This can't really be happening...

[Mitch Gross]

Thomas James is once again full of crap, using half-truths and partial references to support his positions. One of his many bastardizations of the truth was in reference to Doug Trumbull's work on the movie Brainstorm. While James referred to what was part of Trumbull's initial research, what he failed to mention was that the movie itself was not filmed this way. The production shot the "heightened reality" sequences in 35mm 4-perf anamorphic and the standard sequences in spherical 1.85. Everything was printed to 4-perf 35mm anamorhic for release, with the 1.85 material surrounded by black borders on either side.

 

Thomas James doesn't seem to know much more than some technical specs on some product spec sheets he reads, which is why he apparently feels that the JVC camcorders are the greatest imaging devices of all time.

[John Holland]

Mitch , Trumbull wanted to shoot the "hyper real " stuff in Showscan 60fps , but wasnt allowed ,so he shot that stuff Super Panavision 70 24 fps . Rest shot 1.85 .

[Robert Houllahan]

Hi Dave,

 

There is a guy at the BBC called Andy, probably the source of Thomas's info, Geoff Boyle described him at a tw*t on CML.

 

Stephen

 

 

Heh heh I remember that :lol: , funny how S-16 can hold up fine in a theater on a 60' screen though... it's just that bbc and discovery are cheap and their compressors suck for broadcast, not likely to get better. Also if the production is desirable both networks break their no 16mm rules all the time.

 

 

Oh and then there is jonny60frame up there just for some more tiresome mis-information I suppose that the DK I saw at the imax theater last night is not hd either because it is at 24fps.... phhhhttt!

 

-Rob-

[K Borowski]

Heh heh I remember that :lol: , funny how S-16 can hold up fine in a theater on a 60' screen though... it's just that bbc and discovery are cheap and their compressors suck for broadcast, not likely to get better. Also if the production is desirable both networks break their no 16mm rules all the time.

 

 

Oh and then there is jonny60frame up there just for some more tiresome mis-information I suppose that the DK I saw at the imax theater last night is not hd either because it is at 24fps.... phhhhttt!

 

-Rob-

 

Aren't the Americas and maybe Japan the only places on earth where 30 fps is even used? I thought the rest of the world was standardized at 25 fps theatrically and on televisions (50i if you want to be a nit-prick).

 

So is 24 HD in Europe, Asia, Africa, Middle East, Austral-Asia, and not HD here? How does that work? ;)

[John Brawley]

The production shot the "heightened reality" sequences in 35mm 4-perf anamorphic and the standard sequences in spherical 1.85. Everything was printed to 4-perf 35mm anamorhic for release, with the 1.85 material surrounded by black borders on either side.

 

Hi Mitch.

 

I think that one part of the heightened reality methodology was anamorphic, and the second part was higher frame rates. But he realised they couldn't force the exhibitors to change their projectors for one film. Trumbull wanted to actually have the 60FPS sequences projected @ 60 fps and i believe they were shot this way. There was a system whereby the projector's would *detect* the 60 FPS material and crank up on a change over, but only a few prints were made this way because it require a modification to the projectors themselves. The fallback became to release as you describe. All vaguely remembered form a Doug Trumbull special in Cinefex a few years ago.

 

Pretty interesting given Nolan's trying something similar with IMAX sequences in the Dark Night.

 

jb

[John Sprung]

Pretty close, Japan, the Phillipines, South Korea, Taiwan, and Burma are NTSC. The 25 Hz PAL and SECAM systems are used by the majority of the world. The Western hemisphere is NTSC, except for Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Brazil. Brazil uses its unique PAL-M system. It's sort of like PAL, only running at 30 Hz.

 

Doug Trumbull's idea, btw, was to not only shoot, but also project at 60 FPS. This would have been a major issue for the theaters and distributors.

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Thomas James]

The IMAX format runs at 24 frames per second but the IMAX HD format runs at 48 frames per second. The movie Momentum was shot in the IMAX HD format as well as California Soaring.

 

Most HD televisions sold in the United States run at 60 frames per second although some HD televisions can run at 120 frames per second.

