24p motion smoothing... hrm

Narj · 14 Jun 2013 at 10:12

I've settled on changing this to min on my TV when watching films as it really works well, however, I'm finding it extremely offputting. Do you get used to this or do people generally end up raging and disabling it?

I watched a couple of films yesterday and I could feel my brain boiling in protest after about an hour. My mate who was watching with me said he didn't notice anything unusual, just thought it looked good.

The effect is obvious and a plus in things like credits, fast pans and the like but I'm still not sure if my brain is ever going to accept it. It looks too "creepy" if that makes sense?

What are people's opinions and what settings are you using (if at all?)

Psycho Sonny · 14 Jun 2013 at 14:50

panasonic call it image frame creation. all tv enthusiasts over at avforums suggest turning it off or keeping it on minimum. any other setting is too overpowered.

i suggest you turn it off, it's actually creating input lagg, the more features you turn on, the more input lagg there is, so i tend to turn crap features off.

same goes for dynamic backlighting, that gets turns off, where the tv has a sensor and adjusts the brightness of the tv according to how bright the room is.

a lot of these features are worth turning off.

i have eco mode off as well as it effects PQ, power to usb off when in standby as it just wastes electricity, etc.

probably worth you heading over to avforums and finding out the recommended settings for your specific tv.

Narj · 14 Jun 2013 at 16:20

Psycho Sonny said:
panasonic call it image frame creation. all tv enthusiasts over at avforums suggest turning it off or keeping it on minimum. any other setting is too overpowered.

i suggest you turn it off, it's actually creating input lagg, the more features you turn on, the more input lagg there is, so i tend to turn crap features off.

<snip>

probably worth you heading over to avforums and finding out the recommended settings for your specific tv.

I find that "min" setting is alright in some films but not others. I tested with BD Star Trek (the 1st new one) and it looked fantastic. Watching a few other films last night just did my head in, though. This is on a Panasonic plasma. I take it that once higher frame rates are adopted for films and cinema, everyone will have the same wtf moment and mental struggle to adjust. :/

As for settings, I'm conscious of "bedding in" at the moment so running in THX Cinema mode and zooming where there are black bars top & bottom when watching something, otherwise leaving it with the contrast/brightness/sharpness down on normal mode. Not sure this is really necessary but I'll do it for peace of mind.

I'll get it professionally calibrated once it's done about 200 hours.

I'm still curious as to whether it's the fake element that causes the confusion, or if it's just that we're so used to the standard "24fps" for films.

I do remember seeing a snippet from the hobbit filmed in 48fps and thought it looked weird.

Confused · 14 Jun 2013 at 16:30

A friend has all this rubbish enabled on his TV, and after sitting in front of it for a few hours at Christmas, I then tried to drive home.

It had done something weird to my vision, and driving along the M25 felt like I was in a computer game, really disorientating and I felt physically ill. Had to stop at the services to let my GF drive home. It's the only time I've ever felt like that, and I can only attribute it to the TV, the only thing different that I'd done that day compared to any other day of my life.

Narj · 14 Jun 2013 at 16:37

Confused said:
A friend has all this rubbish enabled on his TV, and after sitting in front of it for a few hours at Christmas, I then tried to drive home.

It had done something weird to my vision, and driving along the M25 felt like I was in a computer game, really disorientating and I felt physically ill. Had to stop at the services to let my GF drive home. It's the only time I've ever felt like that, and I can only attribute it to the TV, the only thing different that I'd done that day compared to any other day of my life.

I had similar symptoms last night but not quite as bad. Not sure if it makes any difference but the two films I watched that made me queasy were streaming over netflix. Maybe it was treating BluRay source differently.

Thinking about it, the feeling I had was similar to travel sickness. It's fine on TV but on some films, it seems my brain is constantly telling me that something is wrong.

Metallifux · 14 Jun 2013 at 23:59

My Panasonic TV has 24p mode but no fancy processing. Even so it took me while to get used to it, now it's second nature.

