HD had its detractors when it initially came out. But this was usually centred around older stuff being released. Like effects looking bad because they weren't meant to be seen with high definition. The newer stuff didn't have the same problem. Usually. I know that when I saw District 9 on bluray the effects looked slightly worse compared to the theatre, but they weren't eye searingly awful.
0
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
Gimme all the frames. 48 is nowhere near enough, film at 120 you weasels! I want movies to be buttery-smooth! The biggest difference to me is the huge increase in detail when the camera moves, and higher framerates (not frame interpolation, but real frame refresh rates ) also seem to give a lot more depth of field and visual space to the footage. Kind of like 3D without the glasses, for me.
I wish modern pixel games would emulate the way pixels actually looked on a blurry crt
Some manage to make pixel art look beautiful though. Check out some screencaps or footage of Risk of Rain for a decent example. I'm sure there are better.
Mad Max did some frame shenans and it was rad as fuck, over/underclocking some scenes really worked out. Hobbit at 48 was weird but helped distract from how boring that flick was.
3DS: 2234-8122-8398 | Battle.net (EU): Ladi#2485
+4
Metzger MeisterIt Gets Worsebefore it gets any better.Registered Userregular
Soap operas have been filmed at 48fps for yeeeeaaaars. That's why they look so weird.
I have no idea about filming and projecting technology, but couldn't you use a dynamic framerate that adjusts to the movement on the screen to keep the impression of the familiar cinema film and have better visuals in action scenes at the same time?
I do not think it is a very controversial postulate that far fewer people have a problem with HD than HFR
I have significant issues with HD, I really don't like looking at it.
This is a crazy statement!!!
To be fair, it depends a lot on the film - it can be used well. But I have a definite thing for low resolution imagery. Cameras as well. It's probably the visual equivalent of being a vinyl nerd.
Out of curiosity...why do soap operas film at double of what has traditionally been the standard?
Especially before digital and with them having to produce daily content (sans weekends). Wouldn't having double the amount of film be more expensive and take longer to edit and such?
I have no idea about filming and projecting technology, but couldn't you use a dynamic framerate that adjusts to the movement on the screen to keep the impression of the familiar cinema film and have better visuals in action scenes at the same time?
Out of curiosity...why do soap operas film at double of what has traditionally been the standard?
Especially before digital and with them having to produce daily content (sans weekends). Wouldn't having double the amount of film be more expensive and take longer to edit and such?
because it is/was filmed on video which is a cheap production method
edit: and video isn't locked to 24 fps so it just never was. I don't know if they actually shoot at 48 fps, I imagine they just shot at whatever was native to the format.
I do not think it is a very controversial postulate that far fewer people have a problem with HD than HFR
I have significant issues with HD, I really don't like looking at it.
This is a crazy statement!!!
To be fair, it depends a lot on the film - it can be used well. But I have a definite thing for low resolution imagery. Cameras as well. It's probably the visual equivalent of being a vinyl nerd.
I think there is a not small visual and tactile component to being a vinyl nerd.
i finally watched spy, dang that movie was good, it makes me actually way more optimistic about ghostbusters. i have hated everything else she did/was in, but this seemed to finally hit a good balance
yeah i just watched it this past weekend too. started out feeling like i was gonna be a bit disappointed but it was pretty good! Didn't change my opinions on McCarthy (they weren't negative to begin with) but made me love Rose Byrne and Jason Statham more. Never seen Miranda Hart in anything but she was great too
i also watched it on a tv with frame smoothing and the CG in the plane scene looked like goddamn flight simulator. my dad got borderline hostile when i informed him of his tv's failings though. "i went online to forums to determine the optimal settings for this tv," he said
Miranda Hart is absolutely delightful in Call the Midwife.
0
Blake TDo you have enemies then?Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered Userregular
One of the few things I remember about Die Hard 4 is how the R-rated version for some bizarre reason has a worse one-liner after the scene where he takes down a helicopter by crashing a car into it (if I remember right).
In the PG-13 version, Mac is freaking out about "Holy crap, you just crashed a car into a helicopter!" and he responds with something like "Yeah...well...I was out of bullets."
In the R-rated version, his response is to ramble about statistics of automobile-related deaths.
Oh, and I remember in the commentary you can practically hear Bruce Willis eye-roll at the actual title before deciding to just call it Die Hard 4.
Posts
I have significant issues with HD, I really don't like looking at it.
No this is much more interesting
Some manage to make pixel art look beautiful though. Check out some screencaps or footage of Risk of Rain for a decent example. I'm sure there are better.
Steam // Secret Satan
I guess it just looks like it's playing at 1.5x until your brain gets used to it?
This is a crazy statement!!!
I dunno yours used three exclamation points
THREE!
Who's statement is truly crazy?
Not really, she doesn't really like looking at people in real life either.
Satans..... hints.....
All this talk about it looking bad sounds like so much "old man yelling at clouds" to me.
Five exclamation points, the sure sign of an insane mind.
high frame rate just looks weird. I attribute this to having watched movies at 24 fps my entire life and just being used to it though.
To be fair, it depends a lot on the film - it can be used well. But I have a definite thing for low resolution imagery. Cameras as well. It's probably the visual equivalent of being a vinyl nerd.
Especially before digital and with them having to produce daily content (sans weekends). Wouldn't having double the amount of film be more expensive and take longer to edit and such?
this is essentially what Mad Max Fury Road did
because it is/was filmed on video which is a cheap production method
edit: and video isn't locked to 24 fps so it just never was. I don't know if they actually shoot at 48 fps, I imagine they just shot at whatever was native to the format.
I think there is a not small visual and tactile component to being a vinyl nerd.
Len Wiseman is making Die Hard: Year One, set in 1979 and showing how John McClane became the cop he is in the first movie
I was fine with the sequels, even if 5 was real bad, cause hey more Bruce Willis John McClane
But dang it now some young pretty boy actor is playing him and I am gonna be annoyed forever
Shia LeBeouf is John McClane.
But it loses its thread
I dunno, I think it's a fluke somebody liked the fourth Die Hard movie.
Satans..... hints.....
Miranda Hart is absolutely delightful in Call the Midwife.
While I'm sure you are quoting facts and statistics.
I'm sure you are lying.
Satans..... hints.....
And I hate the third Die Hard movie.
Satans..... hints.....
Yeah that's fair
In the PG-13 version, Mac is freaking out about "Holy crap, you just crashed a car into a helicopter!" and he responds with something like "Yeah...well...I was out of bullets."
In the R-rated version, his response is to ramble about statistics of automobile-related deaths.
Oh, and I remember in the commentary you can practically hear Bruce Willis eye-roll at the actual title before deciding to just call it Die Hard 4.
Also, wasn't Kevin Smith in it for some reason?
The only bad one is 5
What if we get Joseph Gordon Levitt to put on that prosthetic and CGI again