 

I think once the movie theaters switch to digital projection you are going to see higher frame rates especially with all of these Red Scarlet fanboys cranking out 3K sports footage at 120 frames per second.

[John Brawley]

Most HD televisions sold in the United States run at 60 frames per second although some HD televisions can run at 120 frames per second.

 

 

Are you kidding ?

 

60Hz doesn't mean 60 FPS !

 

By that logic three bladed shutters in most cine projectors mean that projectors in cinemas NOW run at 72 FPS.....

 

jb

[Keith Walters]

Aren't the Americas and maybe Japan the only places on earth where 30 fps is even used? I thought the rest of the world was standardized at 25 fps theatrically and on televisions (50i if you want to be a nit-prick).

 

So is 24 HD in Europe, Asia, Africa, Middle East, Austral-Asia, and not HD here? How does that work? ;)

 

Film projection is 24fps everywhere in the world. A textbook model of standardization that sadly goes largely unrecognized these days. (Except by industry people whose opinions actually matter, of course :lol: )

 

TV standards are a seething mess of compromises, all of which have their roots deep in the past. They all work on the assumption that programs will forever be broadcast over the air on small numbers of TV transmitters, and viewed on TV sets based on 1940s vacuum tube technology. The fixed display frame rate, the fixed number of scanning lines ( or more correctly, rows of horizontal pixels) and the use of interlaced scanning, are all based on the assumption that all TV sets for all time would use cathode-ray tubes for the display, with their inherently rigid constraints on the scanning frequencies that could be used. The idea that an inexpensive (under $50) box could one day be made that could transcode just about any line and frame rate into a signal that any NTSC TV set made since 1941 could display, would have been considered Science Fiction! (Even though the eventual development of flat panel displays was correctly predicted, the assumption always that they would continue to locked to existing TV standards. The idea of a flat panel display that could cope with just about anything you could throw at it would have also been considered science fiction, because it was thought that the digital processing circuitry required would be unimaginably expensive).

 

The choice of 25fps or 30fps TV frame rates was originally determined by the particular AC power line frequency used in the country concerned. This dates back to the primitive TV set designs of the 1930 and 1940s which were exquisitely sensitive to stray AC magnetic fields. The only way of disguising the disturbance to the picture was to lock the TV field rate to the mains frequency. Since there are two fields to every frame in interlaced scanning (which was the best they could do in those days; give it a rest TJ), that works out to a frame rate of half the mains frequency.

 

Most of Europe settled on 50Hz mains some decades before, whereas North America settled on 60Hz. There was originally no standard mains frequency in any country, (or even in many cities!), but when power companies realized the economies of scale that could be achieved by having large centralised power stations sited far from the consumption point, there was a need to standardize the frequencies. In Europe, the average was closer to 50Hz, while in the US it was closer to 60Hz. (Some countries in South America have different mains frequencies in different parts of the country, depending on whether it was an American or European country that put in the lowest bid! Thus they have 50Hz and 60Hz NTSC in different parts of the same country...)

 

Movie film had already settled on 24fps years before, and the film could be run through the telecine at 24fps and successfully "photographed" with a 30fps video camera using the technique known as 3:2 pulldown. For 50Hz countries the film is simply run 4% slightly faster at 25fps, which is not noticed by the vast majority of viewers.

 

Converting between 25fps and 30fps interlaced video is much more difficult, and this was why 24p video was developed, since it can be converted to 25fps PAL or 3:2 pulldown 30fps NTSC in much the same way that film can.

 

Most people have no idea what the real advantage of progressive over interlace actually is.

 

While at one time, progressive scanning had some advantages in reducing viewer fatigue with large-screen CRT TV sets, with modern flat panel displays using anti-interline flicker processing, nobody, including trained engineers, can tell the difference in a double-blind test.

 

The major advantage of a progressive scan is that instead of individually compressing and storing say, 50 "fields" (ie half-pictures) per second, you are compressing 25 complete images per second. On (PAL) Digital Betacam, you are effectively storing 25 complete 720 x 576 JPEG-like stills per second, not fifty 720 x 288 JPEG-like stills per second. The simple fact is that compression of a single 720 x 576 image is more efficient and accurate than compression of two 720 x 288 half-images and merging them together, since the compression algorithm has more closely spaced lines to work with.

