Comments on: Filmmakers’ Foolish Fuss Over Frame Rates

By: Evro Moudanidis

Evro Moudanidis — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:40:30 +0000

The success of 2D or 3D film-making regardless of the frame rate, comes down to shooting style, story & editing. I love 3D, I have a 3D camera and I make personal 3D movies as often as I can. I have huge respect for Walter and he makes a lot of sense in what he says (including his evolutionary comments,) the only time anyone in my family gets headaches from my 3D films is when they’re badly made, something which applies equally as much to 2D captured in 24P with DSLR.

By: Levi Thornton

Levi Thornton — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 19:38:40 +0000

Good post Ron, All I have to say is eck… 3D… Actually I’m fine with 3D as long as I get my 2D. I’m just tired about hearing about it 24/7 from Hollywood. Call me a old man, but I rather not have my eyes bleed and a desaturated image.

As for the frame rate, as long as the image is beautiful, I don’t care. Yes, 60fps can be disgusting, but like you said Ron, frame rate isn’t everything. It’s about sum of all the parts (composition, color, control dof, etc).

By: Ron Dawson

Ron Dawson — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:39:53 +0000

In reply to Chase. I too am not crazy about 3D either. I hate the glasses, and it seems very fad like. That being said, if anyone can make it work, these two can. However, I will take up your challenge (not just now though). ;)

By: Ron Dawson

Ron Dawson — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:37:27 +0000

In reply to Andrew McCauley. That's just freaking hilarious. Thanks for that Andrew. :)

By: Andrew McCauley

Andrew McCauley — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:07:06 +0000

I’m sure it was meant as a rhetorical question, but, yes, “Jackass 3” did need to be in 3D. The Jackass franchise needs all the help it can get. 🙂

By: Chase

Chase — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:03:20 +0000

If frame rate serves the purpose of fluidity, motion blur, and the look of the film, great, but please not for the sake of the 3D. I feel thats a condition written into contracts of the studio (just my hunch, $$ trend) than it is a directors choice.

I dare you (Ron 😉 ) to read this article from Roger Ebert about a letter sent to him from Walter Murch, I know you know that name:

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html

The “evolution” part aside, he makes great pointts why 3D is not normal for the human brain. I truly do wish the fad would die, its less cinematic to me and ruined Avatar for me (outside of the story itself, how many times can that story be rehashed?)

I think Jackson/Cameron are astute and dept story tellers regardless of the tech.

By: Ron Dawson

Ron Dawson — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:23:39 +0000

In reply to Steve Moses. Here, here Mr. Mayor. Thanks for commenting. What I care most about: can you engage me in an interesting story. I'm pretty sure Jim and Pete will keep me engaged and going back for seconds, thirds and fourths.

By: Steve Moses

Steve Moses — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:09:09 +0000

Great post Ron! You & I both know event filmmakers who, in a typical elitist attitude, dismiss any event films that are not shot in 24p. God forbid anyone should use 60p!!
You are so right by saying that there is more to achieving a “film” look then the frame rates that are chosen.