dehydratedbabies
Member
Sweet. I can't wait!
The Hobbit film leaves fans with an unexpected sickness
- Thread starter ComputerMKII
- Start date
- Status
You get motion sickness in those games because of field of view. I'm the same way.
You could just adjust it.
brandonh83
Banned
Glad I don't really give a fuck about HFR or 3D. 24fps is just fine with me. brb going to go stalk a Brachiosaur
TheKaeptain
Banned
Damn tickets are 18 bucks in Fresno.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
3D glasses and high framerates
That's what Bilbo Baggins hates
That's what Bilbo Baggins hates
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
A quote from a cinematic snob means nothing. Pure confirmation bias.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
High frame rates actually reduce the ghosting that causes headaches in 3D.
But you know, a couple people in one cinema tweeted about it so I guess we ought to write the technology off!
But you know, a couple people in one cinema tweeted about it so I guess we ought to write the technology off!
And the theater owners who demoed it earlier this year hated it too.
This is what I'll probably do. I'm seeing it on opening night in 2D (I think) and then I'm going to hit up another theater that's showing it in 48fps w/ Dolby ATMOS.
maquiladora
Member
I can't actually find any of those tweets the article quotes. Weird.
Johnlenham
Member
How many people are going to check twitter though? Can pull those quotes out of thin air and then back peddle later saying "they were deleted."
Anticitizen One
Banned
I love how the news media pounces on anything new or different to scare people. This article was probably heavily exaggerated and spiced up. Same shit was said about the 3DS and any new ride at Disneyland that uses a new technology.
ComputerMKII
Banned
The 3DS does give me headaches.
IdreamofHIME
Member
The only way I'm not seeing this in normal 2D is if I'm kidnapped by terrorists and they force me to watch it using the new format.
Keep in mind Peter Jackson shot the Hobbit with a 270 degree shutter angle instead of the normal 180. The 270 will generate a differnt look. Avatar has a native 16:9 aspect ratio the Hobbit 2:35:1.
I think it is a mistake to draw conclusions about 48fps considering all the other stuff Jackson decided to do.
Sapphire Dreams
Member
Eh, I hardly watch 3D movies anyway.
Not looking forward to it...Lion Heart
Banned
I have two choices:
Liemax in 3D
or
HFR 3D.
Not sure I want to gamble on the Y&R in middle earth or pay the premium to watch in Cinematic framerate.
Liemax in 3D
or
HFR 3D.
Not sure I want to gamble on the Y&R in middle earth or pay the premium to watch in Cinematic framerate.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Guys, HFR isn't costing anything extra. If it's somehow just become more expensive than a normal 3D screening, then that is your theatre acting like dickholes.
I know the HFR showings in my area all cost more than the 3D ones. What does it matter if it's the theater's choice? Doesn't change the fact that it's costing more to see in 48fps.
edited to sound less dickish, but you caught it anyway. :lol
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Except they aren't more expensive. They're more expensive at your cinema. That is what I'm saying. My cinema is charging what they normally charge for a 3D film. WB has made it clear that cinemas shouldn't be charging more and if they are then you ought to take it up with them.
Raitosaito
Member
Has anyone ever compared a 48FPS videogame being played to film.
It's not even comparable.
It's not even comparable.
Mushroomer25
Member
For a split second I thought this was going to be another BS story about them being clinically depressed that Middle Earth isn't real, like after Avatar premiered.
I'm very curious to see what the common reaction to HFR 3D is. It is on a technical level, better. That is an undeniable fact. But if some people physically can't handle it? Then the odds of it being the new standard are pretty damn low.
I'm very curious to see what the common reaction to HFR 3D is. It is on a technical level, better. That is an undeniable fact. But if some people physically can't handle it? Then the odds of it being the new standard are pretty damn low.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Real life is running too fast for me guise. Everything being in Ultra HD is making things a little too real as well. WHAT I DO?
Because people are used to seeing movies in a low frame rate that's been the standard for the past 80 years for no reason (except the technical limitation of the 1920s).
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Yeah the soap opera comparison is the worst.
I can understand people saying it feels like watching a stage play - since ultimately that is what it more closely approximates with character's movements resembling real life more than 24fps.
What I'm most interested in seeing is the slow-mo scenes in 48fps.
I can understand people saying it feels like watching a stage play - since ultimately that is what it more closely approximates with character's movements resembling real life more than 24fps.
What I'm most interested in seeing is the slow-mo scenes in 48fps.
That's great that WB isn't charging more for HFR. Doesn't change the fact that some theaters are. That's my point: at the end of the day, regardless of where the decision is coming from, there are going to be a lot of people who will be charged more for wanting to see the movie in 48fps.
TheKaeptain
Banned
False equivalence.
The way your eyes work while watching a 3D movie isn't the same thing they do when you are walking around in your every day life.
People defending it keep saying that but I don't know why it is a bad comparison. I see it and think "This looks like a TV soap opera picture" it is the first thing that comes to mind.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
I'm poking fun at the 'EYES ARE RECEIVING TOO MUCH INFORMATION' bullshit going on in the article.
See what? You've seen The Hobbit?
VGChampion
Member
I've seen the TV's that have the "soap opera" effect. Hell, my dad has one that I watched some movies on when I went home for the holidays.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
That's nice. What has that got to do with this movie?
No.
MyAbsolution
Member
Hes saying it looks the same?
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
No.
He's very uninformed. People who think Motion Interpolation is at all equivalent to watching something shot for 48fps have zero clue what they're talking about.
The Hobbit's HFR and the "TV soap opera mode" can't be compared in any way.
But he hasn't seen The Hobbit, how would he know?
Jack Scofield
Member
Wait, people have to have seen 48 FPS before they can complain about it? What about the defenders who claim it looks "nothing like" soap operas? What are they basing their opinion on?
Well no ones seen the Hobbit running at 24fps either are you saying that'll be a surprise too?
Except when people who have seen the movie say it looks like a soap opera.
Not saying it'll look bad, but thats what it will look like. Remember that James cameron only found out about HFR after doing the Ghosts of the Abyss documentary. He wants to make movies look like documentaries.
TheKaeptain
Banned
It's horribly worded. It should say "It's because of the way our eyes receive information."
Anticitizen One
Banned
and Avatar gives people headaches and Star Tours at Disneyland makes people sick and flying makes some people have a fear of flying. Just because a few people are having issues doesn't mean there is an issue with the technology or medium.
I'm not saying HFR can't look like a soap opera, I'm just saying that on a technical level the soap opera mode and HFR in The Hobbit are two completely different things and shouldn't be compared.Loofy said:
Heh.
maquiladora
Member
According to twitter, nobody died from 48fps at the guild screening at the academy today.
Some comments that the higher frame rate was "weird" and "interesting", no mention of sickness. One guy said the 3D was some of the best he has seen.
Some comments that the higher frame rate was "weird" and "interesting", no mention of sickness. One guy said the 3D was some of the best he has seen.
- Status