Unfortunately, doing this in real time for HD requires faster processing than was available in the late 1990s. Sony's original HDCAM systems used a half-arsed method of recording Progressive scan HD images known as "PSF" (Progressive Segmented Frame), which basically turns the progressive scan into an interlaced scan (1080i) and then records the sequence of images as 1440 x 540 "stills", which are then reassembled and "re-scaled" back to 1920 x 1080 for playback. (According to George Lucas et al, this is "indistinguishable from 35mm film", so what would I know.) Still, plenty of people are happy to rent those old bangers from Panavision and elsewhere, but that may have somehting to do with the glacial slowness of the uptake of HDTV by the viewing public. They do make damned fine SD cameras, I'll give them that!

 

Having said all that, that fact remains that you have to deal with the Industry ("The System" or whatever other "my-name-is-a-killing-word" epithet the wannabes and fanboys choose to spit at it) as it IS, not how they or any upstart manufacturer imagines it should be.

Edited July 29, 2008 by Keith Walters

[Keith Walters]

Most HD televisions sold in the United States run at 60 frames per second although some HD televisions can run at 120 frames per second.

Actually, since all HD televisions sold now use plasma or LCD technologies, strictly speaking, there is no "frame rate".

 

If you pull the signal connector off an LCD panel's control electronics but leave the backlight going, whatever image was last on the screen will remain there for several seconds. That is because the image is formed by a pattern of electrostatic charges stored in the gates of a vast array of thin-film MOSFETS, which modulate the polarization of the light passing through the liquid crystal layers. Viewed through a polaroid filter this produces the pattern of of light and dark pixels (via microscopic red, green and blue filters) that make up the colour image.

 

This is completely different from a CRT TV set, where a single ultra-bright dot is scanned across the entire screen as a series of scanning lines, which has to be done at least 50 times a second to avoid excessive flicker.

 

With an LCD, whatever brightness value is written to a particular pixel, tends to stay there until the signal processing circuitry gets around to "updating" it. Early LCD panels were notorious for their slow refresh times, which were well below the normal video frame rates.

 

Plasma screens work on a completely different principle, but each pixels data is still stored in the drive electronics in an analogous manner.

 

The latest ultra-high-definition LCD panels do not use a normal "raster scan" where every pixel gets updated every frame. Instead, only the pixels that need updating get updated, rather like the principle of video compression.

[Thomas James]

Most televisions sold in the United States are high definition progressive scan flat panel displays that are capable of displaying 60 unique and complete frames per second. ESPN, ABC and Fox sports broadcasting is in high definition at 60 frames per second but at a reduced 720p resolution. Still by effectively eliminating motion blurring the 720p picture will be sharper than the higher resolution 1080i or 1080p picture.

 

120 hertz progressive scan flat panel displays are also sold that can display 120 frames per second. Since no 120 hertz source material is broadcasted these televisions will interpolate the missing frames. Thus any movie will mimmick Doug Trumbles showscan look when viewed on a 120 hertz television.

 

While for all practical purposes film projection is limited to 24 frames per second digital projection does not have these limits. And an infrustructure already exists with Blu-Ray disc players.

[K Borowski]

And how does one get around the fact that you now need to store 2 1/2 times as much information with 60fps as you do with 24 fps Thomas? Oh yeah, I forgot. Since it's digital, you can just compress it more, right?

 

What a load of crap. . .

 

Oh yeah, guess what, showscan was designed and marketed with film. :rolleyes:

[Thomas James]

Thats an easy answer you simply reduce the resolution to make 60fps fit in the same bandwidth. With high definition you shoot 720p instead of 1080p with Red you shoot 3K instead of 4K. However in some cases such as fast action sports you will not be taking a resolution hit and this is because your footage will be sharper at 60 frames per second because you will be eliminating motion blurring. Or you can compress it more if you use a more advanced compression such as MPEG-4 instead of MPEG-2.

