Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
48fps is a lot better for the cinema than 24fps. DO NOT listen to anyone who says otherwise
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Aragalen the Green
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 1:26am

Post #51 of 74 (197 views)
Shortcut
Are they a threat? [In reply to] Can't Post

If I have the Latin name correct, we call them "morning glories" in the US, and they can be somewhat invasive.
The worst is Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius). That stuff is everywhere in Western Washington state. Nasty and persistent!

Sorry--I am assuming you do not live in the US Blush

" Well well!", said a voice. "Just look! Bilbo the hobbit on a pony, my dear! Isn't it delicious!"
"Most astonishing wonderful!"

(This post was edited by Aragalen the Green on Dec 31 2012, 1:27am)


entmaiden
Forum Admin / Moderator


Dec 31 2012, 1:27am

Post #52 of 74 (195 views)
Shortcut
Yes, the tree on top of Bag End is a fake [In reply to] Can't Post

but it looks real! Unfortunately, they haven't figured out how to get the fake tree to drop its leaves in the autumn, so it's green all winter Wink.


Randraug
The Shire


Dec 31 2012, 2:51am

Post #53 of 74 (188 views)
Shortcut
I sincerely disliked the high frame rate. [In reply to] Can't Post

It distracted me the entire movie and I feel like it took away from the presentation. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. =)

"There's nothing wrong with being a loser, it just depends on how good you are at it."
~BJA~



Eowyn of Penns Woods
Valinor


Dec 31 2012, 3:57am

Post #54 of 74 (193 views)
Shortcut
Wanna trade? [In reply to] Can't Post

I'll take all your Scotch Broom if you'll take all our !bleeping! wild Morning Glory vines! I have had trouble keeping the former going, and can't kill the latter even with fire!!!11!!

**********************************


NABOUF
Not a TORns*b!
Certified Curmudgeon
Knitting Knerd
NARF: NWtS Chapter Member since June 17,2011


Aragalen the Green
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 5:05am

Post #55 of 74 (173 views)
Shortcut
Um no, [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks for the offer anyway :)

It could be worse though--about 200 miles south of where I live, the dominant invasive is gorse--like Scotch broom with thorns. No thanks!

" Well well!", said a voice. "Just look! Bilbo the hobbit on a pony, my dear! Isn't it delicious!"
"Most astonishing wonderful!"


Starling
Half-elven


Dec 31 2012, 5:30am

Post #56 of 74 (174 views)
Shortcut
A threat to my sanity! [In reply to] Can't Post

I quite like this take on it.
The roots can travel for lengthy distances, for example under a house and out the other side. When you dig in the garden, the roots are like thick spaghetti. Unbelievable stuff. I almost admire it. Not quite.

You are right to assume I don't live in the US - I am in Christchurch, New Zealand.

A wise person told me how to get rid of convolvulus: Move house.


Owain
Tol Eressea


Dec 31 2012, 6:37am

Post #57 of 74 (158 views)
Shortcut
70mm is actually closer to 8K in resolution... [In reply to] Can't Post

not 18K. At the time of the Hobbit production the RED shot a native 5K but the new Dragon sensor ups that to 6K and RED plans to go to 28K.

The bit depth and final resolution/fidelity achieved in a DCP is arguably a greater resolution/levels of luminosity than any film print... because film prints degrade from the initial negative, to answer prints, to reels that are printed for theatre distribution that ultimately degrade each time they are run through a projection system.

Cost plays a factor but make no mistake... the D-Cinema cameras of today are well beyond the HD video cameras that Hollywood used to scoff at and rightfully so (I'm looking at you Sony Viper camera).

The RED Epic is capturing more resolution than 35mm ever did... and the sensors that are coming will soon eclipse IMAX 70mm.

Not to mention the laser projection that is coming.

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."

(This post was edited by Owain on Dec 31 2012, 6:44am)


Owain
Tol Eressea


Dec 31 2012, 6:43am

Post #58 of 74 (156 views)
Shortcut
In response to this... [In reply to] Can't Post

... I don't know everything but I do consider myself knowledgable and experienced because I have been trained by RED and have used the RED Epic D-Cinema camera in my work.

There are plenty of movies show with the RED, of which audience have made no notice or said... that doesn't look like film. In fact, you may be surprised at the number.


