ChawlieTheFair
pip pip cheerio you slags!
Everybody in all these framerate and filmic thread brains' are too fucking hot lol.
In defense of the "filmic" look.
- Thread starter msdstc
- Start date
Everybody in all these framerate and filmic thread brains' are too fucking hot lol.
que?
Like, real life movement feel natural. It just happens. You don't notice a framerate.
24fps movies are like that. When people move it feels like how my eyes see real people.
60fps is more like "look at me I'm sooo smooth!" Feels artificial
The fps is not the reason why things at higher fps than 30fps look wrong that is the developer tying how the game works directly to fps, which is dumb decisions through and through.
High fps/refreshrate shouldn't look natural to anyone considering reality or the light spectrum runs at a rate of numbers in the trillions. Our eyes do not but military testing can have people pickout a single frame in to 200fps-400fps range. Most people do not have the speed to see high fps scanerios. This is no different than how everyone has different perceptions of color.
High fps/refreshrate shouldn't look natural to anyone considering reality or the light spectrum runs at a rate of numbers in the trillions. Our eyes do not but military testing can have people pickout a single frame in to 200fps-400fps range. Most people do not have the speed to see high fps scanerios. This is no different than how everyone has different perceptions of color.
EatinOlives
Member
60 FPS only looks "strange" in film because that isn't the standard. That's it. There's nothing in 24 FPS (or 30 for that matter) that looks any more "realistic" or "grounded".
60 FPS also looks significantly closer to real life, because it's much closer to how people perceive the real world than 24/30 FPS is. If you're going for "realism", 60 FPS is actually more realistic.
Yeah...that's just you. There's nothing artificial about 60 FPS.
60 FPS also looks significantly closer to real life, because it's much closer to how people perceive the real world than 24/30 FPS is. If you're going for "realism", 60 FPS is actually more realistic.
Yeah...that's just you. There's nothing artificial about 60 FPS.
I don't know what this is trying to prove but its a very useless post. Nobody is arguing in favor of 24fps. If you wanted to be relevant to this thread, you should have posted a gif at 30fps.
OminoMichelin
Member
Our eyes perceive can perceive a little bit above 144 "frames" per second, if I remember correctly. Films are shot at 24fps because it forces the brain to make up the remaining frames, making it more ''magical'', there's a science behind it.
Doesn't ocarina of time run at like 18fps? Certainly doesn't look as jaggy as that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0227DGJIgsQ
That said, I only dislike a movie's 24 fps running on my monitor, because everything seems to chunk along in scenes where the camera pans. Watching it on my TV or at the movies doesn't have the same effect on my eyes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0227DGJIgsQ
That said, I only dislike a movie's 24 fps running on my monitor, because everything seems to chunk along in scenes where the camera pans. Watching it on my TV or at the movies doesn't have the same effect on my eyes.
I can't get over the fact that you see the world at 24fps.
Delta Assault
Member
Don't forget perfect anti-aliasing.
48+ FPS in movies need changes in cinematography to go along with that frame rate. Lighting, sets, costume design, choreography, special effects, all need to be tailored to the higher temporal "resolution" for lack fo a better term.
Taking The Hobbit as an example, the 24 FPS version of the fight scenes were your typical movie tropes. Blurry and shaky as hell, there's no way to tell what the hell is going on except for the one or two characters directly in front of the camera.
The 48 FPS version brought out the incredible choreography of the whole thing. you could see the detail in all the movement, the special effects, the customes, etcs, EVERYWHERE. You could follow the fight in the background between a single dwarf and 5 goblins just as well as the fight happening in the foreground. A fight that went completely unnoticed when I watched the 24 FPS version - because it was a tiny smear in the background.
Probably the main thing that sold me on high frame rate movies.
Taking The Hobbit as an example, the 24 FPS version of the fight scenes were your typical movie tropes. Blurry and shaky as hell, there's no way to tell what the hell is going on except for the one or two characters directly in front of the camera.
The 48 FPS version brought out the incredible choreography of the whole thing. you could see the detail in all the movement, the special effects, the customes, etcs, EVERYWHERE. You could follow the fight in the background between a single dwarf and 5 goblins just as well as the fight happening in the foreground. A fight that went completely unnoticed when I watched the 24 FPS version - because it was a tiny smear in the background.
