AWKWARD ZOMBIE

Well, they know where the person is so they can get them and send them back so that the loop can be closed, so they'd probably know whether or not it actually happened via correspondence with future people and seeing where the person goes. They're the mafia, they've got connections.

Saw Jack Reacher with my dad today. The trailers made it look like a typical dumb action flick, but it was surprisingly very good.

the human eye can't physically see past 60fps. 24fps was set in because cameras weren't able to shoot any faster and then everyone just got so used to it they never bothered changing until recently for some reason.

i heard that it was giving people headaches and shit too but it was completely fine. a high framerates makes movies look better imo because movement doesn't looking stuttered. they did add a crazy amount of motion blur to some areas though that i found a bit necessary and annoying because i wanted to see detail dammit

The eye doesn't see in fps to begin with - it's more of a constant stream of information that is actively being processed rather than in a gradual manner like frames. You can see the difference between 60 and 120 fps if you have a keen eye but it's very small. There's no limit to how much visual information your eye can handle, (well there probably is but it's very high) just how much visual information is actually necessary until diminishing returns kicks in. Your eye can process more than 60 fps but at that point movement is so fluid that it hardly matters.

When there's an insufficient amount of visual information (frames) coming in, your brain tries to fill in the gaps to make it seem more fluid.

Yeah, there's no limit to how many frames your eyes can see because the brain isn't a computer and it doesn't work like that. 60 FPS is just smooth as hell, and it doesn't get much smoother with the current technology we have. Can it be smoother? Yes. But 60 is basically where it stops mattering.



I don't think so? I mean, they use motion blur in movies specifically so it doesn't look so jagged.

Actually I remembered that partially wrong - it wasn't about frames but visual gaps in general.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 135833.htm

Dunno how this ties in to frames, I'm no eye or brain scientist.

Also, most monitors are only 60hz and thus cannot display more than 60fps. I imagine theatres need adjusted projecting equipment for higher fps movies as well.

I dunno. I mean, it's a projector, right? It's not sending the images to a monitor. All it has to do is read the film, and the film itself has to just have more frames.

I don't really know how projectors work though so

Same shit with HD vs non HD. Yes, there are levels where you're going to notice that the quality sucks absolute balls, but at the other end of the spectrum, your brain stops caring after a certain point. It does this because it's lazy, and if it had to notice the difference between 60 fps and 59 fps all the time, you wouldn't be able to enjoy the movie. What it does is take in all of the information around you and weeds out the unnecessary bits, which can include the difference between 24 fps and 60 fps. 24 fps is enough to adequately enjoy the movie without the quality being so low that it's all you can notice, so anything above that is just profit, and prone to you not even noticing it. It's the same reason someone can show me an HD showing of something next to a non HD something, and I can't for the life of me tell the difference, even when I have half a daisies to give at trying to notice it.

Besides, the fact that it's an issue just means someone looked way too much into it in the first place. Most of the time you do notice a difference, all you can really say is "It looks smoother", not "the fps is really awesome!" Most people who look at The Thief and the Cobbler will tell you it looks better than any other animated movie, but probably won't be able to tell you why (it has to do with the sheer number of drawings that went into the animation). The only reason I knew that was because I saw a documentary that told me. Chances are what happened is someone saw that something was different, and equated it was "bad" without actually considering everything about it.

haha well yeah obv we don't see in frames, i was just using fps to make it a but more understandable i guess? I meant more like our brains can't process movement on a screen on a higher framerate than 60fps. Anything more and it looks the same to us.

I personally can DEFINITELY tell the different between 24 and 60fps just by looking. Doesn't even have to be side by side. If given the choice I'd opt for the higher framerate because it looks nicer to me. However I'm an animator and I'm kind of trained to notice shit like that haha

This is entirely wrong. The difference between 24 and 48fps alone is massive enough to be noticed constantly. 24 and 60fps is an even bigger gap. Now, 48-60 is less of a gap, and thus less noticeable, but at that point the fact that it's not as clear a gap is more due to hardware. If you can't tell the difference, then that's something you have, but it's not what everyone has, and it's sure not what the norm is.

There actually was a really good example of the difference that I saw yesterday. I was at Fry's, getting a new headset, and they had an HD TV set up right next to a SD TV about the same size. They were both playing Kung Fu Panda, but the HD one was clearly at least 48-60fps, while the SD one was the normal 24-30. They were playing at the same time, showing the same things, but it was incredibly obvious what the HD one was.

The difference is massive, especially in film, where even HD movies have been in 24fps before, only because that's the standard. It's only now, it seems, that the framerate is being upped.

Change of subject... The 2011 muppets movie was pretty great. Man or Muppet is the best song.

HOLD IT!



Based on what exactly? You say my statement is made based on my own observations and can't possibly reflect the general populous when the same can be said about yours.



Incredibly obvious to you, or were you standing there all day with a pad and pen taking tallies of everyone walking by Are there signatures to ensure certain validity of persons involved?



This is just a restatement of your previous two paragraphs. All you've done is propose the hypothesis that the difference is in fact noticeable where the fieldwork cited to back this statement up is muddled with potential personal bias.

Also, massive is used twice, which is redundant. I remain unconvinced.

/phoenixwrightobjection

EDIT: Honestly though, I don't doubt that there's a noticeable difference between 24 and 60 fps, it just seemed like those were the numbers that everyone was hanging on so those were the numbers I used. I was trying to make a general point to explain why such a thing would be unnoticeable. It doesn't account for things like shitty vs superhuman vision and desensitization.



Sorry, I had just mosey'd from the mafia thread and was in a defensive mood from my mojo being potentially tarnished.

I've actually not seen the recent muppet movie...

Yesterday I watched the latest Muppet movie. I guess it was alright, but I expected it to be funnier.

Going to see Gangster Squad soon.