VARIABLE FRAME RATE - DEBATE

FWIW
Some years ago (3?), BBC and/or EBU had a case in their stand at IBC talking about pixels vs frame rate (4K vs higher frame rates in 1920x1080).
They had put in many "average Joe" in UK to watch film/video in different resolution and/or frame rates. Joe then had to fill in a survey. It was clear from these tests/serveys that HFR was more happy faces and thumbs up compered to more pixels. Tests was done in 50p but aslo 100p and 240p, if I remember correctly.

So, maybe it is not always what we as filmmakers like. Joe might not like it the way we do.

/Rob

Today's Blackmagic tweet:

'DaVinci Resolve 14 Beta 5! Get mixed frame rate playback, looping while trimming, new white and color balance tools, and more! Download now!'

but upon reading the detailed description on the support page:

'This beta update adds support for mixed frame rate source playback through DeckLink and UltraStudio hardware'

I'm using Beta 5 right now and I don't see an option for mixed frame rate output meaning it's indeed exclusive to playing back different sources from the deckling and not actual mixed frame rates within a file.

From the title of the tweet I got excited that we could have 24p and 60p within the same file. Like how Top Gear would have 25p for cinematic shots and 50i for the talking news scenes.

Further experimentation is happening with High Frame Rates and Variable Frame Rates: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind ... ue-1024398

This is cool. I'm glad that experimentation is still ongoing.

Further experimentation is happening with High Frame Rates and Variable Frame Rates: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind ... ue-1024398

This is cool. I'm glad that experimentation is still ongoing.

Thank you for the update.

I haven't specifically read about it but have there been any tests that apply a smart motion blur to 48fps footage to make it look like 24fps? Reasoning being that you'd have the flexibility in post to either go with a smooth look, slow motion or standard 24p.

Christopher, a 360 degree shutter angle at 48 fps will give you the same blur as 180 degree at 24 fps.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Christopher, a 360 degree shutter angle at 48 fps will give you the same blur as 180 degree at 24 fps.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Correct. I was talking about keeping the 180˚ angle at 48fps leaving 90˚at 24fps. I also had higher rates in mind like adding motion blur to 120fps or even 240fps to look like 24p at 180˚

In post you could add motion blur as an effect, but unless it's just to produce a still image for promotional purposes, I don't know how your motion can go beyond a 360 degree shutter angle and make sense regardless of the frame rate you use on playback. I haven't added motion blur in post, but I would think it looks at the next frame and then adds motion blur to the current frame based on the direction of motion and displacement in the following frame. Interesting to experiment though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Christopher, a 360 degree shutter angle at 48 fps will give you the same blur as 180 degree at 24 fps.

Actually it gives you the same shutter speed. But the motion blur is then wrong for 48 FPS.

Sorry, but it looks like crap in my view at 48 FPS. Which begs the question...why bother...

It's hard to sit on the fence with motion blur.

JB

Correct. I was talking about keeping the 180˚ angle at 48fps leaving 90˚at 24fps. I also had higher rates in mind like adding motion blur to 120fps or even 240fps to look like 24p at 180˚

I doubt very much it would actually look good. Using even advanced processes like optical flow, it still get's screwed up by the simplest of things like, multiple planes of different movement. I'm pretty sure a camera shooting someone inside a car that was moving around in their seat along with the car that was moving would make it crazy.

HDRx from RED tries to do this for multiple exposure but always looks weird with temporal motion blur offsets, which is why you rarely see it actually get used. It only works when very little is moving at different speeds within the image, something that rarely happens in "moving pictures"

JB

Actually it gives you the same shutter speed. But the motion blur is then wrong for 48 FPS.

Sorry, but it looks like crap in my view at 48 FPS...

JB

Correct, John. The motion would look alright when the project frame rate is 24 fps, not 48 fps.

When I shoot with a project frame rate of 60 fps, rather than using a higher shutter angle, I usually use a shutter angle less than 180 degrees, typically 150 degrees but sometimes less, since in those situations that involve fast action, I want that slightly faster shutter speed. But I don't go as low as 90 degrees due to the unwanted strobe effect.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Has anyone here worked with a 120p project (with 120Hz input monitor) since Resolve Studio added the feature?

I'm also interested seeing what 120fps videos look like on the new iPad Pro that supports active screen refresh rate changing up to 120Hz.

I doubt very much it would actually look good. Using even advanced processes like optical flow, it still get's screwed up by the simplest of things like, multiple planes of different movement. I'm pretty sure a camera shooting someone inside a car that was moving around in their seat along with the car that was moving would make it crazy.

HDRx from RED tries to do this for multiple exposure but always looks weird with temporal motion blur offsets, which is why you rarely see it actually get used. It only works when very little is moving at different speeds within the image, something that rarely happens in "moving pictures"

JB

John, RevisionFX ReelSmart MB does a very good job at adding motion blur in post and this is less prone to motion vector artifacts then Twixtor when it tries to do artificial slow motion. The worst you could throw at Twixtor is a moving water surface where motion vectors change direction all the time everywhere.