24p must die!Of thomas - 14 oct 2008 12:19:00 Videomaker This article calls for the abolition of 24p - 24p was introduced so as a compromise: when the lowest frame rate, yet the illusion of fluid movement (at least until the camera is not fast moving) and thus s.wenigsten of expensive film stock used. 24p as part of the "film look" means the author of the article as a Ästhtik, which should be overcome because they are only to overcome an artificial restriction is based - and he has no sympathy for the fears of some film makers that 60p to 24p in contrast " too real, "would look like.
This is an auto-generated entry
Antwort von Cocoa_Magazin:
Würg!
Antwort von Spaceman:
Richtig so! Way with the antediluvian 24p! Unfortunately there are too many Yesterdays forever in the film business with blinders on new Lmb Technologie respond. But they can be 30 cm black again introduce television.
Related to this, the 16:9 format in the same synonymous tonne. It was invented so synonymous times in order to maximize space saving many images on the film reel to get. So in order to turn inexpensive and incidentally synonymous to many places in the cinema hall to accommodate ... Officially, however, was then communicated "corresponds to vision of the human eye bla bla bla ..." 16:9 still, there are now so cheap to film where you have a 16:9 monitor above and below has huge black bars ;-)
Antwort von LarsProgressiv:
Hello!
So before I put the frame rate, I would first consider the old-line jump (interlaced material) abolished. And although s.besten yesterday!
Regards Lars
Antwort von Schleichmichel:
He is synonymous' n bisserl simply by themselves in a supposed justification for the Defense of 24 frames per second from the 24p-aussucht friends, the problem of completely synonymous him wiederlegt will.
The gag is that 24 frames per second, the movements are so abstract, as it is a movement illusion is necessary. As far as he was already synonymous yes. Increases can now rate the pictures, so you notice more and more subtle facial expression matches in the faces of the actors. Anyone who thinks this might just be good, has been cut. It takes a hellishly good actor, with such a high "sample rate" is still credible to work. Even the smallest imperfections in the camera movements are here a lot of disturbing. The masses of data will perhaps in some years not as the problem, but for what?
In the sense that its film content on the main should be limited, one should remain synonymous with 24p. The guy has probably never seen a movie Showscan seen. If he wants to feature length, please. A "revolution", which I definitely do not have to wait.
@ Spaceman: We do not really save footage in widescreen. 3-perf and 2-Perf was only in recent years and comes out does not really synonymous in the aisles. Often it costs even more, if one with the 3-Perffilm work goes into the copy and a copy olling wants;)
Antwort von Meggs:
"Spaceman" wrote:
Related to this, the 16:9 format in the same synonymous tonne. It was invented so synonymous times in order to maximize space saving many images on the film reel to get. So in order to turn inexpensive and incidentally synonymous to many places in the cinema hall to accommodate ... Officially, however, was then communicated "corresponds to vision of the human eye bla bla bla ..."
You ever dealt with the 16:9 technique in cinema, then you will no longer something to post. General supposedly have a narrower field of view men than women, and the field of view is with the age. Each bet, you are male and the hills.
Antwort von Daigoro:
I thought the new digital movies would have been to 48p as the new digital standard agreed (who with whom remains unclear, probably Sonywith himself and the rest vary between 24.1 and 61.33333).
Of great again because you just NEN new growth may Television. The current can perhaps 24p/50p/60p but no 48p 'smooth'. :)
Widescreen - synonymous not make sense everywhere. If this is the ultimate gluecklichmacher would GAEB's the Mona Lisa probably synonymous in 2,21:1.
Antwort von Spaceman:
Strange, that in the movie always rangezogen the field of view is to select the format to justify in photography where it is not the number of pictures arrives but there is no 16:9 widescreen. Medium format and large format cameras have image format to 1:1 format ....
The fact is that on a 35 mm film role more frames in 16:9 widescreen format as for example in 4:3 format go. So the 16:9 format is cheaper.
Antwort von Schleichmichel:
Film Cameras transporting the film usually in increments of 4 Perforationslöchern, just like the projectors.
For several years, the film material savings (Rohfilm) the 3-perf and rarely synonymous the 2-perf-Movement in film cameras crept. This is intended to provide a quieter operation, longer maturities and less of magazines Shortends possible. Argument is often synonymous with a cost savings, but as I said ... the copy works, there is still synonymous, and the demand for many s.Filmmaterial work that is not in 4-Perf is a premium.
Projectors in the movies always run in 4-perf-step process. Just because of the soundtracks, but Kompatiblitätsgründen from synonymous. Widescreen movies are always on 4-perf. In conventional copies are then just have black bars on the film, or it is an anamorphic copy with shrink to Picture, then what the whole film surface exploits. Saved as (in the first case) nothing, it is rather the reverse wasteful.
