 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2013-01-05 17:34, Le_Forgeron a écrit :
> Le 05/01/2013 22:57, Warp nous fit lire :
>
>>> Just to clarify: By "old European analogue TV", you mean the thing they
>>> only switched off a year or so ago, and which is still the standard
>>> framerate for (at least) region-2 DVDs?
>>
>> Just use the terms "PAL" and "NTSC". Easier that way.
>>
> Well... there was also Secam & Nicam... (nicam introduced "stereo"!)
>
> And for the place here, now it's, for DVB-T: mpeg-2 for free
> STD-resolution, mpeg-4 for HD-resolution & pay-with-decoder
> STD-resolution...
>
> STD: 720i, I presume.
> HD... something like 1080, i or p ?
>
STD: 480i (NTSC) or 576i (PAL).
HD: 720p or 1080(i or p).
Unless, of course, they use the abbreviations to mean something
completely different.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott <sco### [at] scott com> wrote:
> > I was curious to see if I would experience the same, and what do you know,
> > that exact same thing happened here too! I had read this article before
> > going to see the movie, and was trying to see how the audience reacted to
> > the humor in the movie, and there indeed was signicantly more reaction in
> > the 2D version than in the 3D HFR version.
> There are several possible explanations for that effect, apart from the
> framerate difference. You'd need to do a proper experiment to confirm that.
Nah. Extrapolating from one or less examples has always worked perfectly.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1/6/2013 11:13 AM, Warp wrote
>
> You are probably not a brony, but I think that the current (ie. so-called
> 4th generation) series of My Little Pony is an excellent example of this
Agreed, it joins the likes of Avatar the Last Airbender, Invader Zim,
Powerpuff Girls, Samurai Jack, and Spongebob Squarepants asa show aimed
at kids which can appeal to adults as well.
Even so, I continue to be surprised at how robust the Brony fandom is.
I'd guess that 25% to 50% of the time I do a google image search for
anything something pony related shows up in the results. It's almost as
if by this point there's a rule-34 analogue, but with ponification: "if
it exists, there's a pony version of it". Honestly, it most makes me
think of what Trekkies probably would have been had the internet been
popular when TNG was airing.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>
> I also think that it has something to do with motion blur...
I've been thinking about this in a more 'modern' context.
Most of the consumer camera technology available now (cell phones,
low-to-midrange cameras etc) have video modes that actually don't produce much
motion blur at all. So users, especially young ones, are beginning to get
accustomed to a different viewing experience than 24fps film. Perhaps this is
another reason for Jackson's thinking concerning 48fps.
For example, when shooting video at the US standard of 30fps (well, 29.97), in
order to get 'film-like' motion blur (or something similar, since 30fps isn't
24fps) the exposure should be 1/60 sec. That would correspond to a typical
'shutter angle' of 180-deg on a film camera. And would produce motion blur
approaching the *look* of a typical standard theater film, more or less. But
modern cameras shoot with a much higher exposure time/shutter speed--probably
1/200-sec or higher when in direct sunlight. (You can see this by examining the
video frame-by-frame.) The process seems to be completely automated on lower-end
cameras, varying the ISO and the shutter angle depending on the light levels.
(Lower light automatically produces more blur, in other words.) The result is
that there is really no 'standard' motion blur anymore. Only higher-end cameras
allow some manual variation of the ISO speed/shutter angle, to *introduce*
motion blur.
So it looks like we are all being 'weaned off' the experience of 24fps film
whether we like it or not, just by virtue of modern video technology.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler <nob### [at] nowherenet> wrote:
> Even so, I continue to be surprised at how robust the Brony fandom is.
> I'd guess that 25% to 50% of the time I do a google image search for
> anything something pony related shows up in the results. It's almost as
> if by this point there's a rule-34 analogue, but with ponification: "if
> it exists, there's a pony version of it". Honestly, it most makes me
> think of what Trekkies probably would have been had the internet been
> popular when TNG was airing.
Some memes last a lot longer than others. Some memes die almost immediately
after they appear ("don't tase me bro!" would be a perfect example; it
became old almost the same day it appeared on the nets), other memes last
significantly longer, but still die sooner of later (for example l33t
sp34k was really k3wl for a long time in the 90's, but by now it has more
or less died completely, even among the very people who used it back then.)
