Do you use smooth motion / interpolation / the Soap Opera Effect for 3D content? - Blu-ray Forum

Joe D. · 01-16-2018, 02:56 AM

Know it's strictly preferential but how many enjoy using motion interloption for their 3D viewing?

I myself like it. For filmed documentaries like IMAX, when combined with 3D it's breathtaking, recreating an absolutely stunning lifelike experience that never could be felt with celluloid. Might not be important watching flat but for the 3D afficiando it's truly like being in the landscape, up in the air or headed towards the ocean floor.

Know for movies this can start arguments with purists and for valid reasons. Yet even though it can eliminate the intended film effect of the producers, I find the trade off desirable due to the extra depth and clarity it adds along with making it feel more "lifelike". Even animation is more enhanced.

Found the attached which really doesn't take sides but explains the pros and cons.

So who's on board with me or want me to walk the plank metaphorically?

https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/moti...p-opera-effect

mar3o · 01-16-2018, 04:24 AM

I hate the effect on 2D films, but a mild touch of it for some films works for 3D for some reason. But I mean a touch. I don't like it if it is aggressive, and I can't really use it on my LG because it tends to cause artifacts during fast action scenes, especially horizontal motion.

Interdimensional · 01-16-2018, 02:07 PM

It doesn't give extra depth, it doesn't give extra clarity, but if you want to try it on a few things, why not.

Where I found it interesting was when viewing stop-motion animation, which can be a bit jittery. That's something that can benefit somewhat from the extra fluidity. I don't feel it has the same benefit for handdrawn animation though. It is creating extra inbetweens, but it is doing it robotically which messes with the timing and the drawings.

For live action, I find it swimmy and mushy looking. At certain degrees of smoothness, it is speeding things up, and the audio can be affected.

ZIROK · 01-18-2018, 06:30 PM

Love the high frame rate and motion interpolation stuff. Really do not like watching 24p stutter when the camera pans. After all human vision is smooth and 24p in almost a Century old and we would not be having this conversation if they had the mechanical Tech back then go do higher frame rates. It was the best they could do. Same goes for film reel size. higher rates would have required much larger reels.

Joe D. · 01-18-2018, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZIROK

Love the high frame rate and motion interpolation stuff. Really do not like watching 24p stutter when the camera pans. After all human vision is smooth and 24p in almost a Century old and we would not be having this conversation if they had the mechanical Tech back then go do higher frame rates. It was the best they could do. Same goes for film reel size. higher rates would have required much larger reels.

Hi Zirok,

Glad to know I'm not alone.

.

I really do enjoy the more life like effect, especially when seeing films from when I was a child for it brings back memories of how things used to look like in real life.

DJR662 · 01-18-2018, 09:42 PM

That's a big no for me, absolutely no motion interpolation in this house!

IMO 24p is the only way to watch motion pictures.

Also I sincerely hope HFR does not take off and will fade away in obscurity. I watched The Hobbit 3D HFR in theaters and it was the worst movie going experience I have ever had. 24p should remain the standard framerate for movies till the end of time as far as I'm concerned.

Smaugone · 01-23-2018, 06:58 PM

Some films benefit a lot from it and some become unwatchable. At least on my tv, a Panasonic plasma. The opening scene in The Dark Knight, when the camera is zooming to the window that explodes, the other buildings have a visual glitch that made me think my tv was dying. I was a bit anxious until I figured out it was from Motion Smoother.phew...

Joe D. · 01-23-2018, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smaugone

Some films benefit a lot from it and some become unwatchable. At least on my tv, a Panasonic plasma. The opening scene in The Dark Knight, when the camera is zooming to the window that explodes, the other buildings have a visual glitch that made me think my tv was dying. I was a bit anxious until I figured out it was from Motion Smoother.phew...

Hi Smaugone,

Yes, I come across an occasional video glitch which could be attributed to the motion setting. But it's minor and to me worth the trade off.

It all comes down to taste so with this there's no right or wrong answer. Only ones pleasure.

revgen · 01-24-2018, 02:32 AM

Generally, I don't like it.

