To put an end to this who haw I wanted to do a little research of my own and I found a lot of interesting facts along the way. These facts are a little jumbled so I have to sorta reinterpret what they are.
I came across a post that kinda puts the Hz myth in to prospective.
Regular TV (or the old style standard definition) consisted of 525 lines every 1/30th of a second. Problem was, all the odd numbered lines (1,3,5,7...) were drawn in the first 1/60th of a second, and then the even numbered lines were drawn in the next 1/60th of a second, so there was a complete frame only every 1.30th of a second. Someone got the idea that storing and displaying all 525 lines in 1/60th of a second, and then repeating it for the next 1/60th of a second, would somehow make it refresh faster and look smoother. It didn't. But those same people convinced themselves that it would also double the resolution since it drew the frames twice as fast. Again, it didn't.
The same problem surfaced when CD's first came out. Analog music was stored on digital discs, and the superior rendering of the digital technology only served to accent the inadequacies of analog mastering. When mastering went digital, then CD's were a good medium to reproduce the music.
To reiterate, 60 Hz on a flat screen and the DVD signal to the tv projecting 23.94 fps is the resenation point the eye needs to see as normal. The new technology delivering 120 hz and beyond to consumers is only displaying the same 24 frame rate 5 times in a singel second.
The only way this 120 Hz and beyond tv signal will ever be properly adressed is if the movie industry decides to recognize the faster refresh rate and distributes the content with the intentions of displaying it on the 120 Hz tv.
In a sense we are already there. To project 3D properly to an audience you need double the 60 Hz signal to 120 Hz.
For years Filmmakers have been trying to prefect there craft and every time we get to a point in the industry where us filmmakers have it all figured out there has to be some grand technology that we have to try to adapt too. Its all unnecessary. We have so many digital cameras out with so many ways of capturing the image. Why we can't stick with the original concept of capturing one frame at a time is beyond me. The Red cinema camera is the only digital camera to truly understand the film to digital leap.
When consumers go out to buy there next new TV they are often buying under ignorance thinking just because the tech is new and improved it is automatically better. Its all an advertising gimmick. My friend seems to think this technology is here to stay and that I need to adapt to it as a filmmaker. In many ways that may be true, but now the entire tv industry has opened up a whole new can of worms. I don't think I can predict the future on this 120 hz projection technology. But if anything, something is going to have to give.
One thing is certain that no matter how we change the technology Humans are always going to be on the receiving end of media distribution. All humans have there limitations including the limited metheds of how we can receive information from the outside world and at what tolerances. One thing scientist still debate on is the refresh rate of the eye signal to the brain.
From what I understand american standard of shooting film is at 24 fps. The projected rate is at 48 fps. standard NTSC video is projected at 29.97 fps and is projected at 60 hz. Pal standard is shot at 25 fps and projected at 50 hz. So the common factor is we need to project twice the frame rate the motion picture was shot at. In other words, the resonation factor of the projected medium must coincide with the frequency projected in order to achieve resonance with the human eye that supplies signal to the brain.
according to wikipedia, The human visual system does not see in terms of frames; it works with a continuous flow of light information.
Everything in life works on frequencies of energy. Everything in the universe is connected threw energy of one form to another. Watching a TV is one way of receiving visual information in a frequency form. To our eye we need light in order to see things. If light did not bounce off of or project out of a source or an object then we could not see the object. What we see in the world is all based off of perception. Our brain has to interpret that information into what we think is factual information.
The average human mind revives and translates visual information at 1/10th - 1/15th of a second on average. hence is why we can see motion from a flip book projected at 10 frames a second. When the body's endorphins kick in during a moment of excitement such as a human experiencing a car crash or exposure to an attractive subject, the human mind revives and translates visual information at a maximum of 1/30th of a second. Hence is why we see that car crash or hot babe in slow motion because when our mind projects the memory back to us it is projected at half the speed the information was captured. Film works in a very simular way. If a projector is set to project a 24 fps movie and the film shot was shot at 120 fps then the information would be 5 times slower because it would take more time to project the 120 frames. But if the projector was set to project a 120 fps movie then the image would apear to be normal.
The human watching a tv is not totally in resonance with the medium being projected. A frame that is projected twice allows the mind the chance to register the signal.
This notion that we need to send projected frequencies at a higher rate then humans can process is not how we are made to receive information to begin with. In other words its not natural. Humans weren't designed to see the world threw a 120 hz handy cam 2D movie.
I think there is a connection here as to how we receive and project information. If the mind receives and interprets information at about 1/15th of a second and film captures that information twice that then to deliver visual information smoothly with out motion artifacts (blurriness, judder, etc.) has to be projected twice the speed as it was captured.
So 25 fps film is twice that of what the human mind can captures which is the reception of visual information captured at 1/15th of a second. I think there is a correlation here between projection and reception and the resonating frequencies connecting the two.
To project 25 fps it has to be projected twice the Hz or double the frames inorder for the receiving end, that is the human, to receive and interpret that information at 1/15th of a second.
I thought I should provide this fact so people can understand this whole shutter fraction vs Frames per second and shutter angel craziness.
I am not going to get in to shutter angel in this blog but I thought the math might be nice to know.
as you can see there is a lot more going on then just ramping up the Hz on a flat screen TV to "make it look better."
So the next time you go out to buy a TV ask your self what applications is this really going to benefit and can the medium I have suport this technology.
By
Robert Sawin
0 comments:
Post a Comment