4k TV etc

[ian]

Shooting at 60fps reduces motion blur (which is why it looks 'uncanny'). There's some benefits to having less blur (for instance, masking is a lot easier) but there's a significant extra cost (equipment, data storage, render processing etc.)

Humans can't detect the actual frames, but you do notice the stutter on long pans on my TV, I've assumed it's the mismatch between the various frame and TV refresh rates rather than pure FPS (which is still likely to be 24fps).

[Kim]

I really don;t see the justification for 60fps.   Can anyone convince me why it would work?

Leftpondians have been watching in 60 fields per second since 1941.  There's no question that it works.

For progressive-scan video, higher framerates are needed to achieve the same lack of motion artefacts (either blur or stutter, depending on shutter speed).  Artificially generated video (eg. computer game output) is similar to that produced by a camera at high shutter speed, and higher framerates are needed to give smooth motion.

I thought that perception studies showed that 24fps was as much as the human eye can process.
OR maybe I'm barking and that was the limit on mechanical shutters and film transports back in the day.

AIUI 24fps was the *lowest* frame rate that (most) people would perceive as smooth motion rather than a flicker of images.  Obviously with film you want to keep the frame rate to a minimum, to reduce mechanical stresses and the amount of film stock required.

[Hot Flatus]

Snowfall (US cokesploitation drama on BBC2) looks terrible. I think I'm going to have to use up one of the picture settings to blur it to fuck and make it go orange

[ian]

Smear your eyeballs with marmalade?

I really don;t see the justification for 60fps.   Can anyone convince me why it would work?

Leftpondians have been watching in 60 fields per second since 1941.  There's no question that it works.

For progressive-scan video, higher framerates are needed to achieve the same lack of motion artefacts (either blur or stutter, depending on shutter speed).  Artificially generated video (eg. computer game output) is similar to that produced by a camera at high shutter speed, and higher framerates are needed to give smooth motion.

I thought that perception studies showed that 24fps was as much as the human eye can process.
OR maybe I'm barking and that was the limit on mechanical shutters and film transports back in the day.

AIUI 24fps was the *lowest* frame rate that (most) people would perceive as smooth motion rather than a flicker of images.  Obviously with film you want to keep the frame rate to a minimum, to reduce mechanical stresses and the amount of film stock required.

I thought NTSC was 29.97 fps (interlaced)? I quite like some of the conversion methods that involve simply changing the speed of playback and hoping no one really notices. That's how Marlon Brando got away with voicing the Alvin Chipmunk.

Anyway, it seems that in most cases something gets converted somewhere before it appears on your screen. Of course, I'm old enough to remember even simple animations requiring an overnight render.

[Hot Flatus]

Smear your eyeballs with marmalade?

That wouldn't be wise.

My hands are covered in Copydex

[Cudzoziemiec]

Smear your eyeballs with marmalade?

That wouldn't be wise.

My hands are covered in Copydex

Oh no. You've been polishing your floor again.

[Hot Flatus]

Not me, personally, no.

[BrianI]

How far away are people sitting from their 4K tellys? Too far, and you probably won't be able make out the increased resolution.

https://www.tekrevue.com/tv-screen-size-calculator/

Anyway, I recently replaced my LG 42" FullHD LCD TV with fubared backlight, with a Tesco Technika 50" FullHD! Cheap and cheerful. Seeing as I have no 4K sources, a 4K tv would be wasted...

[ian]

I just loiter outside strangers' houses gazing in, so the distance varies depending on how far their window is from the TV.

[Kim]

I thought NTSC was 29.97 fps (interlaced)?

Indeed.  Frame rate is 29.97Hz, field rate is 59.94Hz.  That's the beauty of interlacing - it reduces motion blur (and flicker, in most camera-derived CRT-based televisual circumstances).  The improvement is so effective that people started associating the motion blur of 24fps film with high production values.

