Extended Hobbit trailer bombs

Schroeder · 04-26-12, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spoon 11th

They should've tripled it to 72 fps.

I'm not even certain the human eye can see the difference between 60 and 72FPS.

floundericiousWA · 04-26-12, 02:24 PM

Indeed...wasn't 24fps selected back when film was..you know...film? It was picked as the point at which the eye/brain combination smeared movement together into a seamless fluid continuity...so I don't understand what 48fps will get you. Gaming I can get...the extra few hundredths of a second give you a chance to see and respond a little faster...but for a sit-back-and-enjoy-the-ride experience...who cares?!?

Oh and add my +1 to the "3D?!? KILL IT KILL IT!!! KILL IT DEAD!!!" crowd.

Spoon 11th · 04-27-12, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by floundericiousWA

...so I don't understand what 48fps will get you.

It will fool your brain better than 24fps, but to gain best results fps should be at least 60.

STEED · 04-27-12, 12:10 PM

3D was so 1980's for crying out loud.

WE WANT 4D.

04-27-12, 05:59 PM

Quote:

WE WANT 4D.

Call The Doctor

Seth8530 · 05-02-12, 09:14 AM

*swoosh* *sawoosh* [other throaty Tardis sounds]

Dowly · 07-30-12, 04:37 PM

Hobbit Trilogy is Confirmed:
http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=34744

Quote:

Ladies and gentlemen, it's official: The Hobbit will be three films rather than
two. Peter Jackson took to his Facebook page today to announce that the
story will be extended across three films as rumoured recently.

vienna · 04-26-12, 02:29 PM

The funny thing about "gimmicks" like 3D, faster FPS, SuperHD, etc., is the pursuit of "realism" often turns out to be off-putting. The more "real" a visual presentation gets, the more ordinary it becomes; remember all the TV shows shot on videotape rather than film in the late 60s thru the 90s? If you look at them now, they seem quite more like home movies instead of network TV shows. The same can be said for all those "realist" films shot on handheld cameras after the success of "Easy Rider". Most audiences rather prefer the careful lighting and atmospheric film effects to films that make you feel like you're watching an expensive home movie. It's kind of like the difference between a photograph of a beautiful or dramatic scene and a well-executed painting of the same scene: one is documentary, the other is art...

...

04-26-12, 02:24 PM	#2
floundericiousWA Medic Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 164 Downloads: 7 Uploads: 0	Indeed...wasn't 24fps selected back when film was..you know...film? It was picked as the point at which the eye/brain combination smeared movement together into a seamless fluid continuity...so I don't understand what 48fps will get you. Gaming I can get...the extra few hundredths of a second give you a chance to see and respond a little faster...but for a sit-back-and-enjoy-the-ride experience...who cares?!? Oh and add my +1 to the "3D?!? KILL IT KILL IT!!! KILL IT DEAD!!!" crowd. __________________ C.O. - USS Tambor "Defending that which is sincerely good and perfectly divine; Triumphant over death, and chance, and time..."

04-27-12, 12:10 PM	#4
STEED Lucky Jack Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Down Town UK Posts: 27,695 Downloads: 89 Uploads: 48	3D was so 1980's for crying out loud. WE WANT 4D. __________________ Dr Who rest in peace 1963-2017. To borrow Davros saying...I NAME YOU CHIBNALL THE DESTROYER OF DR WHO YOU KILLED IT!

05-02-12, 09:14 AM	#6
Seth8530 Captain Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Tennessee Posts: 546 Downloads: 17 Uploads: 0	swoosh sawoosh [other throaty Tardis sounds] __________________

04-26-12, 02:29 PM	#8
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,718 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	The funny thing about "gimmicks" like 3D, faster FPS, SuperHD, etc., is the pursuit of "realism" often turns out to be off-putting. The more "real" a visual presentation gets, the more ordinary it becomes; remember all the TV shows shot on videotape rather than film in the late 60s thru the 90s? If you look at them now, they seem quite more like home movies instead of network TV shows. The same can be said for all those "realist" films shot on handheld cameras after the success of "Easy Rider". Most audiences rather prefer the careful lighting and atmospheric film effects to films that make you feel like you're watching an expensive home movie. It's kind of like the difference between a photograph of a beautiful or dramatic scene and a well-executed painting of the same scene: one is documentary, the other is art... ... __________________ __________________________________________________ __ Last edited by vienna; 04-27-12 at 12:23 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode