{"id":13548,"date":"2011-04-12T07:21:05","date_gmt":"2011-04-12T12:21:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/?p=13548"},"modified":"2011-04-12T07:21:05","modified_gmt":"2011-04-12T12:21:05","slug":"peter-jackson-talks-about-shooting-hobbit-at-48-frames-per-second","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/2011\/04\/12\/peter-jackson-talks-about-shooting-hobbit-at-48-frames-per-second\/","title":{"rendered":"Peter Jackson Talks About Shooting HOBBIT At 48 Frames Per Second"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Peter Jackson has taken a few minutes off from his directorial duties on The Hobbit<\/strong> to confirm on his Facebook page that the 3D film is indeed shooting digitally at 48 frames per second. He doesn’t do it with just a quick two sentence posting either,but took several paragraphs<\/a> to explain what the difference between this method of shooting is versus the way movies had been shot for almost 100 years and what that change means in terms of picture quality. (We’ve copied-and-pasted the entire post below for anyone not on Facebook.)<\/p>\n

Additionally, Jackson has posted a picture of himself on set in front of the video monitors used to watch what each camera is capturing. Of interest is the images on the two big screens. (Click on the picture for a larger view.) It’s the same scene, shot from two different angles. I’m guessing that we’re looking at Martin Freeman as the film’s titular hero Bilbo Baggins, but what rocky environment is he standing in? From my recent re-reading of J. R. R. Tolkien’s origiknal novel, there can be only two possibilities – the cave system under the Misty Mountains where Bilbo meets Gollum and discovers the Ring before saving the dwarves from some ravenous orcs or it could be somewhere on the side of the Lonely Mountain as Bilbo and the dwarves look for the secret door into the Kingdom Under The Mountain.<\/p>\n

Here’s what Jackson had to say about the shooting.<\/p>\n

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\u00a0news that has been reported about us shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 frames per second, and\u00a0explain to\u00a0you what my thoughts are about this.<\/p>\n

We are indeed shooting at the higher frame rate. The key thing to understand is that this process requires both shooting\u00a0and 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\u00a0every 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\u00a0is moving around quickly, the image can judder or “strobe.”<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Shooting and\u00a0projecting at 48 fps does a lot to get rid of these issues. \u00a0It looks much more lifelike, and it is much easier to watch, especially in 3-D. We’ve been watching HOBBIT tests and\u00a0dailies at 48 fps now for several months, and we often sit through two hours\u00a0worth of footage without getting any eye strain from the 3-D. \u00a0It looks great, and we’ve actually become used to it now, to the point\u00a0that 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!<\/p>\n

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\u00a0tracks. 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),\u00a0has been\u00a0a fairly significant part of any film budget.<\/p>\n

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\u00a0in 1927 or whenever it was adopted.<\/p>\n

None of this thinking is new. \u00a0Doug Trumbull developed and promoted a 60 frames per second process called ShowScan about 30 years ago and that looked great. Unfortunately it was never\u00a0adopted 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\u00a0projection difficulties in cinemas, made it tough to use for “normal” films, despite looking amazing. \u00a0Actually, if anybody has been on the Star Tours ride at Disneyland, you’ve experienced the\u00a0life like quality of 60 frames per second. \u00a0Our new King Kong attraction at Universal Studios also uses 60 fps.<\/p>\n

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. \u00a0Most of the new\u00a0digital projectors are capable of projecting at 48 fps, with only the digital servers needing some firmware upgrades. \u00a0We tested both 48 fps and 60 fps. \u00a0The difference between those speeds is\u00a0almost impossible to detect, but the increase in quality over 24 fps is significant.<\/p>\n

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. \u00a0You get used to this new look very quickly and it becomes a\u00a0much more lifelike and comfortable viewing experience. \u00a0It’s similar to the moment when vinyl records were supplanted by digital CDs. \u00a0There’s no doubt in my mind that we’re heading towards movies\u00a0being shot and projected at higher frame rates.<\/p>\n

Warner Bros. have been very supportive,\u00a0and\u00a0allowed 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. \u00a0We\u00a0are 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. \u00a0However,\u00a0while\u00a0it’s predicted that there may be over 10,000 screens capable of projecting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps by\u00a0our\u00a0release\u00a0date\u00a0in Dec, 2012,\u00a0we don\u2019t yet know what the reality will be. \u00a0It is a situation we\u00a0will all be monitoring carefully.\u00a0\u00a0I see it as a way of future-proofing THE HOBBIT.\u00a0\u00a0Take it from me–if we do release in 48 fps, those are the cinemas you should watch the movie in. It will look terrific!<\/p>\n

Time to jump in the car and drive to Bag End for the day. Video coming soon!<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Peter Jackson explains how new digitally technology will affect filming.<\/div>\n

[click for more]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":13549,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_ef_editorial_meta_date_first-draft-date":"","_ef_editorial_meta_paragraph_assignment":"","_ef_editorial_meta_checkbox_needs-photo":"","_ef_editorial_meta_number_word-count":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[84],"tags":[1594,1816],"series":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-13548","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-news","8":"tag-peter-jackson","9":"tag-the-hobbit"},"aioseo_notices":[],"nelio_content":{"autoShareEndMode":"never","automationSources":{"useCustomSentences":false,"customSentences":[]},"efiAlt":"","efiUrl":"","followers":[],"highlights":[],"isAutoShareEnabled":false,"networkImageIds":[],"permalinkQueryArgs":[],"series":[],"suggestedReferences":[]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13548","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13548"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13548\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13549"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13548"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13548"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13548"},{"taxonomy":"series","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.filmbuffonline.com\/FBOLNewsreel\/wordpress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/series?post=13548"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}