Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by Poles Apart on February 23, 2011 at 19:02:39

Hereafter, an Ebert blog topic with numerous intelligent, thoughtful and perverse responses. It opens with the great Walter Murch's views on 3D (and digital in general), then passes to a lengthy letter from one Dean Goodhill, inventor and CEO of MaxiVision48. MV48 not only offers higher resolution, but also higher frp (in fact, 48 frames per second). It all seems like an incontrovertibly great idea until you read the comments and start thinking. Yeah some of these remarks are obtuse and silly, but others... well...

I highly recommend not only the article, but the contributions by Steve Krauss (seventh down) and Peter Wells (Jan. 30, 1:16 P.M.) as well. It further develops that many commentors defend the standard 24frp for its authentic blur ("very cinematic"), finding 48 and 60 "too clean"... "too high-rez TV". Granted there's confusion between resolution and frp, largely without reference to IMAX, but still the thread is hugely instructive.

Consider this one astonishing paragraph:

The reason most of us prefer the 24fps rate of film in a movie is because the strobe effect also helps take us into a heightened reality - almost mesmerising or hypnotic. It's much the same as why people at a night club get a kick out of the strobe light when it's used, and dance harder. We don't go to the movies to see our own reality, we want to be transported to another world for a couple of hours, and for that reason, I would hope that 24fps remains a cinema standard. I'm all for the resolution though -- provided the projectionist has the inclination to actually focus the projector properly!!

Uh-huh.

Enjoy the cinematic experience... while ye may.

P.A.

• http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/more_than_ever_the_f   (Open in New Window)