Quote
I'm not an expert in digital cameras but It makes me wonder if the 'tv look' could have been avoided by shooting it in that special 48fps 35mm film stock VS a digital video camera. If any experts here could chime in about what that would look like in a side by side comparison if the same movie was shot in 48fps but one on 35mm film and one in HD video


The fact that it was shot on a RED Epic digitally doesn't really have much to do with the overall aesthetic that is causing the controversy.

The frame rate AND the shutter speed are what give the 48fps or HFR the appearance that is causing the commotion.

They could have shot and emulated film easily and no one would have known the difference save a very small group of people.

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


Morok Cloudkeeper
Rohan


Dec 31 2012, 11:58am

Post #59 of 74 (147 views)
Shortcut
Not true [In reply to] Can't Post

Saying that the Red Epic captures more resolution than 35mm film is just ridiculous.

Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it yet, keep looking. Don't settle.



Lindele
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 1:51pm

Post #60 of 74 (143 views)
Shortcut
While I agree. [In reply to] Can't Post

I also believe that the CGI in The Hobbit is by far the best we've seen to date in any film.
I've now seen it in HFR 3D, 24fps 2D, HFR 3D Dolby Atoms, and IMAX 3D 24fps, and I feel I have a pretty balanced idea of what the film has to offer.

My first viewing, which was in HFR, was quite overwhelming, and I did think that the HFR 3D drew attention to the CGI in a way that a flat 24fps image wouldn't. Therefore, a lot of the CGI heavy shots (especially explosions) felt very 'fake.' Having said that, the CGI is incredible, and when flattened to 2D 24fps the line between real and fake is pretty seamless.

Seeing the film for the second time in HFR 3D, the CGI really didn't bother me nearly as much, and I was able to appreciate how incredible it is.

I think the fact that the HFR 3D is such an immersive experience, and so realistic, that the CGI is more noticeable as CGI (even though it is very good)...but when all of layers get flattened together into the format that we are used to seeing (24fps 2D), the CGI is pretty much perfect.


sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Dec 31 2012, 2:22pm

Post #61 of 74 (132 views)
Shortcut
Everything that i've been able to find [In reply to] Can't Post

suggests that 4k generally is quite similar in resolution to 55mm film. Though different formats (and cameras and lenses) will render slightly different results, just as different film stocks will.


Lindele
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 2:29pm

Post #62 of 74 (130 views)
Shortcut
you are wrong about that [In reply to] Can't Post

Red cameras capture a higher resolution than 35mm film


sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Dec 31 2012, 2:33pm

Post #63 of 74 (127 views)
Shortcut
Maybe you re-read my post [In reply to] Can't Post

as I'm talking about 4K, not the Red Epic specifically.


(This post was edited by sauget.diblosio on Dec 31 2012, 2:36pm)


Morok Cloudkeeper
Rohan


Dec 31 2012, 2:37pm

Post #64 of 74 (142 views)
Shortcut
Film [In reply to] Can't Post

70mm film can be scanned to a format that is exponentially bigger than 5k(theoretically close to 12k). I said in an earlier post 18k but I admit that is bit of an exaggeration although I have read about that somewhere. Even 35mm film can be scanned to a resolution bigger than 5k, which is the resolution the Red Epic shoots at. Even Nolan said there isn't a medium today that is superior to film, but the filmmakers are forced to move to digital.

Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it yet, keep looking. Don't settle.



sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Dec 31 2012, 3:01pm

Post #65 of 74 (122 views)
Shortcut
And no, i don't think i'm necessarily "wrong" [In reply to] Can't Post

As others have noted, the Red Epic can capture up to 5k resolution. But i believe The Hobbit was shot in 4k. In all the research i've done in visiting various photography sites and forums, the consensus is that 4k resolution roughly translates to the equivalent of 35mm film, just as 8k is roughly equivalent to 65-70mm film. And of course, there are a lot of variables that go into a comparison like this, such as cameras, lenses, skill of the operator, and in the case of film, type of stock used. That's why i say "roughly".


Finrod
Rohan


Dec 31 2012, 3:31pm

Post #66 of 74 (115 views)
Shortcut
Bad math, bad English [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
70mm film can be scanned to a format that is exponentially bigger than 5k(theoretically close to 12k).


