Projectors used in cinemas, what resolution do they have?

[huhn]

i just have to ask.
if a movie is 60p how would a 24p version of it be watchable?
how do you turn 60 to 24 without extreme judder if it was 120 i can see it but 60?

[Balling]

i just have to ask.
if a movie is 60p how would a 24p version of it be watchable?
how do you turn 60 to 24 without extreme judder if it was 120 i can see it but 60?

Nvidia driver cannot even play 60.000 fps video on 60.000 fps display without duplicating and dropping 3 frames. Hollywood does not use nvidia, they use nvidia cuda, and optical flow that smears 10 and more frames together trying to get to other framerate. It requires a GPU farm. Nvidia's optical flow can also do some of it, but it kinda worse than what some folks from MSU (Moscow state univercity that is) here talk about. https://www.compression.ru/video/frame_rate_conversion/index_en.html

[Balling]

True, they could have easily divided it in fields and outputted a 29,970i which would have been bobbed to 59,940p by the TVs, so it would have been just as smooth.
I don't know why they haven't done that...



Dude, two different people replied xD
The last reply was from William, not me, and he lives in the U.S, while I'm stuck in Italy xD
You're replying to 2 different people xD



I was talking ahout you being in Italy. Obviously :) as for dolby stuff, this is a new version of dolby vision now supporting cinema trims Dolby Vision XML version 5.1.0. This was all discussd here https://professional.dolby.com/events/dolby-vision-technical-updates/

I also rechecked what Atmos is for theater. It is more complex than that... Dolby Atmos in theaters has a 9.1 "bed" channels for ambience stems or center dialogue, leaving 118 tracks for objects, which I suppose put into 6 channels...

[wonkey_monkey]

Still in any big city you would have at least 60.000 fps Marvel. Again, all masters for Marvel are 60 fps...

Can you provide ANY evidence to support this claim?

The idea that they shoot at 60fps, interpolate up and then cull down to 24 is just ridiculous. 99.99% of theatrical films are shot at a native 24fps, except for special scenes where a certain effect might be needed (and even then the end product will still be 24fps).

[Balling]

Can you provide ANY evidence to support this claim?

The idea that they shoot at 60fps, interpolate up and then cull down to 24 is just ridiculous. 99.99% of theatrical films are shot at a native 24fps, except for special scenes where a certain effect might be needed (and even then the end product will still be 24fps).

We know some movies are shot at integer 24 fps, yes, cause some people like to post right from the scene, someone posted "Irish man" cameras in action, e.g., it was in 24.000, as in later on Netflix. Same about CGI, some people like to paste unlisted links to Maya workflows and it is sometimes set to 60, which means master is 60. Unfortunately https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4154796/technical?ref_=tt_spec_sm does not say anything about the masters' fps. I think it was written on some cinema booking site that it is HFR movie (and 3D+) in the cinema. And it was like a lot of movies. I saw it 2 years ago and now I will obviously not find it. Still, it is commonly known everyone should move to 60 fps projectors in next 2 years according to Dolby business plans...

[wonkey_monkey]

So no, then. No Marvel has ever been shown, or even shot, at 60fps. There's just no way it would have gone under the radar.

Not to mention that, every time it's been attempted, HFR has so been an unmitigated flop. It'd be a waste of time and money.

Still, it is commonly known everyone should move to 60 fps projectors in next 2 years according to Dolby business plans...

Well that's Dolby's business if they want to do that. No-one's going to be making any films at 60fps to show on them though; not in the next 2 years, probably not in the next 5 years. Even 10 wouldn't be a good bet. The only good reason to switch right now is for sports and other live broadcasts.

[Balling]

So no, then. No Marvel has ever been shown, or even shot, at 60fps. There's just no way it would have gone under the radar.

Not to mention that, every time it's been attempted, HFR has so been an unmitigated flop. It'd be a waste of time and money.



Well that's Dolby's business if they want to do that. No-one's going to be making any films at 60fps to show on them though; not in the next 2 years, probably not in the next 5 years. Even 10 wouldn't be a good bet. The only good reason to switch right now is for sports and other live broadcasts.

HFR is literally all of youtube. What are even talking about. Opera effect is because of upscale, native content with correct panning will never have such an effect. You know our eyes do not have such an effect, yet they have 500 fps and even more on side vision.

"There's just no way it would have gone under the radar." Is it? Prove it. Because if neither I no you can provide any evidence, we will be just stuck.

Nikon Z9 does 4k 120 even in N raw, no problem. 8K it is only 60 fps, bit still. Panasonic too.

There are in fact a special section on youtube that does 120 fps on x2 speed. LG C9 supports that, too, in Youtube app. Yep.

https://youtu.be/h5DQIkyBQU0
https://youtu.be/f8MNWmmQSmA

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrlSOktpqII0WXNcW1dWvAD0cBGsevnV0

[wonkey_monkey]

HFR is literally all of youtube.

I mean that's not even true to begin with, but every HRF Marvel video you see has been created by a fan using off-the-shelf interpolation tools.

Opera effect is because of upscale

That's also not true. It has absolutely nothing to do with upscaling (or interpolation, if that's what you actually meant).

We simply associate high framerates with cheaper, "soap-opera" production. It's an arbitrary convention, really, but it's a convention nonetheless.

yet they have 500 fps and even more on side vision.

This is also not true. The human vision system is extremely complex and it's impossible to objectively assign a single specific "framerate" to it. It doesn't work like a camera.

"There's just no way it would have gone under the radar." Is it? Prove it. Because if neither I no you can provide any evidence, we will be just stuck.

