Skip to main content

BOB MARLEY: ONE LOVE Featurette

Peter Jackson To Shoot THE HOBBIT In 48 Frames Per Seconds

Time for an update. Actually, we've been intending to kick off with a video, which is almost done, so look out for that in the next day or two. In the meantime, I thought I'd address the news that has been reported about us shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 frames per second, and explain to you what my thoughts are about this.

We are indeed shooting at the higher frame rate. The key thing to understand is that this process requires both shooting and projecting at 48 fps, rather than the usual 24 fps (films have been shot at 24 frames per second since the late 1920's). So the result looks like normal speed, but the image has hugely enhanced clarity and smoothness. Looking at 24 frames every second may seem ok--and we've all seen thousands of films like this over the last 90 years--but there is often quite a lot of blur in each frame, during fast movements, and if the camera is moving around quickly, the image can judder or "strobe."

Shooting and projecting at 48 fps does a lot to get rid of these issues. It looks much more lifelike, and it is much easier to watch, especially in 3-D. We've been watching HOBBIT tests and dailies at 48 fps now for several months, and we often sit through two hours worth of footage without getting any eye strain from the 3-D. It looks great, and we've actually become used to it now, to the point that other film experiences look a little primitive. I saw a new movie in the cinema on Sunday and I kept getting distracted by the juddery panning and blurring. We're getting spoilt!

Originally, 24 fps was chosen based on the technical requirements of the early sound era. I suspect it was the minimum speed required to get some audio fidelity out of the first optical sound tracks. They would have settled on the minimum speed because of the cost of the film stock. 35mm film is expensive, and the cost per foot (to buy the negative stock, develop it and print it), has been a fairly significant part of any film budget.

So we have lived with 24 fps for 9 decades--not because it's the best film speed (it's not by any stretch), but because it was the cheapest speed to achieve basic acceptable results back in 1927 or whenever it was adopted.

None of this thinking is new. Doug Trumbull developed and promoted a 60 frames per second process called ShowScan about 30 years ago and that looked great. Unfortunately it was never adopted past theme park use. I imagine the sheer expense of burning through expensive film stock at the higher speed (you are charged per foot of film, which is about 18 frames), and the projection difficulties in cinemas, made it tough to use for "normal" films, despite looking amazing. Actually, if anybody has been on the Star Tours ride at Disneyland, you've experienced the life like quality of 60 frames per second. Our new King Kong attraction at Universal Studios also uses 60 fps.

Now that the world's cinemas are moving towards digital projection, and many films are being shot with digital cameras, increasing the frame rate becomes much easier. Most of the new digital projectors are capable of projecting at 48 fps, with only the digital servers needing some firmware upgrades. We tested both 48 fps and 60 fps. The difference between those speeds is almost impossible to detect, but the increase in quality over 24 fps is significant.

Film purists will criticize the lack of blur and strobing artifacts, but all of our crew--many of whom are film purists--are now converts. You get used to this new look very quickly and it becomes a much more lifelike and comfortable viewing experience. It's similar to the moment when vinyl records were supplanted by digital CDs. There's no doubt in my mind that we're heading towards movies being shot and projected at higher frame rates.

Warner Bros. have been very supportive, and allowed us to start shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps, despite there never having been a wide release feature film filmed at this higher frame rate. We are hopeful that there will be enough theaters capable of projecting 48 fps by the time The Hobbit comes out where we can seriously explore that possibility with Warner Bros. However, while it's predicted that there may be over 10,000 screens capable of projecting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps by our release date in Dec, 2012, we don’t yet know what the reality will be. It is a situation we will all be monitoring carefully. I see it as a way of future-proofing THE HOBBIT. Take it from me--if we do release in 48 fps, those are the cinemas you should watch the movie in. It will look terrific!

Please Leave A Comment-
Source-PeterJacksonFacebook

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sex Tape Review: Overly Sexual, Rude, Vulgar, and Absolutely Hilarious

The raunchy Sex Tape will divide audiences and critics, but who cares? Sex Tape suggests a growing practice among loving partners: that of making a raunchy testament of their escapades for posterity. But what happens when that evidence gets seen by friends, neighbors, and even the mailman? This is the plot that pits Jay (Jason Segel) and Annie (Cameron Diaz) in an effort to secure every iPad gift Jay has given, his record company playlists being the envy of the recipients, but which has also inadvertently spread the video to every device. The reason for the act - termed in the movie as pulling "the full Lincoln " for its three-hour length - stems from the couple's non-existent social life, brought on by the constant demands of their children. The couple has a lot to lose: a burgeoning business relationship between Annie and Hank (Rob Lowe) could end if the iPad she's given to Hank exposes the video, and so the couple sets out to reclaim and wipe the incrim...

Movie Review: #Vacation

Vacation makes me want to take a STAY-cation. Review by Matt Cummings It's not too often that a movie makes me wish film never existed, yet her I am ready to give the newest Vacation all the hate it deserves. And hate on it I will. Grown-up Rusty (Ed Helms) is stuck in a dull marriage to Debbie (Christina Applegate), who's been forced year after year to spend vacation with her family at a cabin in Michigan. When the overly optimistic Rusty realizes his family needs a change, he packs them up for a trip to Walley World, the site of his greatest trip as a teen. But soon, his family begins to encounter difficulties and flat-out disasters that could end their road trip and return Rusty's marriage back to square one. It might surprise our readers to know that someone from our team actually considered walking out of Vacation , and we get to see these films for free. That's how bad our experience became as we sat mesmerized by its 99 minutes of ineptit...

LIONSGATE Will Be Doing Fridays Of FREE FLICKS

Global content leader Lionsgate (NYSE: LGF.A, LGF.B) announced today that the studio will honor the communal experience of watching movies in movie theaters and support the people who make those places great with a special program that reminds everyone how much we love going to the cinema. The studio is presenting Lionsgate Live! A Night at the Movies , a program of four Fridays of free movies streaming live on YouTube. Beginning this Friday and continuing every Friday spanning four consecutive weeks, the studio will team with Fandango and YouTube to livestream four of Lionsgate's most popular library titles – the blockbuster The Hunger Games , the classic Dirty Dancing , the Academy Award®-winning La La Land , and the box office smash John Wick – on Lionsgate’s YouTube page and Fandango’s Movieclips YouTube page. Lionsgate Live! A Night at the Movies will be hosted by Jamie Lee Curtis . Curtis will share her own movie memories as she is joined by special guest celebriti...