April 11, 2011
The Hobbit will be shot at 48fps

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!

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. 

- Peter Jackson

I think 48fps is going to be a bigger deal than the 3-D “revolution.” 

  1. academyclass2011 reblogged this from justin
  2. jpegmasterjesse reblogged this from thedailyprofile and added:
    Good news to me. The fellowship had far too many “Slow-mo” sequences that are just plain painful.
  3. thedailyprofile reblogged this from justin and added:
    Bring it on I say. Don’t kill film but let this new stuff happen…eventually it will be the new old?
  4. namelessted reblogged this from justin and added:
    I think that as long as they are filming at the 48 frames per second it should look good. The thing I absolutely despise...
  5. le0x reblogged this from justin and added:
    OH! bueno vamos a ver que tal
  6. justin reblogged this from millertime83 and added:
    Hmmm, interesting. I’ll have...see it to not think it looks cheesy. I still like my 24p...
  7. kevinmosley said: I’m listening. 3D is crap. This sounds very interesting.
  8. millertime83 posted this