AVATAR 2 and 3 to be shot at 60 FPS

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  04 April 2011
AVATAR 2 and 3 to be shot at 60 FPS

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...nds-make-172916

So does this mean that render times are essentially QUADRUPLED for the same thing?

Will current houses have to either increase their render capacity, or decrease their shots if this catches on?

One thing is for sure...cooling fan manufacturers just got happy.
 
  04 April 2011
This must add to realism. Will there be motion blur?
 
  04 April 2011
Originally Posted by Pyke: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...nds-make-172916

So does this mean that render times are essentially QUADRUPLED for the same thing?

I'm sure you mean 2.5 times..
Originally Posted by mister3d: This must add to realism. Will there be motion blur?

Yes, even though it's lenght most likely is ~8ms.
 
  04 April 2011
Originally Posted by Pyke: So does this mean that render times are essentially QUADRUPLED for the same thing?

Increasing the frame-rate doesn't necessarily equate to a directly proportional increase in rendering times or costs. Same as rendering two eyes usually averages out to 10 to 20% more computational work and not double.

In first place a denser temporal sampling means you can reduce other things, and get better interpolation from some data. You reduce moblur etc. Especially if you're heavy on raytracing, fast shots you're already paying for in rendering several times over the single temporal sample of a non mo-blurred shot.

Secondly, a lot of rendering power already goes into partials, you often render on 8s and 4s before you try to render the whole sequence, many, many times over (not to mention the absurd amount of stills and wedges).
Unless you're working on something where motion and moblur has great impact, you can work at 12 fps in lighting for a relatively long time throughout the process.
All in all the deressed and not-full-on renderings during production outweight the iterations of the final-like settings several times over.

You're probably looking at 30-40% more rendering across the span of a production to go from 24 to 60.
Nobody's done anything quite like it yet, but in plenty productions you might have to do a few sequences here and there at higher speed, especially if they want to play with ramping between the first iteration and the final baked in ramp delivery.
When so much goes in tests and tweaks, the farm impact for doing an entire sequence at 96, I think, ends up around time and half what it would have been if the sequence had been 24 throughout.
__________________
Come, Join the Cult http://www.cultofrig.com - Rigging from First Principles

Last edited by ThE_JacO : 04 April 2011 at 07:15 AM.
 
  04 April 2011
Originally Posted by ThE_JacO: Increasing the frame-rate doesn't necessarily equate to a directly proportional increase in rendering times or costs. Same as rendering two eyes usually averages out to 10 to 20% more computational work and not double.

In first place a denser temporal sampling means you can reduce other things, and get better interpolation from some data. You reduce moblur etc. Especially if you're heavy on raytracing, fast shots you're already paying for in rendering several times over the single temporal sample of a non mo-blurred shot.

Secondly, a lot of rendering power already goes into partials, you often render on 8s and 4s before you try to render the whole sequence, many, many times over (not to mention the absurd amount of stills and wedges).
Unless you're working on something where motion and moblur has great impact, you can work at 12 fps in lighting for a relatively long time throughout the process.
All in all the deressed and not-full-on renderings during production outweight the iterations of the final-like settings several times over.

You're probably looking at 30-40% more rendering across the span of a production to go from 24 to 60.
Nobody's done anything quite like it yet, but in plenty productions you might have to do a few sequences here and there at higher speed, especially if they want to play with ramping between the first iteration and the final baked in ramp delivery.
When so much goes in tests and tweaks, the farm impact for doing an entire sequence at 96, I think, ends up around time and half what it would have been if the sequence had been 24 throughout.


Excellent reply! Thanks for painting a much rosier picture than I had originally thought.

Any ideas on how this will effect editing?
 
  04 April 2011
3D version will probably be better and more realistic, but I think a 60fps 2D version might be quite strange looking due to the lack of motion blur that we've come to expect from cinema.
__________________
Tamas Varga
 
  04 April 2011
Originally Posted by Laa-Yosh: 3D version will probably be better and more realistic, but I think a 60fps 2D version might be quite strange looking due to the lack of motion blur that we've come to expect from cinema.

This will be cool. It's just the next step. Looks like within 10 years we will say goodbye to motion blur.
 
  04 April 2011
How many theaters can actually project at 48 or 60fps?
__________________

You can have your characters photoreal, fast or cheap. Pick two.
 
  04 April 2011
Originally Posted by playmesumch00ns: How many theaters can actually project at 48 or 60fps?


They had that same issue with 3D...if it works, theaters will upgrade.
 
  04 April 2011
I was under the impression that the only people who really cared were hardcore movie nuts...

And if this means production houses need to expand their render farms and involve additional effort for compositing and roto, it should probably be factored in to the cost just like stereo would be.
__________________
This should take less than a few minutes.

Last edited by noouch : 04 April 2011 at 01:47 PM.
 
  04 April 2011
Originally Posted by Pyke: They had that same issue with 3D...if it works, theaters will upgrade.


Yeah they will need to upgrade. The lower framerate on fast action in theaters is the one thing that snaps me out of the 3d experience.
 
  04 April 2011
Isnt this like showscan?
I remember watching a film in that format-I cant say it looked less film like..ok i cant remember it very well... maybe the wide shots seemed more smooth.
It was a long time ago.

Will the script be in a higher frame rate-that's perhaps a more important question.
 
  04 April 2011
Originally Posted by Pyke: They had that same issue with 3D...if it works, theaters will upgrade.


Most won't need too, depends on how quickly they moved over to a digital projector. Most of the 4K sony's SRXT support 48 and 60 fps for example
__________________
Quote: "Until you do what you believe in, how do you know whether you believe in it or not?" -Leo Tolstoy
Kai Pedersen
 
  04 April 2011
April fools? Maybe??
__________________
Personal: www.japetusproductions.com
Work:Straightface Studios

 
  04 April 2011
I don't think so - even Cameron himself has criticized current 3D formats because of the low frame rate and the resulting strobe effect. He's also been talking about 48-60fps for Avatar 2 before, so it's unlikely to be a simple joke.

Avatar 2 might be late to the party, though. There were quite a few converted 3D movies that looked terrible and the audience is growing weary of the feature. Also, 3D TVs aren't selling as well as expected, although I don't know if there's been any release of Avatar in 3D yet.
Then again, most manufacturers are just trying to rip off their customers and their TVs are pretty damn expensive if you consider that they're simply the same system with a higher refresh rate and some simple LCD glasses that were included with graphics cards for no extra cost back in 2000-2001, so it's no wonder that they're not seeing significant interest...
__________________
Tamas Varga
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.