 

With film you can save money by shooting Maxivision at 48 frames per second which costs only 50 percent more than conventional 35 mm film.

[Keith Walters]

Most televisions sold in the United States are high definition progressive scan flat panel displays that are capable of displaying 60 unique and complete frames per second.

Define "Televisions". Numerically, most TVs sold around the world (including the US) are cheap Chinese-made CRT-based standard definition sets, little different in performance from sets sold 30 years ago. It seems no matter how ludicrously cheap appliances get, there is a certain mentality that always goes for the lowest price...

 

As for "HDTV" sets, the range of quality and capabilities varies enormously. Some people think 640 x 480 Plasma is "High Definition" and there are quite a few of those made with high definition tuners! With a good digital transmission (SD or HD) the picture is still going to be better than the average CRT TV on analog, so they are probably happy enough.

 

From normal viewing distances and screens under 50 inches, most people can't tell the difference between 1440 x 768 and 1920 x 1080 displays either, which is almost entirely due to the fact that very few programs have enough resolution to take advantage of it. 1920 x 1080 is really only warranted for 6 foot or larger screens anyway

 

 

The term "progressive scan" is essentially meaningless for a flat panel display, it only has meaning with CRT based sets. Some high-end sets will accept the more technically demanding 1080p signals through the HDMI interface, along with 1080i, 480p, 480i, 576p, 576i, and analog VHF. However, the way the image is displayed is exactly the same in all cases.

 

 

While for all practical purposes film projection is limited to 24 frames per second digital projection does not have these limits. And an infrustructure already exists with Blu-Ray disc players.

 

And what does this have to do with anything?

Most people who continue to shoot of 35mm film at 24fps do so because

A. The infrastructure is already in place to conveniently use it.

B. It gives a better picture than any video camera presently available

 

Now, note, you can disagree with the above as loudly and long as you like.

It will not affect the way most films get made one iota.

 

It's like the quote from the Handbook of Redneck Ettiquette

At the Movies:

Do not attempt to speak to the people on the screen.

Scientific tests have conclusively proven they cannot hear you.

[John Brawley]

Thats an easy answer you simply reduce the resolution to make 60fps fit in the same bandwidth. With high definition you shoot 720p instead of 1080p with Red you shoot 3K instead of 4K. However in some cases such as fast action sports you will not be taking a resolution hit and this is because your footage will be sharper at 60 frames per second because you will be eliminating motion blurring. Or you can compress it more if you use a more advanced compression such as MPEG-4 instead of MPEG-2.

 

With film you can save money by shooting Maxivision at 48 frames per second which costs only 50 percent more than conventional 35 mm film.

 

 

Niki Mundo's back !!!!!

[Keith Walters]

Getting back to the main subject of this thread:

How to defend the RED

 

I must go and see if my wife has any of those excellent "Comfi-Pop" Incontinence Pads with her geriatric nursing stuff in the garage. Wouldn't want to cause a short-circuit :lol:

Edited July 29, 2008 by Keith Walters

[David Auner aac]

Film projection is 24fps everywhere in the world. A textbook model of standardization that sadly goes largely unrecognized these days. (Except by industry people whose opinions actually matter, of course :lol: )

 

Nope, that's not so clear. There are and there used to be a lot of movies in Europe shot at 25fps and projected at that. They even projected many American movies shot at 24 fps at 25. The 4% percent change in running that really matter to them. You'd hear it if your had perfect pitch hearing though.

 

Cheers, Dave

[Keith Walters]

Nope, that's not so clear. There are and there used to be a lot of movies in Europe shot at 25fps and projected at that. They even projected many American movies shot at 24 fps at 25. The 4% percent change in running that really matter to them. You'd hear it if your had perfect pitch hearing though.

 

Cheers, Dave

First time I've ever heard of that. Why would anyone want to shoot and project at 25fps, if it's not for PAL TV? The only possible reason I can think of is to stop strobing by HMI studio lighting when you don't have a 172.8 degree shutter.