Of course, it only works properly on the sort of video equipment that peaked in the late 80s.  Once you start displaying interlaced video on a progressive scan device it looks utterly shit, even with reasonably clever deinterlacing algorithms.

Anyway, it seems that in most cases something gets converted somewhere before it appears on your screen. Of course, I'm old enough to remember even simple animations requiring an overnight render.

There's an awful lot of shoddy conversion going on in modern consumer TV equipment.  Not that the average punter notices; they're too busy photographing their widescreen telly with their portrait smartphone so they can share some video on the interwebs.

[ian]

Before HDMI became ubiquitous, every visit to my parents involved selecting the correct aspect ratio. It's clearly wrong, I'd despair. Oh, they'd say, really?

But yes, Blue Planet II and anything shot for UHD and not scaled or otherwise looks amazing. Everything else looks fine but there are artefacts and it shines a bright light on the production, but the colour depth and brightness of OLED is quite frankly literally amazing (we have an LG 65 inch monster).

By-the-by, watching the HD version of Wonder Woman the other evening, quite a lot of the VFX had the B5 quality.

[Jurek]

Is this thread about that new TV Channel?
The one they call Channel 4.

[Kim]

Before HDMI became ubiquitous, every visit to my parents involved selecting the correct aspect ratio. It's clearly wrong, I'd despair. Oh, they'd say, really?

Last time I awkwardly visited my parents, I found my brother watching Stargate SG-1 (which is surely the next best thing to a testcard for checking aspect ratios, given the roundness of both the eponymous plot device and of General Hammond's head) in glorious stretch-o-vision.  He was doing a degree in Media Technology at the time.

(click to show/hide)

Which he then predictably dropped out of after failing his exams.

[Jaded]

Is this thread about that new TV Channel?
The one they call Channel 4.

I never got into Big Breakfast, but do confess to watching Brookside and The Word.

[Jurek]

Is this thread about that new TV Channel?
The one they call Channel 4.

I never got into Big Breakfast, but do confess to watching Brookside and The Word.

I was in the studio audience when Ollie Reed made his controversial appearance on The Word.
I caught his eye as he walked past me, and he paused for a split second.
To this day I remain convinced that he knew exactly what he was doing, and was nothing other than sober.

[Hot Flatus]

Is this thread about that new TV Channel?
The one they call Channel 4.

I never got into Big Breakfast, but do confess to watching Brookside and The Word.

I never miss an episode of The Tube

[ian]

That episode where Terry Christian buried the Mark Lamarr's corpse under the patio. Gripping.

[Kim]

What, no Eurotrash?

[ian]

Surely no one was sober enough to remember Eurotrash. It's up there with dodgy kebabs and inadvised sexual partnerships (never muddle the two). You know it happened but you don't have to acknowledge it happened.

[Jaded]

Prace your bets now - no bet no get!!!

[Wombat]

The only 4k footage I've seen on my 43" 4k TV is from my own camera, which does 50 or 60 fps, I can't remember the data rate, something like 100Mbps.  I do know it doesn't take very long to rack up a GB or two in file sizes, just checked and a 4min 54sec long shot is 3.517 GB.  I've heard all the stuff about 60fps looking uncinematic, or just wrong, buy I'm unconvinced, and suspect its just not what people expect, so they class it as wrong. A bit like the change from gas to electric light...

[Zipperhead]

I made a 4k timelapse, but as I don't have a 4k TV I've never seen it in that resolution.

[Valiant]

I recently purchased an 85" 4k HDR set. It looked soap operay. The first thing I did was calibrate it and then disable most of the dynamic stuff ie motion smoothing,  active frame rate, dynamic contrast, auto ambient dimming, etc and suddenly it came to life and looks amazing with everything. The only thing I left on was local dimming.

Becareful with OLEDs though, they can burn in. Also bear in mind that their lifespan is somewhat lower than LCD/LCOS.

[simonp]

Real life has a higher frame rate. IMO the frame rate isn’t the issue it’s the conversion doing odd things.