BunnyKillBot · 15 Jun 2013 at 09:02

In general, its your brain, your fault, not the device. Just because you are used to the horrible juddery motion of 24p as 'cinematic' doesn't make it 'good'. It irks me when people liken frame interpolation/high frame rate to 'like a cheap home made movie' type thing. No. What frame rate do you play games at? Guess what, it isn't 24 frames per second. What frame rate do your eyes see the world at? Nope still not 24 frames per second.

Just stick with it and give your brain time to adjust, because high frame rate/motion interpolation on 24p sources IS better, just your brain is programmed to the horrible judder.

Psycho Sonny said:
panasonic call it image frame creation. all tv enthusiasts over at avforums suggest turning it off or keeping it on minimum. any other setting is too overpowered.

i suggest you turn it off, it's actually creating input lagg, the more features you turn on, the more input lagg there is, so i tend to turn crap features off.

same goes for dynamic backlighting, that gets turns off, where the tv has a sensor and adjusts the brightness of the tv according to how bright the room is.

a lot of these features are worth turning off.

i have eco mode off as well as it effects PQ, power to usb off when in standby as it just wastes electricity, etc.

probably worth you heading over to avforums and finding out the recommended settings for your specific tv.

Wrong wrong and wrong. These companies aren't putting in these features because they are 'crap' and 'worth turning off'. These features are only found on more expensive devices because they require more computational power.

Go on, go play a computer game at 24 frames per second limited and tell me how immersive and cinematic the experience was.

(For the record, I have a sony vpl-hw30es, and I have motion interpolation set to full)

Psycho Sonny · 15 Jun 2013 at 09:53

BunnyKillBot said:
In general, its your brain, your fault, not the device. Just because you are used to the horrible juddery motion of 24p as 'cinematic' doesn't make it 'good'. It irks me when people liken frame interpolation/high frame rate to 'like a cheap home made movie' type thing. No. What frame rate do you play games at? Guess what, it isn't 24 frames per second. What frame rate do your eyes see the world at? Nope still not 24 frames per second.

Just stick with it and give your brain time to adjust, because high frame rate/motion interpolation on 24p sources IS better, just your brain is programmed to the horrible judder.

Wrong wrong and wrong. These companies aren't putting in these features because they are 'crap' and 'worth turning off'. These features are only found on more expensive devices because they require more computational power.

Go on, go play a computer game at 24 frames per second limited and tell me how immersive and cinematic the experience was.

(For the record, I have a sony vpl-hw30es, and I have motion interpolation set to full)

mate i have a top of the range panel

a GT50

and see here

http://www.avforums.com/forums/plas...gt50-reviewers-recommended-best-settings.html

avforums - a forum full of guys who know everything about tv's recommend you have it turned off.

please go over to that forum and post what you posted, they will soon educate you.

TheVoice · 15 Jun 2013 at 09:55

BunnyKillBot said:
Go on, go play a computer game at 24 frames per second limited and tell me how immersive and cinematic the experience was.

I think everyone knows that isn't a proper comparison though.

Narj · 15 Jun 2013 at 11:53

Oh I'm not arguing that it doesn't look better, it looks amazing, there's just something eerily disconcerting about it. With a large panel it's almost like looking through a window.

I'll keep it on "min" for now and give it a chance as "max" just makes me feel ill (seriously). I find the slight judder in fast pans and on credits without it a bit jarring tbh, but maybe I have the wrong settings as it is. I'll go do some reading on avforums.

BunnyKillBot · 15 Jun 2013 at 14:49

Psycho Sonny said:
please go over to that forum and post what you posted, they will soon educate you.

No thanks, I am capable of making my own decisions without needing to follow the herd. I love motion smoothing/frame interpolation/make judder go bye bye, what ever you want to call it. I have it on where I can, and screw a bunch of internet geeks.

Narj said:
there's just something eerily disconcerting about it

Try to scientifically quantify 'eerily disconcerting'. Its all in your head.

TheVoice said:
I think everyone knows that isn't a proper comparison though.

Oh really, and why why not? Because your brain has been programmed to accept 24 frames per second as 'cinematic' even though its not fast enough for smooth motion, because thats how it was and always has been.

Psycho Sonny · 15 Jun 2013 at 15:38

BunnyKillBot said:
No thanks, I am capable of making my own decisions without needing to follow the herd. I love motion smoothing/frame interpolation/make judder go bye bye, what ever you want to call it. I have it on where I can, and screw a bunch of internet geeks.

Try to scientifically quantify 'eerily disconcerting'. Its all in your head.

Oh really, and why why not? Because your brain has been programmed to accept 24 frames per second as 'cinematic' even though its not fast enough for smooth motion, because thats how it was and always has been.

i dont think you know much about tv signals a lot of them aren't output at 24 hz.

e.g. my sky + hd box outputs 1080i 50hz into my tv regardless of what is being shown on the tv, movie, sports, tv show, etc, etc.

i think the only time you get 24 hz input is when you watch a movie through a dedicated playing device. e.g. a blu ray player or dvd player.

by turning on IFC it creates unnatural movement, fake frames, if you have good eyesight then you can spot these fake frames and your brain gets confused.

in fact when i turned it on to play fifa on my ps3, the ball would appear to disappear and reappear very rapidly when in the air after being hit from a goal kick or when the keeper punted it. turn it off and the ball moved naturally through the air.

basically you are adding in frames which are not needed, frames which were not intended to be displayed, frames which make the sync go crazy.

e.g. if the signal is 50hz and you have now changed it to 120 hz using IFC.

50 does not go into 120 equally which results in certain frames being shown more than others.

e.g.

frame 1, frame 1, frame 2, frame 2, frame 2, frame 3, frame 3, frame 4, frame 4, frame 5, frame 5, frame 5

this is basically what is happening when you turn a 50 hz signal into a 120 hz one. as you can see frame 2 and 5 are repeated 3 times whereas frames 1, 3 and 4 are only repeated twice.

ideally a 50hz input should be converted to 100hz therefore everything is just doubled, i think this is what minimum/medium does. whereas maximum does 120 hz.

this is why minimum or off is recommended.

but since you do not want an experts advice you shall never really know what it is that is going on, must be amazing to live in your ignorant world where expert advice is not listened to.

the wopster · 15 Jun 2013 at 15:42

Psycho Sonny said:
i dont think you know much about tv signals a lot of them aren't output at 24 hz.

e.g. my sky + hd box outputs 1080i 50hz into my tv regardless of what is being shown on the tv, movie, sports, tv show, etc, etc.

i think the only time you get 24 hz input is when you watch a movie through a dedicated playing device. e.g. a blu ray player or dvd player.

by turning on IFC it creates unnatural movement, fake frames, if you have good eyesight then you can spot these fake frames and your brain gets confused.

but since you do not want an experts advice you shall never really know what it is that is going on, must be amazing to live in your ignorant world where expert advice is not listened to.

+1 to that

BunnyKillBot · 15 Jun 2013 at 19:52

Psycho Sonny said:
i dont think you know much about tv signals a lot of them aren't output at 24 hz.
....
but since you do not want an experts advice you shall never really know what it is that is going on, must be amazing to live in your ignorant world where expert advice is not listened to.

Amusing to call me ignorant when you don't seem to understand the technologies involved. Firstly, refresh rate != source rate. True frame interpolation creates new frames based on algorithms that compare two or more sources to produce an intermediary frame, see here. That same algorithm is responsible for ensuring consistency when there exist remainder frames.

Thus your poorly worded example has nothing to do with what we are talking about here, because frames are not simply doubled up, but an entirely new frame is created

frame 1 | frame 1/2 | frame 2 | frame 2/3 | frame 3

insane200 · 15 Jun 2013 at 20:10

BunnyKillBot said:
Amusing to call me ignorant when you don't seem to understand the technologies involved. Firstly, refresh rate != source rate. True frame interpolation creates new frames based on algorithms that compare two or more sources to produce an intermediary frame, see here. That same algorithm is responsible for ensuring consistency when there exist remainder frames.