But I think it can make the film look better if the scene is fast-action, fast-panning, fast editing, and shaky cam. Which a lot of filmmakers like to do these days. Thankfully, films like Blade Runner 2049 are going against this trend.

gafool · 01-25-2018, 02:24 AM

I hunted and bought my second HD tv just for the effect! lol, im starting to think i cant even tell the difference anymore?

KcMsterpce · 01-25-2018, 12:30 PM

Frame interpolation gives me a headache.
Also, I think everything looks artificial and mis-timed.

I will say that I wish it was ONLY used during fast pans, or when something was moving somewhat quickly across the screen.
Other than that... Nope.
I watched Iron Man at my dad's house and he couldn't even tell he had Smooth Motion (whatever his TV called it) on, and 45 minutes in I HAD to ask to have it turned off. A small migraine was building just above my eyes.

vila2k · 01-25-2018, 04:32 PM

I think it can be a very useful technology for things like sports that where designed to be viewed at 50 / 60 fps in the first place.

But when applied to a film that was designed to be viewed at 24 fps it ruins the cinematography and the intent of the film makers.

If film makers like Michael Mann, Ang Lee and Peter Jackson want to use a higher frame rate then I'm all up for viewing as intending - but not altering the film as intended - too us long enough to get films in 24p for home viewing.

Joe D. · 01-25-2018, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vila2k

I think it can be a very useful technology for things like sports that where designed to be viewed at 50 / 60 fps in the first place.

But when applied to a film that was designed to be viewed at 24 fps it ruins the cinematography and the intent of the film makers.

If film makers like Michael Mann, Ang Lee and Peter Jackson want to use a higher frame rate then I'm all up for viewing as intending - but not altering the film as intended - too us long enough to get films in 24p for home viewing.

Hi guys,

Guess I just like the way it looks in general. You know me, Wild Bill's ambassador.

But try it out on filmed nature documentaries rather than movies. The effect truly makes everything appear life-like, which film cannot do. Underwater, landscapes, animal life -- along with 3D, the only thing missing is feeling the natural environment.

UFAlien · 01-25-2018, 10:11 PM

I tend to watch most TV shows with motion smoothing turned on. Films, never, with the only exceptions I can recall making being for "found footage" stuff.

I actually find it particularly unsuitable for 3D because of the image artifacts that can be created by the frame interpolation. They stand out more in 3D and can cause depth errors.

Interdimensional · 01-26-2018, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJR662

That's a big no for me, absolutely no motion interpolation in this house!

IMO 24p is the only way to watch motion pictures.

Also I sincerely hope HFR does not take off and will fade away in obscurity. I watched The Hobbit 3D HFR in theaters and it was the worst movie going experience I have ever had. 24p should remain the standard framerate for movies till the end of time as far as I'm concerned.

I don't have any issue with high framerate, just motion interpolation.

Movement has its own textures and rhythms, interpolation erases that with an artificial smoothness.

High framerate has barely been explored in cinematic terms. I have never had any problem with how 24 fps looks, I've always felt it looked more theatrical and added a certain veneer and ambiance. I sometimes wonder if younger viewers and future generations will feel the same way when they have become accustomed to watching everything at 120 fps.

I'm as inclined towards purism and snobbery as any enthusiast, but lets face it, kids will be shooting 8k HFR footage on their smartphones before we know it.

VonMagnum · 12-05-2018, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the13thman

He's just released a video with Tom Cruise saying the best way to watch the film at home is with motion smoothing turned off. It's all over Twitter.

But they are dead wrong. The best way to watch the film at home would be on 3D Blu-ray, with motion smoothing turned off.

Try telling them that though... I suspect McQuarrie has no love for 3D conversions and Cruise is just on the happy pills (or whatever Scientologists take instead of pills). I wish Scientologists really loved 3D, they for sure wouldn't let Paramount off the hook for the lame home release of this film...

No, the BEST way is with 3D with motion smoothing turned on MAXIMUM!