“Exponentially” bigger? Sure, if that exponent is 1.54395931063277, since that is the power to which 5k must be raised to raised to reach 12k.

I’m sorry, but an exponent of 1.5 is simply not very impressive. What did you really mean?

…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.
The Silmarillion, pp 150-151
while Felagund laughs beneath the trees
in Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.
The Lays of Beleriand, p 311




Finrod
Rohan


Dec 31 2012, 3:33pm

Post #67 of 74 (110 views)
Shortcut
And where can we see in it 4k? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
As others have noted, the Red Epic can capture up to 5k resolution. But i believe The Hobbit was shot in 4k. In all the research i've done in visiting various photography sites and forums, the consensus is that 4k resolution roughly translates to the equivalent of 35mm film, just as 8k is roughly equivalent to 65-70mm film. And of course, there are a lot of variables that go into a comparison like this, such as cameras, lenses, skill of the operator, and in the case of film, type of stock used. That's why i say "roughly".


Can one actually see the film in 4k resolution anywhere? How can you know? What would say that it is shown in that resolution? The 48fps 3D is not, because there is not enough bandwidth, so it is just 2k. Where is it 4k?

Also, didn’t they say that their workflow was basically a 2k one?

…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.
The Silmarillion, pp 150-151
while Felagund laughs beneath the trees
in Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.
The Lays of Beleriand, p 311




Lindele
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 3:35pm

Post #68 of 74 (108 views)
Shortcut
35mm [In reply to] Can't Post

can be scanned up to about 3 to 3.5k digitally. above that it really doesn't improve.
so to say that a Red camera's ability to capture 4k or 5k is not better than 35mm is wrong.
by this math...70mm should be able to be effectively scanned at 6 to 7k...but I believe what you see at the IMAX is generally equivalent to 4k.


Lindele
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 3:41pm

Post #69 of 74 (103 views)
Shortcut
What i was saying is wrong is [In reply to] Can't Post

the statement that Red camera's capturing higher resolution than 35mm is a joke.

35mm can be scanned up to about 3 to 3.5k digitally. above that it really doesn't improve.
so to say that a Red camera's ability to capture 4k or 5k is not better than 35mm is wrong.
by this math...70mm should be able to be effectively scanned at 6 to 7k...but I believe what you see at the IMAX is generally equivalent to 4k.


sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Dec 31 2012, 3:43pm

Post #70 of 74 (103 views)
Shortcut
I think i read somewhere [In reply to] Can't Post

that while it was shot in 4k, all the effects were done in 2k, and it's being shown in theaters in 2k. But i'm just going on memory on that.


Lindele
Gondor


Dec 31 2012, 3:48pm

Post #71 of 74 (100 views)
Shortcut
I'd be interested [In reply to] Can't Post

to hear the truth of this matter...
because I've heard that as well, but I've also heard that the master is 4k. which would make so much more sense for future proofing.


Owain
Tol Eressea


Dec 31 2012, 4:08pm

Post #72 of 74 (102 views)
Shortcut
In what way... [In reply to] Can't Post

is it not true?

It's actually very accurate.

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


Morok Cloudkeeper
Rohan


Dec 31 2012, 4:40pm

Post #73 of 74 (92 views)
Shortcut
I don't like people grabbing one word of my post and hanging on to it to start another argument. [In reply to] Can't Post

And in what way is my English bad? Being that I'm Croatian, I speak English well. Anyhow, the amount of details that you can extract from a 70mm film is mindblowing. Ultimately, digital is going to replace film entirely and be higher resolution than it. But not for some time.

Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it yet, keep looking. Don't settle.



JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Dec 31 2012, 5:10pm

Post #74 of 74 (106 views)
Shortcut
Word Choice [In reply to] Can't Post

Your use of "exponentially" for something that is a simple and quite low multiple diminishes your credibility because of the hyperbole. The same argument is more reasonable and acceptable when your terms are more rational. I wouldn't even use "mind blowing" because it's not. Just saying.

Digital advancements improve in multiples at a high frequency, indicating that our technology is not yet even close to mature. It won't take long to reach any level you are thinking, so I wonder why you cling to analog so tightly. I do have my own reasons for a distrust of digital - mostly in terms of archival permanence - even though all my work in the digital domain.


(This post was edited by JWPlatt on Dec 31 2012, 5:10pm)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.