 

In any case, there would be no real problem if such a film was projected at 24fps on an unmodified projector in the US or elsewhere. The only time it makes any significant difference to the general public is when a well-known recording is used on the soundtrack; you certainly don't need perfect pitch to hear a 4% change!

 

In practice, projector speeds can be all over the place and most people won't be any the wiser.

[David Auner aac]

First time I've ever heard of that. Why would anyone want to shoot and project at 25fps, if it's not for PAL TV? The only possible reason I can think of is to stop strobing by HMI studio lighting when you don't have a 172.8 degree shutter.

 

In any case, there would be no real problem if such a film was projected at 24fps on an unmodified projector in the US or elsewhere. The only time it makes any significant difference to the general public is when a well-known recording is used on the soundtrack; you certainly don't need perfect pitch to hear a 4% change!

 

In practice, projector speeds can be all over the place and most people won't be any the wiser.

 

I think that people just wanted to have the same speed for all film shot in Europe I guess. But that was later watered down, as was the case with 1.66 wide screen. Well, about perfect pitch or not, I'd say you'd hear it only with a piece of music you know really well, as you said Keith. Maybe it would be nice to try and see whether you notice the change or not and if, how much of a change you'd notice.

 

Cheers, Dave

[Brian Drysdale]

First time I've ever heard of that. Why would anyone want to shoot and project at 25fps, if it's not for PAL TV? The only possible reason I can think of is to stop strobing by HMI studio lighting when you don't have a 172.8 degree shutter.

 

In any case, there would be no real problem if such a film was projected at 24fps on an unmodified projector in the US or elsewhere. The only time it makes any significant difference to the general public is when a well-known recording is used on the soundtrack; you certainly don't need perfect pitch to hear a 4% change!

 

In practice, projector speeds can be all over the place and most people won't be any the wiser.

 

Quite a few films in Europe are shot at 25fps because almost the TV post production is set up for that frame rate. I'd imagine the theatres use 25fps because they can just about squeeze in an extra screening during the day or have a shorter working day for their hourly paid employees.

 

European TV has been screening 24 fps films at 25fps for years, long before pitch correction. How noticeable it becomes, I suspect, depends if the music or voices sound unnaturally high pitched.

[David Namir]

I just did my first shoot with a RED on a music video yesterday. The camera was so noisy, I was shocked. The internal fan just howls. I don't see how people can use it for dramatic content with such a loud fan.

Go to system>>Set Up>> maintenance >>fan and choose quite or silent (don't remember the difference) once you press the record button the fan will quite down.

And the battery connections are so finicky the power kept on going down, with the 90 second initialization that followed. And using tungsten lights creates a lot of noise in the blue channel with the build they were using. It does take beautiful pictures, but so do a lot of other cameras.

In build 16 booting time is much quicker. There is a problem with the battery connections. Solution is working as much as possible with AC power.

 

Camera is far far from being perfect, it is quite a negligent manufacturing but you can work with it. It is not a film camera that simply work and produce better image than HD video. I have a lot of criticism on the Red company, it is not a scam as they were described on their early stage but they don't deliver a high standard of a product as far as ergonomic design and work flaw. In fact I may say the ergonomic almost doesn't exist.

[K Borowski]

David and Brian, I guess that means only NTSC countries have *real* HD. . .

 

America is the greatest country on Earth, after all, we invented pizza, enchiladas, and the missionary position too! :rolleyes:

[Jamie Lewis]

Define "Televisions". Numerically, most TVs sold around the world (including the US) are cheap Chinese-made CRT-based standard definition sets,

 

Tube TV's have not outsold flat panels for years with LCD being the leader since 2006.

http://www.cnet.com.au/tvs/lcd/0,239035307,339272444,00.htm

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/22/w...cture-tube-tvs/

[David Auner aac]

David and Brian, I guess that means only NTSC countries have *real* HD.

 

We do have 50p though!

 

Cheers, Dave

[K Borowski]

Tube TV's have not outsold flat panels for years with LCD being the leader since 2006.

http://www.cnet.com.au/tvs/lcd/0,239035307,339272444,00.htm

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/22/w...cture-tube-tvs/

 

Congratulations on submitting the tenth needless nitpick of this post!