JulioD

I’m going try a different angle. How is this different to “life like photo real animation that requires no back end labour staring your favourite already famous celebrity skins” ? and also, last time I checked a Human still “directs” this or arguably “writes” this by prompt, and then refines and edits and selects the best result to “show” How is this not just a better animation tool?

Other than the cost of labour, how is this THAT different to animation? it’s not objectively better, it just makes shitty images available to anyone.

Drama is a limited application…. Right

It’s not sacred. it’s just what audiences continue to like. If it wasn’t, then geeze wouldn’t there be a lot more HFR content? There’s nothing stopping you from shooting at any frame rate you like.

You’re making claims that have actually already been tried. Which if you had a clue you would already know. Youre not the first genius to think of this. Peter Jackson made a HFR film with a 270 degree shutter at 48fps for exactly the flawed logic you presented. In his own words… “Changing the shutter angle affects the amount of motion blur captured during movement. Reducing the shutter angle gives you the stroby (or jerky) “Saving Private Ryan” look. However, we’re going the other way, shooting at 48 fps with a 270 degree shutter angle. This gives the 48 fps a lovely silky look, and creates a very pleasing look at 24 fps as well. “ Except it didn’t work and was universally hated in its HFR versions. Oh and because you won’t know how to do the maths, that means a 1/64th of a second shutter speed. Its not about motion blur. It still tanked. Next!

LOL yourself buddy. Kindly present YOUR scientific evidence that counters the already existing BOX OFFICE evidence that in a market that already allows free choice for any frame rate you like the entire world has decided that 24 is what people LIKE. Theres nothing stopping you from going out and making a 69fps masterpiece right now, so go set it up now at Netflix. If an audience preference was for HFR, there would be a lot more HFR content. That is actual fact. Your childish LOLs are just an opinion.

He didn’t retire. He was told to step down for his blatant disregard for others at a time when Australia was at the full height of Covid lockdowns. https://www.couriermail.com.au/coronavirus/millionaire-jeromy-young-and-his-company-atomos-under-fire-after-superyacht-border-breach/news-story/d93a461fe002ecc6863590416bd6ccb3?amp&nk=1ee37250f95936b7d3d792c55479cfbd-1704752061 This behaviour might have been celebrated in the US, but it outraged the general public in Australia. Now he’s done his time I guess? The toxic culture mentioned in the subsequent lawsuit was well established during his tenure. I’m assuming it will be business as usual for these crooks.

NM

+1

No. 12bit LOG uncompressed for more than 10 years. The most very recent model, the Alexa 35 does 13bit log uncompressed.

May I politely suggest you retest on a face? Big difference between 24 color patches and the continuous range in skin.

Yes. Spec chasing nerds. Half the posts here are higher number must be better. Few actual practitioners. It’s ok if you don’t make a living from doing this but you can tell the posters that only care and the technical process and not what it’s in service of. Most successful image makers aren’t posting on forums like these. They don’t even participate in these kinds of conversations because they’re such a small part of the end result. And yeah I’m posting here so what does that say about me.

Fascinating. Super wealthy hobbyists who make fancy home movies think 24p doesn’t look like cinema having never actually made anything with actors or working with a crew and using their family as their evidence of audience approval. Little to no understanding of the difference between acquisition frame rate and distribution or display refresh rate in multiple environments or global territories but still drawing conclusions. So many experts one one place. How lucky we all are.

You are all smart and I think you’re brilliant

Wasn’t HFR enough

Perspective https://aftermath.site/true-lies-4k-uhd-blu-ray-james-cameron-peter-jackson-park-road-post?fbclid=IwAR3b3VsuqvTo-oQGqoXKwbCnecwsIitsFTNIPJn6Q9e0U5e-9CnDfcbe2BQ_aem_ARJEhho1vX53Khd8nl-ybLVB85Xaq75msEdbUm5GS7EjABLhSohni7-OdMbAWzAtAbg

$1000 expensive for an uncompressed recorder? Go away.

I've also decided to opt out. The problem with these engineering technical I read it on the internet types and have an opinion clowns is that they are demonstrably wrong. Even when you point it out to them they seem to ignore that and move onto their next tightly held narrow idea. They post opinions as fact and only demonstrate what they do not know or understand. I've stopped bothering to point out their misinformation. I think the rest of the posters here understand where they are off on their own. Even in the last two pages they've made some really stupid claims without understanding filmmaking fundamentals. They won't even know what I'm alluding to, but it shows that they have only a little understanding of the technology. Just like one thought Titanic was shot HFR. Why bother if they don't want to truly learn or understand.

Some tough love. They will always suck. There is no such thing as a good one. The way they work is by degrading your image. The sooner you accept it the better. I long ago went to straight or internal ND. Do I occasionally use VND? Yeah. But I can count on one hand the number of times in a year. I suspect you need to hear this because you wrote a post about it. Not everyone will agree but throw away the crutch and never look back

You made snide comments saying Jackson Pollock was using the same techniques as children. Your comment says the value of art from an recognised established visual artist is the same as the output of children. Your test is that they would be the same, a variation of the Turing test. That says to me you can’t see the difference in Pollocks work vs a child. Here’s some science. Children CAN tell the difference. Why would I argue with someone who doesn’t see the difference and nuance when 4 year olds can. The problem is you. “Three unexpected findings emerged. First, even 4-7-year-olds can distinguish works by artists from superficially similar works by children and animals when there are no labels to guide them. Second, children’s aesthetic responses are not aligned with those of adults: children often chose works labeled child or animal whether or not this label was correct, and sometimes justified their choices by crediting the effort the child or animal had made (e.g., “it’s really good for an elephant”). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15248372.2015.1014488?journalCode=hjcd20

I think it’s pointless arguing about something that you don’t seem to grasp while ignoring other rebuttals.

Copying. Emulation. It’s reproducing a well known and celebrated source. It won’t be the next Jackson Pollock though. It can only fake something that already exists.

I think you missed the point.

And forgot to add this link ”Indeed, the value of data collected about genuine human interactions with systems will be increasingly valuable in the presence of content generated by LLMs in data crawled from the Internet.” https://arxiv.org/pdf/2305.17493.pdf Genuine human interactions are what will be “valuable”

Humour. AI can tell a joke but it doesn’t get a joke. innuendo. It can’t tell if what’s made is “ good” either. There’s no self criticism. Just patterns and predictions based on data. Humans are storytellers. It’s not just the story telling, it’s the way we tell the story that’s just as important. Performance. Religion. Science. Art. It’s all storytelling and making sense of the world. These giant models of data are t without issues being so inward looking leading to more and more generic results. It’s called model collapse. “This means that the models begin to lose information about the less common -- but still important -- aspects of the data. As generations of AI models progress, models start producing increasingly similar and less diverse outputs.“ “Model collapse is based on the principle that generative models are replicating patterns that they have already seen, and there is only so much information that can be pulled from those patterns.” This type of AI is never better than it’s data. https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/feature/Model-collapse-explained-How-synthetic-training-data-breaks-AI I have no doubt AI will become an important tool. Buts a tool driven by human data and prompts.