Thus your poorly worded example has nothing to do with what we are talking about here, because frames are not simply doubled up, but an entirely new frame is created

frame 1 | frame 1/2 | frame 2 | frame 2/3 | frame 3

This is all great and such, but for things shot digitally which is already blur free due to higher FPS, leaving the motion processing on makes normal tv horrible.

judder is much more visible, and things like text scrolling is almost impossible to read.

I see it every day at work, even on some panning images tv's judder like crazy, turning of IFC or even changing it to minimum stops this.

For films still recorded in 24p yes its good to have on, most other things its not.

asim18 · 15 Jun 2013 at 20:17

Camera operators are capable of setting their camera's shutter angle for optimal results at their chosen FPS.

Any footage captured by a half decent camera crew will have the appropriate shutter angle for the shot. The frankly extreme illustrative example used in your link is only applicable to crap footage captured by a rookie on cheap home video equipment.

I trialled frame interpolation for a while. The effect does "wow" you I must admit; but that doesn't mean it's good. To anyone remotely enthusiastic about proper video exhibition it's completely counter productive.

It does have it's uses though, I enjoy it with... erm... adult material, but that's it. For any kind of film I don't like it.

If anyone wants a good light media player with built in frame interpolation, check out Splash Pro

TheVoice · 15 Jun 2013 at 22:35

BunnyKillBot said:
Oh really, and why why not? Because your brain has been programmed to accept 24 frames per second as 'cinematic' even though its not fast enough for smooth motion, because thats how it was and always has been.

No, it's because there's a difference between a game at 24fps and film running at 24fps. Motion blur in film helps provide a smoother experience, you don't get that with games.

BunnyKillBot · 15 Jun 2013 at 23:55

TheVoice said:
No, it's because there's a difference between a game at 24fps and film running at 24fps. Motion blur in film helps provide a smoother experience, you don't get that with games.

*Sigh* Low frame rate != motion blur.

Its a sad sad state of affairs that consumer expectation is so out of line with technical implementation.

asim18 · 15 Jun 2013 at 23:57

TheVoice said:
No, it's because there's a difference between a game at 24fps and film running at 24fps. Motion blur in film helps provide a smoother experience, you don't get that with games.

Spot on.

BunnyKillBot said:
*Sigh* Low frame rate != motion blur.

Its a sad sad state of affairs that consumer expectation is so out of line with technical implementation.

No.

You need to learn about shutter angle and it's effect on motion blur.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_disc_shutter

It's not all about "OMG 60 is better than 24". The low frame rate of motion pictures can actually be mastered by a good cinematographer to create unparalleled artistic effects.

Frame interpolation is a load of crap. The effect becomes a complete gimmick once you realise how the camera crew carefully set shutter angle to create perfect motion blur and you're ruining it with a silly computer algorithm. Not to mention the stupid "rubber band" artefacting caused when the cinematographer has varied shutter angle from shot to shot.

But hey keep doing it if you want.

BunnyKillBot · 16 Jun 2013 at 09:31

asim18 said:
Spot on.

No.

You need to learn about shutter angle and it's effect on motion blur.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_disc_shutter

It's not all about "OMG 60 is better than 24". The low frame rate of motion pictures can actually be mastered by a good cinematographer to create unparalleled artistic effects.

Frame interpolation is a load of crap. The effect becomes a complete gimmick once you realise how the camera crew carefully set shutter angle to create perfect motion blur and you're ruining it with a silly computer algorithm. Not to mention the stupid "rubber band" artefacting caused when the cinematographer has varied shutter angle from shot to shot.

But hey keep doing it if you want.

Thats great and all, but I dont give a rats backside about 'mastered by a good cinematographer'. You seem to be missing the point entirely, that 24 frames per second is not fast enough for smooth motion and gives me a headache.