I don't usually care for the effect with 2D so much (too many blur points that create distortion), but it works fine on "low" with the Epson 3100 here (no artifacts and smoother than without for panning). But 3D is different for some reason. It looks like real life on high (save the occasional glitch). 3D without high frame rates is like having a GTO Judge and only going the speed limit. You're missing half the fun.

the13thman · 12-06-2018, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VonMagnum

No, the BEST way is with 3D with motion smoothing turned on MAXIMUM!

I don't usually care for the effect with 2D so much (too many blur points that create distortion), but it works fine on "low" with the Epson 3100 here (no artifacts and smoother than without for panning). But 3D is different for some reason. It looks like real life on high (save the occasional glitch). 3D without high frame rates is like having a GTO Judge and only going the speed limit. You're missing half the fun.

I put on The Meg the other day and motion smoothing was on for some reason - it looked like absolute crap to me. I couldn't take even one minute before changing the settings.

You may like it and others may like it, but I hate it more than any other feature on my TVs. I don't want my movies looking like real life, I want them looking like movies.

Bluray3d4life · 12-06-2018, 01:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the13thman

I put on The Meg the other day and motion smoothing was on for some reason - it looked like absolute crap to me. I couldn't take even one minute before changing the settings.

You may like it and others may like it, but I hate it more than any other feature on my TVs. I don't want my movies looking like real life, I want them looking like movies.

Watching a movie in 3d is giving you the immersive impression that you are part of the action! Why not make it more like real life my fellow 3d enthusiast?!?!

VonMagnum · 12-06-2018, 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the13thman

I put on The Meg the other day and motion smoothing was on for some reason - it looked like absolute crap to me. I couldn't take even one minute before changing the settings.

You may like it and others may like it, but I hate it more than any other feature on my TVs. I don't want my movies looking like real life, I want them looking like movies.

Sorry, but I thought the WHOLE REASON for 3D movies was to make them MORE REALISTIC like REAL LIFE. I honestly have no clue what you get out of 3D movies if you want them to be more like 24fps horribly choppy panning film. If I want that, I'll watch the 2D version....

GenPion · 12-06-2018, 03:16 AM

Interpolation is the worst. Keep it OFF. Keep it 24fps.

01-16-2018, 02:56 AM	#1
Joe D. Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Oct 2015 Location:Bronx, NY Home Theater Gallery:1	Do you use smooth motion / interpolation / the Soap Opera Effect for 3D content? Know it's strictly preferential but how many enjoy using motion interloption for their 3D viewing? I myself like it. For filmed documentaries like IMAX, when combined with 3D it's breathtaking, recreating an absolutely stunning lifelike experience that never could be felt with celluloid. Might not be important watching flat but for the 3D afficiando it's truly like being in the landscape, up in the air or headed towards the ocean floor. Know for movies this can start arguments with purists and for valid reasons. Yet even though it can eliminate the intended film effect of the producers, I find the trade off desirable due to the extra depth and clarity it adds along with making it feel more "lifelike". Even animation is more enhanced. Found the attached which really doesn't take sides but explains the pros and cons. So who's on board with me or want me to walk the plank metaphorically? https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/moti...p-opera-effect

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-16-2018, 04:24 AM	#2
mar3o Blu-ray Baron Member since:Dec 2011 Trading Score:2	I hate the effect on 2D films, but a mild touch of it for some films works for 3D for some reason. But I mean a touch. I don't like it if it is aggressive, and I can't really use it on my LG because it tends to cause artifacts during fast action scenes, especially horizontal motion.

01-16-2018, 02:07 PM	#3
Interdimensional Power Member Member since:Nov 2014	It doesn't give extra depth, it doesn't give extra clarity, but if you want to try it on a few things, why not. Where I found it interesting was when viewing stop-motion animation, which can be a bit jittery. That's something that can benefit somewhat from the extra fluidity. I don't feel it has the same benefit for handdrawn animation though. It is creating extra inbetweens, but it is doing it robotically which messes with the timing and the drawings. For live action, I find it swimmy and mushy looking. At certain degrees of smoothness, it is speeding things up, and the audio can be affected.

01-18-2018, 06:30 PM	#4
ZIROK Active Member Member since:Sep 2013 Home Theater Gallery:3	Love the high frame rate and motion interpolation stuff. Really do not like watching 24p stutter when the camera pans. After all human vision is smooth and 24p in almost a Century old and we would not be having this conversation if they had the mechanical Tech back then go do higher frame rates. It was the best they could do. Same goes for film reel size. higher rates would have required much larger reels.

01-18-2018, 09:42 PM	#6
DJR662 Blu-ray Knight Member since:Feb 2009 Trading Score:30	That's a big no for me, absolutely no motion interpolation in this house! IMO 24p is the only way to watch motion pictures. Also I sincerely hope HFR does not take off and will fade away in obscurity. I watched The Hobbit 3D HFR in theaters and it was the worst movie going experience I have ever had. 24p should remain the standard framerate for movies till the end of time as far as I'm concerned.

01-23-2018, 06:58 PM	#7
Smaugone Special Member Member since:Sep 2012 4K collection:1 Blu-ray collection:325	Some films benefit a lot from it and some become unwatchable. At least on my tv, a Panasonic plasma. The opening scene in The Dark Knight, when the camera is zooming to the window that explodes, the other buildings have a visual glitch that made me think my tv was dying. I was a bit anxious until I figured out it was from Motion Smoother.phew...

01-24-2018, 02:32 AM	#9
revgen Power Member Member since:Oct 2013 Location:Southern California, USA Trading Score:17	Generally, I don't like it. But I think it can make the film look better if the scene is fast-action, fast-panning, fast editing, and shaky cam. Which a lot of filmmakers like to do these days. Thankfully, films like Blade Runner 2049 are going against this trend.

01-25-2018, 02:24 AM	#10
gafool Active Member Member since:Oct 2011 Location:da hills of gawga	I hunted and bought my second HD tv just for the effect! lol, im starting to think i cant even tell the difference anymore?

01-25-2018, 12:30 PM	#11
KcMsterpce Power Member Member since:May 2011 Location:Belgium 4K collection:61 Blu-ray collection:553	Frame interpolation gives me a headache. Also, I think everything looks artificial and mis-timed. I will say that I wish it was ONLY used during fast pans, or when something was moving somewhat quickly across the screen. Other than that... Nope. I watched Iron Man at my dad's house and he couldn't even tell he had Smooth Motion (whatever his TV called it) on, and 45 minutes in I HAD to ask to have it turned off. A small migraine was building just above my eyes.

01-25-2018, 04:32 PM	#12
vila2k Active Member Member since:Aug 2017 Trading Score:3	I think it can be a very useful technology for things like sports that where designed to be viewed at 50 / 60 fps in the first place. But when applied to a film that was designed to be viewed at 24 fps it ruins the cinematography and the intent of the film makers. If film makers like Michael Mann, Ang Lee and Peter Jackson want to use a higher frame rate then I'm all up for viewing as intending - but not altering the film as intended - too us long enough to get films in 24p for home viewing.

01-25-2018, 10:11 PM	#14
UFAlien Blu-ray Guru Member since:Oct 2008 4K collection:1 Blu-ray collection:299 Blu-ray reviews:13 Trading Score:29	I tend to watch most TV shows with motion smoothing turned on. Films, never, with the only exceptions I can recall making being for "found footage" stuff. I actually find it particularly unsuitable for 3D because of the image artifacts that can be created by the frame interpolation. They stand out more in 3D and can cause depth errors.

12-06-2018, 03:16 AM	#20
GenPion Blu-ray.com Reviewer Top contributor Member since:Feb 2009 Location:Texas 4K collection:420 Blu-ray collection:2479 Blu-ray reviews:3 Trading Score:218	Interpolation is the worst. Keep it OFF. Keep it 24fps.

Best 3D Blu-ray Deals