6 ms·

They should apply this during movie fighting scenes. Then we might actually see the fight instead of the blur caused by "exciting cameras".

by Pelayo 14y ago

ck2 14y ago
I wish my tv/movie playback devices had a "de-lensflare" filter.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- toemetoch 14y ago
  Are you referring to JJ Abrams recent flirts with anisotropic lenses?
objclxt 14y ago
Going off on a tangent here, but from the distant memory of my film studies degree days one of the reasons you get so much fast cutting and hard-to-make-out action in modern fight scenes is because choreographing and shooting a fight scene properly is hard work, particularly if your actors aren't that experienced in stage combat. It's a big cheat, designed to make shooting fight scenes much easier (this is especially true if you're shooting a fight-scene where one participant is CG'd in).
modeless 14y ago
Higher frame rates would help a lot with the blur. I think Peter Jackson made a mistake shooting The Hobbit at 48 FPS for the entire movie. He should have shot most of it at the traditional 24 FPS but used 48 or 72 for fast motion shots. Hopefully his blunder won't poison high FPS forever in the minds of filmgoers.
- elithrar 14y ago
  > Higher frame rates would help a lot with the blur. I think Peter Jackson made a mistake shooting The Hobbit at 48 FPS for the entire movie. He should have shot most of it at the traditional 24 FPS but used 48 or 72 for fast motion shots. Hopefully his blunder won't poison high FPS forever in the minds of filmgoers. You can't shoot parts of a film at 24FPS, and parts at 48FPS - the 48FPS parts would be transformed down to 24FPS and would appear to be in "slow motion". Jackson, for what it's worth, is sticking to his guns re: 48FPS and believes that part of the dislike is because it's "change".
  - modeless 14y ago
    You absolutely can shoot parts of a film in 24 FPS and parts at 48 FPS. Instead of transforming the 48 FPS parts to 24 FPS, you do the other way around and transform the 24 FPS parts to 48 FPS, not by doubling the speed but by repeating each frame twice. In fact, film projectors have always displayed movies at 48 FPS with frame doubling to reduce the appearance of flicker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate#Background http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate#Background

They should apply this during movie fighting scenes. Then we might actually see the fight instead of the blur caused by "exciting cameras".

by Pelayo 14y ago

They should apply this during movie fighting scenes. Then we might actually see the fight instead of the blur caused by "exciting cameras".

ck2 14y ago

I wish my tv/movie playback devices had a "de-lensflare" filter.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
toemetoch 14y ago
Are you referring to JJ Abrams recent flirts with anisotropic lenses?

objclxt 14y ago

Going off on a tangent here, but from the distant memory of my film studies degree days one of the reasons you get so much fast cutting and hard-to-make-out action in modern fight scenes is because choreographing and shooting a fight scene properly is hard work, particularly if your actors aren't that experienced in stage combat. It's a big cheat, designed to make shooting fight scenes much easier (this is especially true if you're shooting a fight-scene where one participant is CG'd in).

modeless 14y ago

Higher frame rates would help a lot with the blur. I think Peter Jackson made a mistake shooting The Hobbit at 48 FPS for the entire movie. He should have shot most of it at the traditional 24 FPS but used 48 or 72 for fast motion shots. Hopefully his blunder won't poison high FPS forever in the minds of filmgoers.

elithrar 14y ago
> Higher frame rates would help a lot with the blur. I think Peter Jackson made a mistake shooting The Hobbit at 48 FPS for the entire movie. He should have shot most of it at the traditional 24 FPS but used 48 or 72 for fast motion shots. Hopefully his blunder won't poison high FPS forever in the minds of filmgoers. You can't shoot parts of a film at 24FPS, and parts at 48FPS - the 48FPS parts would be transformed down to 24FPS and would appear to be in "slow motion". Jackson, for what it's worth, is sticking to his guns re: 48FPS and believes that part of the dislike is because it's "change".
- modeless 14y ago
  You absolutely can shoot parts of a film in 24 FPS and parts at 48 FPS. Instead of transforming the 48 FPS parts to 24 FPS, you do the other way around and transform the 24 FPS parts to 48 FPS, not by doubling the speed but by repeating each frame twice. In fact, film projectors have always displayed movies at 48 FPS with frame doubling to reduce the appearance of flicker: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate#Background http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate#Background