Antwort von Schleichmichel:
Here even a link with pictures of movie formats in the projection:
http://www.cc86.org/~kinos/formate.htm
And here of Arri an explanation for the 3-perf format, which is just relates to the production, and not on the cinema print. For 2-perf is holding almost the same:
Related to this, the 16:9 format in the same synonymous tonne. It was invented so synonymous times in order to maximize space saving many images on the film reel to get.
I know of no movie widescreen format with 16:9 (or 1.78:1). To my knowledge, the span of 1,66:1 to 2,35:1 about 1,85:1. 16:9 arose because the early 1990s was the widescreen format, which you with the then available as a glass tube was built and it was a compromise from 1:66:1 to 1,85:1 - these various widescreen formats can one without too much dislocation in the 16:9-hat bring. That in the meantime the people for TV film productions s.16: 9 based, is another matter ...
Antwort von WoWu:
Counter-proposal: All other format and 1080p24/48 will die as a common, cross-format, because only one of 24 format with all the other predictable methods (3:2 pd, rez, spup) relatively loss-free produce, no preference, whether from the 25 European world or from the American 30er world. Instead, we will probably all sorts of odd and incompatible formats, such as (25,29,97,50,59,94) reserve. The proposal to abolish 24 is somewhat short jump. And above all, the Americans once their 23,976 and abolish 24 It really do.
Antwort von Axel:
I have heard - from pretty good sources - that 16:9 is not only not abolished, but now the movies in 17:9 widescreen and standard - we strongly believe - the action-movie format Scope (fksCinemascope, 1:2, 39) to replace. This is the final declaration of the bankruptcy cinemas.
Antwort von Quadruplex:
"Axel" wrote:
This is the final declaration of the bankruptcy cinemas.
They want the people but now with (Yawn!) 3D lure ... If I have to install the film in the original can be seen and at a reasonable price, I might actually return to movie times.
Antwort von Meggs:
"Spaceman" wrote:
Strange, that in the movie always rangezogen the field of view is to select the format to justify in photography where it is not the number of pictures arrives but there is no 16:9 widescreen. Medium format and large format cameras have image format to 1:1 format ....
The demand for film and photography is completely different. A Still Image shows explicitly a certain area, a film wants to create the illusion, the viewer was in the act here. The photographer is so synonymous depending on the motive Landscape times, times portrait photos, you loose in a row can see. Imagine NEN movie times, where the format kept changing, the landscape in landscape, which totals to a person in a portrait.
Antwort von Axel:
"Megger" wrote:
Imagine NEN movie times, where the format kept changing, the landscape in landscape, which totals to a person in a portrait.
Yeah, I have often presented to me, and I find it very interesting. Of course, it answered the question about the importance of the visual field: A practical reason.
Antwort von TheBubble:
"Axel" wrote:
This is the final declaration of the bankruptcy cinemas.
I would consider it as a convergence of various technologies from different formats to see. The TV was wider, the film would now (if this change actually comes) rather narrow, both to meet and have the same format.
Antwort von TheBubble:
"Quadruplex" wrote:
They want the people but now with (Yawn!) 3D lure ...
I am such a step would not only want to see as a bait. 3D is just yet more "middle", as 2D. However, the challenge of a good 3D movie to create not entirely irrelevant, because the 3D impression is indeed possible, at every function and it should be synonymous anybody uncomfortable.
Antwort von TheBubble:
"Spaceman" wrote:
Richtig so! Way with the antediluvian 24p!
Let us consider this: you can add 24p to 25p speed, without it being noticed wriklich. 60i can with "pulldown from 24p won what synonymous acceptable results.
What would be the alternative to 24p? 25p? Will hardly enforce this is to improve the temporal Resolutionzu low. 30p, 50p, 60p? All compromises, there are 50 Hz and 60 regions, one could only operate with the best shots.
Antwort von Axel:
"TheBubble" wrote:
What would be the alternative to 24p? 25p? Will hardly enforce this is to improve the temporal Resolutionzu low. 30p, 50p, 60p? All compromises, there are 50 Hz and 60 regions, one could only operate with the best shots.
Clearly 48p. 24/25 The distinction has never been someone gejuckt, analog and digital is not no more anyway. 48/50 is still similar, and remain with 48 "classic" more compatible.
Digital movies that need no standard. The light source is DC, the DLP-head is not restricted to certain frequencies, if it could give problems, they would be on TV panels to look for, and this area is always important.