Probably the main thing that sold me on high frame rate movies.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Somebody wake this man up from the Matrix.
EatinOlives
Member
Or the complete lack of "loading screens"
ArkkAngel007
Member
How was your transition from watching a SD film on a SD television to one on Bluray on a HD set? I remember my wife recently having to acclimate and refusing for a long while to watch HD media due to the headaches and 'speed' of it.
It's a similar effect IMO that has little to do with the actual hz/frames, but with the fluidity and clarity. It's a patience game to acclimate to, and some do it faster than others.
Also, things have to be more on point at 60fps. A game designed at 30fps isn't/shouldn't necessarily be designed the same as one at 60fps.
But seriously, the filmic look just seems like an excuse for something that isn't easily understood.
It's a similar effect IMO that has little to do with the actual hz/frames, but with the fluidity and clarity. It's a patience game to acclimate to, and some do it faster than others.
Also, things have to be more on point at 60fps. A game designed at 30fps isn't/shouldn't necessarily be designed the same as one at 60fps.
But seriously, the filmic look just seems like an excuse for something that isn't easily understood.
I'm not the guy you're quoting, but there's plenty of games with real-time rendered cutscenes and PC versions will let you watch them at 60fps. And I think 60fps cutscenes look yummy.
Leave this thread, watch this GameSpot video, then come back.
In short one of the biggest differences is motion blur for movies sort of smoothing it out for our brains, video games going for 24 fps without faking the motion blur, well, watch that Watch_Dogs webm, and there's Ocarina of Time on the N64 for I THINK 20 fps.
In short one of the biggest differences is motion blur for movies sort of smoothing it out for our brains, video games going for 24 fps without faking the motion blur, well, watch that Watch_Dogs webm, and there's Ocarina of Time on the N64 for I THINK 20 fps.
Same thing goes for games, there's a lot more blur in 30fps games. I kinda hate it in some games where the blur is bad enough to double all the imagery when you move around. Much less noticeable at 60fps.
Yup, habit. That's all. There is no other reason to prefer a lower framerate. Higher framerate will always be better and give a much clearer image.
Wat
Mr. Poolman
Member
Delta Assault
Member
They used to have em at the beginning of movies, and disguise em with the names of actors and important people in the production. These days though, they've got a middleware solution that backloads them after the movie ends.
No. Pretty sure when 24 FPS became standard there was no science to the number, and it was probably simply base don the lowest number of frames that would create convincing movement. Film is expensive.
Colonel Nasty
Member
It's crazy the huge deal people put on resolution yet were not supposed to give a flip about framerate
Auto-Reply
Member
I agree. I watch movies on a plasma exclusively with ifc for 2-3 years now and it feels completely natural to me, it didn't at first but that faded completely. When i go back watching movies the tradionial way they look choppy and blurry. I not only got accustomed to the higher motion resolution, i prefer it now.
Leatherworkstation
Banned
I didn't like the way Tomb Raider looked on PS4 at 60. I think racing games and FPS games should always be 60, everything else, as long as it's stable at 30, I couldn't care less about.
As for films, having seen the Hobbit at 48FPS, no thank-you. I don't like my big budget movies to look like BBC outside broadcast productions. Though I'm willing to admit, with more familiarity maybe it wouldn't be an issue.
As for films, having seen the Hobbit at 48FPS, no thank-you. I don't like my big budget movies to look like BBC outside broadcast productions. Though I'm willing to admit, with more familiarity maybe it wouldn't be an issue.
I think movies are affecting your perception of the world rather than the other way around
Agreed 100%
60fps COD is fine,.
playing something that is not twitch based locked 30 is great
thewhitehawk
Member
And in what context, other than your imagination does this question have any validity, and if so, what is the point of answering it?
There are some games I absolutely do not mind playing in 30FPS and there are some games in which I prefer 60fps but don't see it as an obligation provided the game is designed well-enough to accommodate its number of frames per second.
60 FPS is great and can be an improvement for some games, but there are some in which it barely makes any difference. The debate of frames-per-second and whether or not games have the same lighting effects we saw at their unveiling have greatly overshadowed other flaws behind those same games.
I've played games from the same series in 60FPS and 30FPS like WipeOut and Ratchet and Clank and I didn't find one less enjoyable than the other due to the frame-rate diferences. To me it's much less of a deal than many other aspects of gameplay and design.
a Master Ninja
Member
I used to sell tvs and I have never, EVER heard of this. Did you leave that stupid motion interpolation on?
Hurr Hurr Hurr
I'm ok with 30 locked and some nice motion blur for "filmic" purposes in games.
As others have pointed out, 24 fps with motion blur for cinema is okay, it's the "processed" 24 (source) to 60 fps conversion that looks like shit (soap opera effect), maybe native 60 on cinema would look okish.
That seems like a really stuttery 24, not a smooth one. I'm gonna try and get another example.
Someone on this forum made a few shorts shots with their (or the company's) RED camera in both 24p and 48p.
It was funny, because the 48p video seemed a bit alien at first. But after watching it for less than a minute, it felt natural. And then going back to the 24p shot again, and it felt like you were watching a bloody slideshow. Or as if your computer was acting up strange.
For shits and giggles, I once took the time to render some of my motion graphic animations (which are originally 25p) at 60p. Although it increased the rendering time a ten-fold, it was the same story. 60p felt natural pretty quickly, and 25p looked incredibly jittery afterwards.
So from my experience, the fact 48p+ seems so weird is hugely due to the fact we're not used to it.
With that said, I'd definitely like to see 60 fps become the norm in (3D) games. Including their cutscenes.
It was funny, because the 48p video seemed a bit alien at first. But after watching it for less than a minute, it felt natural. And then going back to the 24p shot again, and it felt like you were watching a bloody slideshow. Or as if your computer was acting up strange.
For shits and giggles, I once took the time to render some of my motion graphic animations (which are originally 25p) at 60p. Although it increased the rendering time a ten-fold, it was the same story. 60p felt natural pretty quickly, and 25p looked incredibly jittery afterwards.
So from my experience, the fact 48p+ seems so weird is hugely due to the fact we're not used to it.
With that said, I'd definitely like to see 60 fps become the norm in (3D) games. Including their cutscenes.
Netherscourge
Banned
Now, make that guy RUN instead of walk and check back in with a new gif!
Not Spaceghost
Spaceghost
I don't know why everyone seems to believe that Racing games have to be at 60fps, maybe for racing games that are more on the sim side, but considering how those games are made up of motion blur and have nearly no frame perfect input requirements I don't quite see the benefit there.
If you can notice 60FPS on a screen then your eyes see the world around you beyond that.
You lend validity to the notion that 24FPS looks natural only because you're used to it. You appear to be so deeply entrenched in that thought that you think life appears more like 24 than 60.
Sadly almost everyone who doesn't know shit about TVs leaves motion interpolation. I always end up asking for the remote when visiting friends/other people's houses just to turn off the "soap opera" mode.
You are seeing the world moving at half the speed son, the hell is going on?
tryagainlater
Member
I agree with that guy who made a thread about the cutscenes in Ground Zeroes looking off in 60fps but that might just be because I'm not used to it. Overall, I don't really mind low framerate unless it goes below 20.
Jeez, this looks way lower than 24 fps to me. How horrifying.
Isn't that kind of the point, at least specifically when people try to defend 24 fps? Our displays aren't set up for that and even have to fake it for movies, and a few people seem to seriously be thinking if it's fine for movies it must be fine for games... when that's wrong wrong wrong. At best there's a case to be made maybe on PAL non-HD TVs, but on everything else you'd be a fool to actively seek 24 fps specifically in a game rather than 30, and even for PAL it's more like you should go to 25 fps.
This is also why 60 fps would generally not be very good for most movies. So much of "movie magic" is just hiding things in plain sight.
I can't watch it on phone, but what I can guess is that it's chugging, that's really not a fair shot at it, but again I'm not fighting for 24FPS more for 30.. hell I'm not fighting for that at all.
This really isn't about which is better, it's more why if FPS affects how a movie feels in terms of the cinematic feel, can't the same beside for games? I've always felt this way, and maybe it's my personal preference in terms of purely looking at a game. I remember it specifically back when Modern warfare first came out. I played that with friends for a little bit, then went back to resistance, and it was incredibly jarring, however I noticed that when playing single player, it had more of a "film" feel to it. You can laugh, call it PR, whatever, but there is a reason for it, and people notice it in movies, apparently not in games though.