Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1 • Hacker News Board

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#31

Post by pwthornton » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 4:55 PM UTC

soperj wrote: post #7

cbg0 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

60 FPS is undesirable for most movies/shows, as opposed to 24 FPS which creates a certain feel that most people prefer.

Most people prefer it because they're used to it, and that's what they feel is "movie like"

I don't know if I would say it's just because people are used to it. 24 fps is highly stylized. Movies are shot in 24 fps, wide aspect ratio (often much wider than 16:9), heavily color graded and often have film grain applied to them. It makes them feel quite distinct from normal digital video.

I'd argue it is color grading and wide aspect ratio more than anything that makes movies feel like movies, but 24 FPS and it's less lifelike movement also does make them feel distinct.

On the other hand, no one argues that sports look a lot better in 60 FPS. For home movies I take, I also want at least 60 FPS, because it preserves reality better.

But movies aren't about preserving reality.

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#32

Post by samstave » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 4:56 PM UTC

Best pricing info I can find quickly:

* c300 mk ii 6998

* c500 18995

* c700 28000

* Varicam 35 12949

* caricam lt 16500

* red dragon 32520

* red weapon 49955

* red helium 49500

* panavision dxl cant find

* sony f55 28990

* sony f65 cant find

* sony fs7 12949

* arri alexa 65 cant find

* ursa mini 4.6k 5995

* ursa 4.6k 4995

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#33

Post by stinkytaco » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 4:57 PM UTC

slhck wrote: post #26

stinkytaco wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty good analogy. Film is attempting to portray a 3D world in 2D. Even if everything looks really good, it's still fake and 4K at 60fps just draws attention to that fakeness. For sports, news, even documentaries this isn't a huge deal because you are not trying to get people to suspend their disbelief. But for narrative cinema, it can take you right out of the picture.

I don't understand your argument… if the analogy were true, listening to a CD or streaming from the web would make most people think the recording is "fake" or artificial, longing to listen to it on vinyl. Which I guess most people probably haven't had the chance to compare to CD yet.

Well, lots of people do prefer vinyl. One of the things that soured me on the whole "audiophile" thing that I did for a while was the fact that some of my favorite music sounds worse due to the high quality of the playback. Prince's 1999 does not sound good on high quality headphones from a digital source. That and the money and snake-oil.

I think some of this will change with time as people get more used to the look and the production gets better (effects, costumes, etc.). Music is also an artificial construct from the get-go, even live, but most narrative film is meant to reflect real life in some way, shape, or form. That means that anything out of place is caught immediately by our expert eyes.

All that said, when I was in the industry, one thing I noticed was how easily you could gloss over minor visual details like set dressings or small props (think food on plates), but even the slightest error in sound production was enough to destroy the effect.

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#34

Post by alkonaut » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 4:58 PM UTC

monkeyprojects wrote: post #15

fenwick67 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's why he said "in the future", when people might eventually realize that 60FPS is good.

All 3 hobbit movies where released in the high frame rate format (albeit 48 frames not 60) and the general complaint was that they felt "soap opera"ry due to the way people felt about them. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2014/12/16/hate-the-... Is a decent commentary on the issue

One of the reasons for higher FPS is that it gives artistic freedom to make panning shots etc. High speed panning in 24fps is horrible.

Maybe it would be possible to shoot at 60fps or even higher and then dynamically adjust the frame rate to keep the 24fps but smooth some scenes as required?

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#35

Post by hoschicz » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 5:02 PM UTC

mattalbie wrote: post #19

Justin_K wrote: post #5

I wish they'd push for 4K 60FPS so they could upgrade their releases to this in the future.

Increases costs dramatically. 2.5x the data.

video size != costs! Most movie production costs are mostly humans.

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#36

Post by ttoinou » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 5:04 PM UTC

matt-attack wrote: post #30

fenwick67 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's why he said "in the future", when people might eventually realize that 60FPS is good.

24fps is a form of impressionism, plain and simple. An engineer claiming that 60fps is better simply because it offers realism, is as naive as claiming that a hi-res photo is obviously better than a Van Gogh because it "has more detail". Can you imagine commenting on an impressionistic painting and remarking, "well it's nice, but if the painter has used finer brush strokes we'd see more detail and it'd be more life-l…

Actually, the comparisons between simple and double framerate are not "true" one factor at a time comparisons because the motion blur is not the same (linked to the camera shutter).

I love watching 48/50/60 FPS for psychedelic things or music visualization (and games of course ! like most of gamers) but it should be used carefully and intentionnally by the content director / producer. Some scene/content would require high motion blur and some others scene/content high framerate...

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#37

Post by stinkytaco » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 5:04 PM UTC

slhck wrote: post #27

ryandrake wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is 24FPS the video equivalent of vinyl's so-called "warm" sound?

No, I don't think so, not even in terms of being purist arguments that people make. Long version if you're interested in why people some people may think vinyl sounds better than CD: http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_(Vinyl) It's hard to compare these two arguments since "CD sound" is the standard these days, whereas the "technically inferior" 24fps is still the cinematic standard. So, while people may…

Music also changed to leverage the recording mediums' "artificiality". There's lots of music that simply could not exist live. Creating a sound that sounds like a live performance (i.e. "natural") is no longer necessarily the goal.

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#38

Post by gcb0 » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 5:05 PM UTC

robodale wrote: post #2

...And that my friends, is how you layout specs. Simple enough for anyone to read and understand, yet concrete enough to minimize interpretation variances. Love that change log.

not really. this how you do not do it. I'm particularly bugged by their list of approved cameras. it's silly. exclude most of the interesting cameras in the market for 4k now.

my bet is that they are receiving so much submissions, and actually buying all of them, that I guess the company, or a few clever individuals, saw the "consulting" or equipment renting/financing potential and will try to monetize on selling cookie cutter packages.

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#39

Post by code4tee » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 5:06 PM UTC

I always find the idea of future proofing interesting here. Like the way Seinfeld reruns are in HD even though the technology didn't really exist at the time--because they shot a TV show in actual film and then could re-scan it later to keep up with modern tech.

Crazy expensive but obviously given the value of those reruns the cost made sense.

Re: Netflix Originals: Production and Post-Production Requirements v2.1

#40

Post by 83457 » Thu, Jun 22, 2017, 5:08 PM UTC

ashark wrote: post #20

monkeyprojects wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All 3 hobbit movies where released in the high frame rate format (albeit 48 frames not 60) and the general complaint was that they felt "soap opera"ry due to the way people felt about them. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2014/12/16/hate-the-... Is a decent commentary on the issue

My complaint about the 48fps (after going in hyped to see this Spiffy New Format) was that everyone looked like they were speed-walking all the time, which was really distracting. It was like a sped-up silent film. Nothing else I've seen in higher framerates has had that problem, though—just The Hobbit.

Was that the frame rate or just hobbits trying to keep up with Gandalf?