24p motion smoothing... hrm

Psycho Sonny said:
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.
Click to expand...

Even then it won't be showing 24Hz, it will be showing 96Hz, I don't think there is a single TV that actually displays 24Hz at 24Hz since the refresh rate is so low.

There's a good post on the Blu-ray.com forums

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=170767

But basically I don't understand why anyone would enable motion interpolation features, I figure most people who use Blu-ray would want things to be the same as they are in the cinema.
 
Broken Hope said:
Even then it won't be showing 24Hz, it will be showing 96Hz, I don't think there is a single TV that actually displays 24Hz at 24Hz since the refresh rate is so low.

There's a good post on the Blu-ray.com forums

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=170767

But basically I don't understand why anyone would enable motion interpolation features, I figure most people who use Blu-ray would want things to be the same as they are in the cinema.
Click to expand...

My TV is definitely showing 24p at 24 hz. Now a TV that can do 96hz, that I haven't seen.
 
TheVoice said:
I give up, your attitude problem is apparently preventing you from having a reasonable discussion about the subject.
Click to expand...

No not really. You guys seem unable to accept that somebody has a different opinion to you. At the end of the day, its a consumer choice whether you choose to enable these features, and i suggest to you the fact they are being built in to high-end equipment in the first place suggests there is a market for it. I don't give a rats behind about what you think or feel about the subject, other than to say I, personally, love it and will always be using it :)
 
BunnyKillBot said:
No not really. You guys seem unable to accept that somebody has a different opinion to you. At the end of the day, its a consumer choice whether you choose to enable these features, and i suggest to you the fact they are being built in to high-end equipment in the first place suggests there is a market for it. I don't give a rats behind about what you think or feel about the subject, other than to say I, personally, love it and will always be using it :)
Click to expand...

From your first reply you were agressive towards others on here, im sure if many forums with real experts claim the system is poor they are correct, the reasons why manufatures add it is mainly to shout about numbers.

But obviously they no nothing compared to yourself, the self proclaimed expert.

You will also be the first person to see my block list.
 
IFC is great for sports but I find it intolerable for movies. For some reason everything looks like a soap opera. I think to me it highlights motion too much and against a static background it makes it look unnatural, almost like a video game.
 
BunnyKillBot said:
Click to expand...

I would have ignored this but i wont, I work in a shop that just happens to sell Tv'S :eek: so funnily enough i get to experience IFC and other brands of motion control, and get to see all the different types of issues it causes.

I've also had to deal with many people complaining about issues due to having it turned on and certain sources and looking terrible.

If there is no issue like you claim, the many forums, experts and customers must all be incorrect.
 
insane200 said:
If there is no issue like you claim, the many forums, experts and customers must all be incorrect.
Click to expand...

Its got nothing to do with 'what other people say'. Here I am, an end user and I extensively use this feature because i like it. You disregard my opinion because it doesn't fit in with your own world view, which for most people here appears to be based on 'expert opinion' and conjecture rather than their own experiences.

Nearly all of the criticisms levied at frame interpolation as applied to movie sources are psychological tending towards psychosomatic, which is to say cognitive dissonance, a disconnect with what the viewer 'expects' leads to physical symptoms, from anxiety and 'uncanny valley' triggers to headaches and nausea.

The 'Soap opera effect' is not scientifically quantifiable and is all in your head.

I think to me it highlights motion too much
Click to expand...

Is like saying a roller coaster is too roller coaster-y. Motion Picture. Motion. Its in the name.

As long as you continue to expect to hate it, you will continue to suffer from it, because it is your own mental processes that are at fault.
 
Last edited:
IMO, IFC turns lovely movies into over-sharp Eastenders type affairs. I wonder if it would benefit gaming, but it appears to cause input lag according to other posters...so, lose-lose?
 
I don't get why it can't predict frames better, i might like it on for tv as it makes things more solid and in some ways better, films im not sure about, of course it would be better if they just gave us 60fps when they filmed but i can't see why motion smoothing can't also be improved, i think the prediction is the problem, im not sure exactly how it works but instead of predicting future frames why not simply take the video/audio and delay it a bit so it doesn't need to predict, it can look at two frames and create exactly the difference between moving objects.

Edit: I was just testing it again and the real problem is it's just not consistent, it's like it switches on and off all the time, i noticed in long pans it kept speeding up and slowing down, going juddery and then smooth every second or so, it makes most scenes look like it was shot by a drunk person, very odd looking but you can see if it worked properly it should be good, for now it stays off.
 
Last edited:
tom_nieto said:
IFC is great for sports but I find it intolerable for movies. For some reason everything looks like a soap opera. I think to me it highlights motion too much and against a static background it makes it look unnatural, almost like a video game.
Click to expand...

it's supposed to be the opposite.

good for movies and bad for sports
 
Radiation said:
im not sure exactly how it works but instead of predicting future frames why not simply take the video/audio and delay it a bit so it doesn't need to predict, it can look at two frames and create exactly the difference between moving objects.
Click to expand...

to do this in real time, im guessing you would need a very very expensive PC built into it for real time creation of new frames.

would depend on the source obviously but i am assuming your talking about 1080P blu ray content here and not a dvd.

the technology doesn't work like it's supposed to because of the above i would imagine, analysing the current 24 frames every second, creating up to an additional 96 frames every second and then displaying them would take a supercomputer i imagine.
 
Radiation said:
I don't get why it can't predict frames better
Click to expand...
It's simply that movement isn't the only thing happening on screen.

You have changes in light and shade, colour differences, changes in the appearance of objects at different angles, motion blurring, the movement of the camera as well as the subject and/or background, zooming, camera shake etc etc. Add to this film grain, video noise, macro blocking, mosquito noise, MPEG artefacts etc. How does an algorithm differentiate accurately between pixels affected by the trajectory of an object and those altered by some random noise?

As humans we are pretty good at telling when a photo doesn't look natural. What's surprising though is how quickly we seem to lose that power when it comes to TV images. We accept some pretty horrendous crimes for the sake of a moving image. That is, until we see something better. The trouble is so few of us get to see what a properly calibrated image looks like.
 
I have a Samsung PS51D8000 Plasma which has a "Cinema Smooth" option when a 24p source is on. I think it runs at 96hz and to me does not produce the "soap opera" effect but unfortunately does have a hit in the Black level.

So I can choose from silky smooth 24p films with poor black level or watch a film at 60fps with 3:2 pulldown but with a superior black level but occasional judder....thanks Samsung!

I watch at 60fps as the judder is hardly noticable to me but the "Cinema Smooth" option is not bad on animation films etc
 
lucid said:
As humans we are pretty good at telling when a photo doesn't look natural. What's surprising though is how quickly we seem to lose that power when it comes to TV images. We accept some pretty horrendous crimes for the sake of a moving image. That is, until we see something better. The trouble is so few of us get to see what a properly calibrated image looks like.
Click to expand...

I have fallen foul of this for so long. Never started reading up on this stuff until Christmas there and now always rely on the AVS-HD-709 disc patterns and supplied manual.

Never seen so much detail in whites and blacks for so long due to factory presets. It's one of those things you just take for granted out of the box.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom