|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News from Bree
spymaster@theonering.net
Dec 19 2012, 2:01pm
Post #1 of 4
(328 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Noted Photographer Explains His Disappointment with High Frame Rates in THE HOBBIT
|
Can't Post
|
|
 Reactions to the high frame rate (HFR) of 48 frames per second used for The Hobbit have ranged from love to hate, and everything in between. Now Pulitzer-prize-winning still photographer Vincent Laforet has weighed in. He undertook to see the film in 3D HFR, 3D, and 2D, all on the same day. He disliked the HFR version, preferring both the 3D and 2D versions at the normal 24 fps. Laforet's blog post, "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Masterclass in Why HFR Fails, and a Reaffirmation of What Makes Cinema Magical," gives a detailed description of how he found it difficult to identify with the characters and have any emotional involvement in the story while watching the HFR version. The lighting looked bad, whereas it looked good in 2D--even though these are different versions of the same footage. The tiny flaws in makeup, sets, and special effects were visible in the HFR version but not in the normal version. Laforet explains why he thinks all this was the case, and although the essay gets a bit technical at times, it's generally pretty clear. If you haven't seen The Hobbit yet and are wondering which version to see, or if you've seen the HFR version and are wondering if the normal-speed version is worth seeing, check out what Laforet has to say.
By the way, he does like the fact that Peter Jackson is bold enough to test out new technologies like HFR!
|
|
|
Owain
Dor-Lomin
Dec 19 2012, 7:09pm
Post #2 of 4
(236 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It should be noted that while...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Vincent LaForet has made a lot of short films with various digital cinema grade cameras, he is primarily known for still photography.
While his opinion as a viewer is valid like anyone's, he is not a contemporary of Peter Jackson's, James Cameron, Christopher Nolan etc.
It's an interesting assessment...
Middle Earth is New Zealand!
"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."
|
|
|
LordMaximus
Ossiriand
Dec 19 2012, 7:37pm
Post #3 of 4
(215 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The article I read about the early work in higher frame rates
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Suggested the exact opposite of that is stated here the emotional connections (ie a greater connection with characters), because of the more lifelike representation of characters. I do believe that investigation was done at 60 fps though.
|
|
|
Celedor
Ossiriand
Dec 21 2012, 1:06am
Post #4 of 4
(145 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Just saw it at both frame rates - 2D and 3D
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course. Personally, I loved the 48 frames per second! It was so nice to actually feel like I was watching the people and not a flickering piece of film. I didn't notice any flaws in the 48 frame version that I didn't see in the 24 frame version (which I saw first). To me, the 3D aspect was more annoying than anything. It was too gimicky for my tastes, and I'm not a fan of the 3D craze.
|
|
|
|
|