There probably aren't many "eternal" memes that never die off (or at the
very least get relegated to a very small niche.)
It's curious (although in no way surprising) how technology affects the
type and spread of memes. The wide availability of free blog services,
and especially the availability of free video sharing services (YouTube
being by far the #1), something that was completely unthinkable in the 90's,
has changed the mem landscape considerably.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kenneth <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Most of the consumer camera technology available now (cell phones,
> low-to-midrange cameras etc) have video modes that actually don't produce much
> motion blur at all. So users, especially young ones, are beginning to get
> accustomed to a different viewing experience than 24fps film. Perhaps this is
> another reason for Jackson's thinking concerning 48fps.
I'm not completely sure that the amount of motion blur in a movie
having an effect on how "natural" or "distracting" it looks like is
completely a question of being accustomed to one or the other.
The original choice of 24 frames per second was most probably dictated
by practicality (it's about the minimum framerate that makes the movie
look fluid to the human brain, and back in the day it was hard enough
to create such cameras to be trying anything significantly higher), but
it might turn out to be a case of serendipity: Maybe it's not only just
a question of economy (ie. the minimum framerate you can get away with
so that you don't have to make your camera more complicated and thus
expensive), but it just happens to be that the motion blur that it causes
is close to *perfect* for the human brain because it might be close to
what the brain sees when you move your eyes/head around.
When you get rid of that "natural" motion blur, there's a dissonance
between what you see and what your brain normally expects to see when
things move.
Of course this is pure speculation from my part because I haven't read
any actual studies on this.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1/8/2013 10:37 AM, Warp wrote:
>
> It's curious (although in no way surprising) how technology affects the
> type and spread of memes. The wide availability of free blog services,
> and especially the availability of free video sharing services (YouTube
> being by far the #1), something that was completely unthinkable in the 90's,
> has changed the mem landscape considerably.
>
One of the things I've found interesting about it is that the extremely
rapid creation and propagation of memes allowed by the internet has led
(so it seems to me) to a change is the style of the memes. In
particular, memes which are extremely quick to digest (like image
macros) seem to have a really high fitness in this sort of environment,
and you seem them everywhere.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The original choice of 24 frames per second was most probably dictated
> by practicality (it's about the minimum framerate that makes the movie
> look fluid to the human brain, and back in the day it was hard enough
> to create such cameras to be trying anything significantly higher), but
> it might turn out to be a case of serendipity: Maybe it's not only just
> a question of economy (ie. the minimum framerate you can get away with
> so that you don't have to make your camera more complicated and thus
> expensive), but it just happens to be that the motion blur that it causes
> is close to *perfect* for the human brain because it might be close to
> what the brain sees when you move your eyes/head around.
>
I don't think "make the camera more complicated" was the main driver...
"Minimized the amount of film needed" was probably more important.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler <nob### [at] nowherenet> wrote:
> One of the things I've found interesting about it is that the extremely
> rapid creation and propagation of memes allowed by the internet has led
> (so it seems to me) to a change is the style of the memes. In
> particular, memes which are extremely quick to digest (like image
> macros) seem to have a really high fitness in this sort of environment,
> and you seem them everywhere.
Indeed. It's not like it was difficult to create image macros in the 90's,
it's just that back then there was no efficient distribution channel, even
for people who had internet connection and their own web pages.
Back then there were little to no centralized forums or blogs (not to
talk about wikis) that were popular. By far the most popular was usenet
(which is nowadays dying a slow death), but it was not the optimal way
of distributing images nor have them widely seen.
It's funny to think that back in the mid-90's it was actually a rare
privilege to have internet access. Nowadays you have to try very hard
to *not* have access.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/01/2013 03:45 AM, Kevin Wampler wrote:
> One of the things I've found interesting about it is that the extremely
> rapid creation and propagation of memes allowed by the internet has led
> (so it seems to me) to a change is the style of the memes. In
> particular, memes which are extremely quick to digest (like image
> macros) seem to have a really high fitness in this sort of environment,
> and you seem them everywhere.
Memes which are easy to copy, you mean. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
