If you haven’t been following my updates on Twitter, Facebook, or Google Plus, you might’ve missed the first few columns in my new “Oscar Effects” series over at Digital Trends. Each day, I’ve put the spotlight on one of the movies nominated in the Academy Awards “Visual Effects” category, and examined a key element of the film’s effects that made it stand out from the crowd last year.
My first column focused on “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey” and director Peter Jackson’s decision to shoot the movie at 48 frames per second, which caused no small amount of controversy and debate among critics and audiences alike.
Here’s an excerpt from the column:
At a time when Blu-Ray players are becoming ubiquitous and nearly every home is furnished with a high-definition television capable of pumping out video at a quality that would’ve seemed impossible 10 years ago, the director argued that the move to a higher frame rate is long overdue – especially with every big-budget movie being screened in 3-D and IMAX formats, too.
Supporters of the movement to 48fps insist that the higher speed of filming and screening – which displays 48 images every second instead of the customary 24 that became the standard in the late 1920s – improves the clarity of images and smooths the transition between frames. The blur associated with movement is also reduced, and a greater level of detail can be perceived on the screen. Filmmakers such as Bryan Singer (Jack the Giant Slayer) and James Cameron (Avatar) have already expressed a desire to move into the 48fps world with their own projects, though quite a bit depends on how audiences embrace Jackson’s foray with the format.
You can read the rest of the column at DigitalTrends.com.