I agree with you about 3-D. We are still far away from acceptable 3-D. I saw the film in 3-D HFR. It was not even the best 3-D I've seen. The image was divided into 3 very flat images, one near, one far, one in the middle distance. In 2-D my mind fills in the third dimension without constantly reminding me I am watching a movie. I think I am going to avoid 3-D altogether for at least 5 years.
I had reason to expect to prefer the high frame rate but I can't even recommend it. I know it may be largely due to a whole life of 24 frames per second, but after viewing the whole film I believe there is something more to my negative reaction.
I have long understood that film is not realistic and imparts a somewhat dreamlike quality. 48 fps does in fact come closer to our natural vision, but still isn't realistic, and introduces other problems that weren't evident before.
A number of people have suggested that those who don't like the HFR are just old fashioned, hopelessly stuck in the past. They have compared the new format to the advent of color in motion pictures. But this brings up a point which I don't believe any one else has mentioned.
When movies began to introduce color, it took some time for cinematographers to adjust. Most early color films just did not look good, as the techniques needed differ markedly from those used in filming black and white. Perhaps eventually adjustments will be made and this will be a viable format, at least for some applications, but we are not there yet.
The Hobbit appeared overlit, not surprising considering the 48 frame process requires much more light. Riddles in the Dark? I have been to restaurants darker than Gollum's lair.
no subject
I had reason to expect to prefer the high frame rate but I can't even recommend it. I know it may be largely due to a whole life of 24 frames per second, but after viewing the whole film I believe there is something more to my negative reaction.
I have long understood that film is not realistic and imparts a somewhat dreamlike quality. 48 fps does in fact come closer to our natural vision, but still isn't realistic, and introduces other problems that weren't evident before.
A number of people have suggested that those who don't like the HFR are just old fashioned, hopelessly stuck in the past. They have compared the new format to the advent of color in motion pictures. But this brings up a point which I don't believe any one else has mentioned.
When movies began to introduce color, it took some time for cinematographers to adjust. Most early color films just did not look good, as the techniques needed differ markedly from those used in filming black and white. Perhaps eventually adjustments will be made and this will be a viable format, at least for some applications, but we are not there yet.
The Hobbit appeared overlit, not surprising considering the 48 frame process requires much more light. Riddles in the Dark? I have been to restaurants darker than Gollum's lair.