Blackmagic Camera project frame rates

Hey BMD,

Question: Why don't Blackmagic Cameras have project frame rather that match the standard project frame rates as Davinci Resolve?

I know some of them cap at 60fps... but then why no 47.952 & 48?

Who's shooting 47.952 or 48? Only Peter Jackson has shot that frame rate as a project frame rate. Otherwise it has been either 60 or 120 for max frame rate. 59.97 for drop frame rate 60. Either way, I don't know why Blackmagic should bother adding 47.952 or 48 as it's just not a frame rate that will ever be standard.

I'm one of the few advocates for HFR. And, I saw Gemini Man in 120 FPS 3D and loved the HFR 3D. I do have some major issues on a storytelling level with the movie, but felt the technical aspects of the HFR 3D to be perfectly well done. At the same time I won't deny that the HFR 3D made the wooden acting more obvious. I'll have a full review next week. I have to tackle it with poise since I was on set for it.

Either way, regarding HFR as a project frame rate the main standards are going to be 60 fps and maybe 120 if you are on the Ang Lee level. The main reason they're doing 120 is because it's easily divisible to 24 fps. 60 however makes more sense as a standard if not going back down to 24 because 1/60 of a second is as easy as saying 1/60 of a minute when talking about frames compared to the other basis of time in minutes and hours. Either way, the human eye can barely detect a difference between 60 fps and anything higher.

So when it comes to project frame rates I don't see a need to do anything other than 60 fps and maybe 120 fps to make it possible to do what they did on Gemini Man. No one is going to repeat The Hobbit frame rate however.

Yes Tim, I agree.
Colin, there was a lot of negative audience reaction to the Hobbit in 48fps. I saw it in 48fps, and compared to the early episodes shot in 24fps, the 48fps final episode was not as visually appealing, and the faster frame rate detracted from the story.
Cheers

I saw the Hobbit in IMAX 3D and then went down the hall in the multiplex to where they were showing the 48fps version. That way I got a pretty immediate comparison. My feeling was the 48fps version had the temporal quality of video and looked a lot like the BTS footage from a feature which really takes you out of the action. There were certain aspects that seemed "clearer" but in general, the 48fps did nothing good for the set or environments. I can't really see why you'd want this unless you love the look of soap operas.

So, agree to disagree on HFR filmmaking, and back to my initial point....

Davinci Resolve has a list of standard timeline FPS formats: 16, 18, 23,976, 24, 25, 29.97, 30, 47.952, 48, 50, 59.94, 60, 72, 95.904, 96, 100, 119.88, and 120.

I don't see why we couldn't have these in their cameras to match.

Why? So we can experiment. Try new things. Whatever. I don't really care if anything is a standard or not.

But, I specifically called out 48 for the same reason Lee went with 120. It would be the frame rate I could get a 24 version out of easily on a Pocket camera in 4k. That's it.

On the flip side, I would love to experiment with 16 fps too.

Resurrecting this old post

I saw that Furiosa shot its action on 1/48 with a 270 degree shutter, except they're not projecting at 48, just using it to get more flexibility in the edit, going by the comments here.

https://www.reddit.com/r/cinematography/comments/1d4mzsj/comment/l6fyne9/