Publicité
Our eyes expect motion to be as smooth as it is in nature, but films shot at 24-fps do not
look this way. This results in motion that appears somewhat jittery to us. This jitter
makes the image look less clear than it should be, as evidenced by examining individual
still frames from the 24-fps film.
The flicker introduced by film projectors and CRT displays helped our brain interpret the
motion better, because the image was not held static at the same motion position for a
prolonged period of time. Instead, the image just flashed shortly at the right motion
position and then disappeared, which was easier for our visual system to process.
Therefore, with film projectors and CRT displays, we had smooth and relatively clear
motion, but with some flickering. By comparison, with sample-and-hold displays, we
avoid the flickering, but trade that advantage for jittery and blurred motion, potentially
with some judder and double contours. The crux of the issue is that this can
compromise the filmmakers' intended motion characteristics of the content.
Thus, the intrinsic challenge for modern displays becomes evident: Achieving
flicker-free visuals at the expense of natural motion representation is a trade-off that
has prompted the industry to aggressively seek techniques that better capture the
essence of cinematic motion.
5.0 The Promise and Pitfalls of Modern Motion Handling Solutions
5.1 Why 24-fps Remains the Cinematic Standard
The film industry's enduring commitment to 24-fps is both a relic and a deliberate
choice. Born out of early film's technical constraints, 24-fps emerged as the de facto
standard by the 1930s. It was a rate that balanced film stock cost with perceived
continuous motion, producing a sequence of images that appeared fluid to the human
eye. But there is more to 24-fps than just economy and perception; there is an aesthetic
that filmmakers and audiences have grown to love. The slight motion blur and the
specific "feel" of 24-fps convey a sense of drama and weight. It has become
synonymous with the "cinematic look" – a visual texture distinct from the hyper-real
clarity of higher frame-rate video.
Yet, it's intriguing to ponder: what if the visionaries of cinema had standardized around a
higher frame rate, such as 48-fps instead of 24-fps? Would today's filmmakers or
audiences criticize 48-fps for being "overly fluid" or lacking the "cinematic essence"?
While such a scenario remains speculative, it does prompt us to question whether our
Copyright © madVR Labs, LLC. All rights reserved.
6
Publicité
