted by bigrob

Wasn't Avatar 2 being shot in 60fps or something? hence why this version is HFR as well.

They were shot partially at 48fps, with other scenes at 24fps because Cameron realized that having everything at a higher framerate wasn't necessary. Which makes the decision to interpolate Titanic to that framerate even more baffling - if Cameron knows HFR isn't always suitable, why do it for a movie that was never shot with it in mind?

[jvonl]

Originally Posted by d3nt0n

HFR is one thing, but up-converting something shot in 24 FPS to HFR is something I cannot understand.
I am curious to finally see this in 3D, I've heard many people say it's one of the best 3D conversions out there.

That's the consensus. I may be the only one who thought the 3D conversion was horribly distracting. Had to go home and watch the standard version to get it out of my head.

[Hectorlabra]

I hope that now it will arrive in bluray 4k hdr after February 2023... and how exciting that HFR is, because I have to watch all the movies with maximum motionflow and sometimes there are slight flaws that are distracting, but I prefer those flaws to to see something as choppy as 24hz... I don't understand how, being in 2022, they continue to record those images per second with so much technology and where storage is cheaper and the visual effects are getting better and better... the other thing I hope for is that this release uses all the image of the film that we saw in the bluray 3d (1.78; 1) and not the cut cinemascope, which is my other problem in the cinema... what is the point of continuing to use it? I understand that it began to be used to put more images on the negatives, but since there is a digital format for filming, it is something that does not enter my head, especially when I see that when they record, it is at 16:9 and then they simply cut the bars above and below... if titanic arrives in 4k hdr/dolby vision with 48 or 60 hz and in 1.78:1 it will be a true visual delight and an excellent demo...

[storythecorgi]

Originally Posted by d3nt0n

HFR is one thing, but up-converting something shot in 24 FPS to HFR is something I cannot understand.
I am curious to finally see this in 3D, I've heard many people say it's one of the best 3D conversions out there.

It really is - gave the film an entirely new viewing experience.

But I'm NOT happy about HFR though. Please tell me they will have an option like they did with The Hobbit.

[mar3o]

How do we know it will be using the same 3D conversion as before? It makes sense to I guess, but as good as that was, it was still quite a few years ago. I saw a feature that showed things they had to do back then for the conversion, like trim certain details out of scenes like some of Kate's hair that made the conversion tricky. I don't know if those things are still necessary with today's advancements in conversion. A modern conversion might be a bit more true to what was filmed without needing to edit details in scenes.

The previous 3D release did indeed look fantastic. But any modern 3D release is a conversion and modern Marvel films are an excellent example of how far 3D conversions have come. It would be cheaper to just use the previous conversion, but since they're also adding in HDR and HFR, I wonder if they're springing for a new 3D conversion as well?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by mar3o

How do we know it will be using the same 3D conversion as before? It makes sense to I guess, but as good as that was, it was still quite a few years ago. I saw a feature that showed things they had to do back then for the conversion, like trim certain details out of scenes like some of Kate's hair that made the conversion tricky. I don't know if those things are still necessary with today's advancements in conversion. A modern conversion might be a bit more true to what was filmed without needing to edit details in scenes.

The previous 3D release did indeed look fantastic. But any modern 3D release is a conversion and modern Marvel films are an excellent example of how far 3D conversions have come. It would be cheaper to just use the previous conversion, but since they're also adding in HDR and HFR, I wonder if they're springing for a new 3D conversion as well?

Doubt it. The conversion is still class-leading IMO.

[mar3o]

It's been a while since I've seen it. I might have to give it another watch soon. I don't know if I'd be able to tolerate HFR since I can't stand motion interpolation on my TV, and I doubt any of the theatres in my area would be equipped for HDR+HFR+3D anyways.

[pablo94]

Originally Posted by d3nt0n

HFR is one thing, but up-converting something shot in 24 FPS to HFR is something I cannot understand.
I am curious to finally see this in 3D, I've heard many people say it's one of the best 3D conversions out there.

In my opinion, the 3D conversion isn’t just the best conversation but one of the best 3D films. The great thing about Cameron’s use of 3D in Titanic is it isn’t about stuff flying out at you, it’s about adding depth. One of the best scenes is when Rose is running around the lower decks trying to find Jack and gets lost. The camera cuts to a POV shot of Rose and she looks down three corridors, all of which look exactly the same — the 3D use here allows you to get a feel for the length of the corridors and a sense of how desperate this situation would be. I thought it was really powerful.

[Poya]

Cameron's said he's using TrueCut Motion to convert this and Avatar to HFR. Allegedly, it's a tool that wasn't available to Jackson nor Lee and can reap the benefits of HFR without losing the cinematic look.

Motion Grading. Before and After. - YouTube

CinemaCon 2022 - Pixelworks Shows Value of TrueCut Motion Grading - YouTube

[Farerb]

It's still just a gimmick. I don't care about this screening, but if he releases the film like that on 4K I'm going to be mad

[d3nt0n]

Has anyone confirmed what refresh exactly it'll be in? I would assume either 48 or 60...