Remove ads with our VIP Service
Share This Page
- Avatar 
- Avatar: An IMAX 3D Experience 
- Avatar in 3D 
- Avatar: Special Edition 
- Avatar Special Edition: An IMAX 3D Experience 
- Avatar: Special Edition in 3D 
- Avatar 2 in 3D 
- The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey 
- The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey in HFR 3D 
- The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies 
Add Your Comments
- "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" Sequel Planned for 2018 Release [8/4]
- Looking Back at "The Devil Wears Prada" 10 Years Later [6/25]
- See "Warcraft" and Get Free "World of Warcraft" Game [5/18]
- On the 20th Anniversary of "Twister" Check Out This Stormchaser Tornado Video [5/12]
- If You Have QuickTime for Windows, Read This Security Warning [4/15]
- Examining Some of What Makes the Score to "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" Great [2/23]
- Watch All Eight Best Picture Nominees at the Marcus Theatres Best Picture Festival [2/18]
- Watch All Eight Best Picture Nominees at AMC's Best Picture Showcase [2/18]
- Watch a Documentary About Making "The Revenant" [2/4]
- New York, NY: Martin Scorcese and Others Pay Their Respects to the Now-Closed Ziegfeld Theater [1/29]
Academy Award-winning director James Cameron has been beating the drum recently about increasing the frame rates of movies from the standard 24 frames per second (fps) to 48 and even 60, in order to reduce judder and other artifacts in movies. He appeared at the industry convention CinemaCon at the end of March to present his reasons for making the switch (read the article on The Hollywood Reporter's web site).
According to his research, modern Digital Cinema projectors are capable of the higher frame rates with little or no modification. Cameron stated that he intends to make Avatar 2 3D and Avatar 3 in either 48 or 60 fps.
Given that the man set the bar with Avatar 3D so high that it excited an entire industry, while at the same time set a standard for 3D production that no one has yet been able to match, James Cameron has quite a bit of credibility where it counts.
But only one director, no matter how many awards he's received, is not going to make something like this happen alone.
His case just got more backing, with director Peter Jackson's announcement on his Facebook page that he's going to shoot The Hobbit - Part 1 at 48 fps:
We are indeed shooting at the higher frame rate. The key thing to understand is that this process requires both shooting and projecting at 48 fps, rather than the usual 24 fps (films have been shot at 24 frames per second since the late 1920's). So the result looks like normal speed, but the image has hugely enhanced clarity and smoothness. Looking at 24 frames every second may seem ok--and we've all seen thousands of films like this over the last 90 years--but there is often quite a lot of blur in each frame, during fast movements, and if the camera is moving around quickly, the image can judder or "strobe."
Shooting and projecting at 48 fps does a lot to get rid of these issues. It looks much more lifelike, and it is much easier to watch, especially in 3-D. We've been watching HOBBIT tests and dailies at 48 fps now for several months, and we often sit through two hours worth of footage without getting any eye strain from the 3-D. It looks great, and we've actually become used to it now, to the point that other film experiences look a little primitive. I saw a new movie in the cinema on Sunday and I kept getting distracted by the juddery panning and blurring. We're getting spoilt!
Click on the Read link below to view the full posting on Facebook.
Whereas James Cameron is talking about using the process when he begins making Avatar 2 in 18 months, Peter Jackson is doing it right now. And he's doing it with a movie that's part of a series that's made a boatload of cash and won another boatload of awards, with fans around the globe.
That's credibility! Let's hope that the potential translates into reality and that the studio will support 48 fps throughout the production process, and that theaters will be able to show the movie as it was intended to be seen.
Theaters have until December 2012 to get it figured out...
Add Your Comments
No comments found. Be the first and let us know what you think!
Add Your Comments
|Commenting on Journal Articles is available only to our readers who have customized this site, which makes it easier for you to complete the form and for us to contact you with any questions or concerns about your comments.|
Please login or register a new account before continuing.
Log in to retrieve your saved settings.
Forget Your Passcode?Send My Passcode To Me
Not Registered? Create a New Account!
Our registered members enjoy more features, including:
- Save Your Location -- the site remembers your location, no having to re-enter it each time you visit
- Favorite Theaters List -- keep a handy list of the theaters you attend
- Favorite Movies List - movies you want to see, all in one place
- Write Movie Reviews -- share your opinions of the movies you see
- Block Ads with VIP Service -- view this site ad free (subscription req'd)
Basic accounts are free -- sign up today!
Concerned About Privacy?
Journal/Blog - The Marquee - Movie Links - News and Events - Now Showing - Reader Reviews
Customize - VIP Service
|The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a service of SVJ Designs LLC. All graphics, layout, and structure of this service (unless otherwise specified) are Copyright © 1995-2016, SVJ Designs. The BigScreen Cinema Guide is a trademark of SVJ Designs. All rights reserved.|
'ACADEMY AWARDS®' and 'OSCAR®' are the registered trademarks and service marks of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.