> I also think that it has something to do with motion blur. When you film
> something at 24 FPS, when there's rapid movement each frame gets more
> motion blur than if you film it at 48 FPS. Thus it makes the movie look
> sharper, but whether that's a *good* thing is another question. "Less
> motion blur" does not automatically mean "looks better" to the human
> brain.

At 24fps the director can use motion blur as a tool to force the 
audience to concentrate on a certain part of fast moving scenes. At 
higher frame rates this becomes harder, so really it's just about how 
much control the director should over what the audience should be 
looking at.

Post a reply to this message