48 FPS - Printable Version
+- XBMC Community Forum (http://forum.xbmc.org)
+-- Forum: Announcements, Info, and General Discussion (/forumdisplay.php?fid=85)
+--- Forum: XBMC General Discussion (/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: 48 FPS (/showthread.php?tid=130369)
48 FPS - sialivi - 2012-04-30 20:36
This is a bit off topic, but for some reason I can't post in the Off Topic forum.
With all the controversy about The Hobbit's 48 FPS I'm a bit curios about a few things:
1) Does the current Blu-ray profile even support 48 FPS? From what I can tell it only supports up to 24p or 29.97i at 1080p. So will we need a new profile to be able to support 48 FPS movies?
2) Does anyone know if there is any high quality 48 FPS footage available for download anywhere? There are HD camcorders available that shoots at this framerate. I want to make sure both my hardware and software is capable of handling movies.
Note: Please, no "48 FPS sucks!" rants in this thread. I'm not interested.
RE: 48 FPS - PatK - 2012-04-30 21:43
1) Looks so... any excuse to sell new equipment. Well in truth, most video these days is handling 60 fields/frames per second or multiples of it. Putting this double sized on Blu-Ray disks, with extras might be a bit tough though.
2) a lot of games etc play back in excess of 48fps, I'm looking at a monitor that is presently scanning at 60fps non interlace. I guess that you're equating this with the announce Hobbit at 48 fps... should be good. For the most part still images at 24fps have the 'flick' or flickering look to them, but when the camera pans... you get the a horrible jerk motion, so this should be smoothed out nicely and because sharpness is a perception of movement, the image will look sharper.
Looking at some of the recent articles, it not only looks like fps is going to get a boost, but 8-10 bit video, resolutions close to 4000x3000 pixels; according to a recent revision 3 episode, most of the major manufacturers have been demoing this kind of panel, but it all looks good.
RE: 48 FPS - Chris! - 2012-04-30 23:12
It'll be interesting seeing 48fps displaying on 60fps... seems a bit strange they didn't go straight to 60 fps. Why 48?
Quote:Note: Please, no "48 FPS sucks!" rants in this thread. I'm not interested.ok, only cos you're not interested(!)
RE: 48 FPS - bobo1on1 - 2012-04-30 23:23
Probably because a 48 fps movie can easily be converted to 24 fps by dropping half the frames to remain compatible with existing hardware.
RE: 48 FPS - natethomas - 2012-05-01 05:02
(2012-04-30 23:23)bobo1on1 Wrote: Probably because a 48 fps movie can easily be converted to 24 fps by dropping half the frames to remain compatible with existing hardware.
And vice versa. My understanding is that many digital cinema projectors can spit out 48 frames as easily as 24 with a simple firmware tweak.
RE: 48 FPS - davilla - 2012-05-01 06:10
most digital cinema projectors are already running at 48 fps, they show a 24 fps frame twice.
RE: 48 FPS - Chris! - 2012-05-01 09:29
Didn't think of the cinema, guess that shows something