You're the one making the extraordinary claim. The burden of proof is on you to back it up.

If I told you that Marvel's next film was going to be 49fps, shot on SD cameras, use all practical effects, and be an $250,000 budget adaptation of the 1977 Amazing Spider-Man TV series, and told you that I expected you to accept it as true unless you could disprove it, would that be reasonable?

There are in fact a special section on youtube that does 120 fps on x2 speed. LG C9 supports that, too, in Youtube app. Yep.

All very interesting but none of that is going to persuade feature film makers to adopt HFR any time soon.

[FranceBB]

HFR is literally all of youtube.

So?
Taking aside that, YouTube has other problems, like hugely bitstarved encodes which are literally unwatchable AND the fact that real-time streaming is still all in the old crappy VP9 rather than AV1 and only non-live videos are encoded as AV1. Not even that, I picked the "Prefer AV1" in my settings, but I'm still occasionally served VP9 on some videos. Last but not least, AAC 128 kbit/s 44'100Hz with high frequencies cut off in 2022 is inacceptable. You might argue that they also have Opus at a slightly higher bitrate, but it's still very bad.
Still, none of this has any relevance or affinity with what we were discussing and... with all due respect with youtubers (some of which I follow too like Tom Scott), we can't compare cinematic productions with pseudo-home-made (although well done) videos on YouTube...

every HRF Marvel video you see has been created by a fan using off-the-shelf interpolation tools.


Exactly.



You know our eyes do not have such an effect


We're not saying that high frame rate isn't important. Heck, I'd love to have everything at high frame rate. We're just saying that it's not worth it for companies in terms of money 'cause only a niche of people cares (which is probably the entire population of this forum and no one else).
And just FYI most people don't know about any of this, but will leave linear interpolation turned on in their TVs and watch everything interpolated nonetheless, living "happily" and "ignoring" what the real framerate actually is.


The human vision system is extremely complex and it's impossible to objectively assign a single specific "framerate" to it. It doesn't work like a camera.


Precisely.




Prove it.


If you want the mediainfo at 23,976 of the UHD versions, I think both me and William can provide them, but this info is probably on IMDB already anyway.



Nikon Z9 does 4k 120 even in N raw, no problem. 8K it is only 60 fps, bit still. Panasonic too.


You do realize that we're saying A and you're replying B, right?
We know that there are cameras that can easily shoot at high frame rate. Heck, all the sports contents we produce in UHD is natively shot, processed and aired at 50p, while there are higher frame rate cameras for replays which are slowed down to 50p if we need to show something in particular etc. This isn't news, it's a well known fact and no one here is saying that you can't shoot at high frame rate.
What we're saying here is that in the overwhelming majority of the cases, when it comes to movies and tv series, the final version (and the one they make VFX etc in) is 24000/1001, due to several reasons and this is what consumers usually get. There are exceptions, sure, Gemini Man, as you pointed out, is one, but it's the outlier here.


none of that is going to persuade feature film makers to adopt HFR any time soon.

Yep. I can only agree with everything David said.

[Balling]

I mean that's not even true to begin with, but every HRF Marvel video you see has been created by a fan using off-the-shelf interpolation tools.





What is your point? No Marvel movies was ever on 60p for a consumer (on a blu-ray or streams)! These are native 60/1.001 from Blu-ray: https://youtu.be/i82xURPkLWo
https://youtu.be/t-R8PIADl7s https://youtu.be/7zCywLzJJs8

Of course it is possible to assign fps and megapixels to our vision by reading the neural network that processes it, and it was done for vision and for hearing. You can even increase the size of NN by wearing some bad glasses for while, just like if you wear upside down glasses, your vision will flip upside down. In fact color space also is quite complex, e.g. we can see ultraviolet color if we replace our real lens with artifical or if a person has tetrachromatic vision. Recently this year it was discovered some of the math was flawed back when XYZ 10° observer was done. But that was known for a long time. It is also how any modern camera work, iPhones have neural net and so does Pixels.

"If you want the mediainfo at 23,976 of the UHD versions, I think both me and William can provide them, but this info is probably on IMDB already anyway."

Do you even read what I write? IMDB does not have DI fps, only resolution. Anyway, how would you provide it? It is all under NDA.

"You might argue that they also have Opus at a slightly higher bitrate, but it's still very bad."

What are talking about! Youtube devteam still preserves AAC for multichannel audio, that is why. All devices use opus nowadays, I do not have any devices that use aac. In fact it caused some problems for 5.1 sound on youtube, since Opus must be switched to aac for that.

"That's also not true. It has absolutely nothing to do with upscaling (or interpolation, if that's what you actually meant)."

It has indeed everything to do with interpolation (smoothing) and slightly with panning method. That is what Stacy Spears says too.

"Not even that, I picked the "Prefer AV1" in my settings, but I'm still occasionally served VP9 on some videos"

AV1 is only available on videos after 1 000 000 views. Usually. I think Youtube people sometimes set some movies to test some stuff on a large sample size... oh, and also after those geniuses deleted Vp9 codec for 8k60 hdr, it is now possible to force it with uploading 8K60 HDR videos. Sure.

[FranceBB]

What are talking about!


This is the file taken from the official YouTube/VEVO channel of Tom Grennan, untouched.
I passed it through the Constant Q Transform (Brown Puckette) using one of my open source projects on GitHub for mpv (https://github.com/FranceBB/mpv-scripts) and took a snapshot of three different moments in time. Do you see ANYTHING missing on the right hand side?

https://i.imgur.com/C93N1jR.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/1YH3fqB.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/VZWIVLA.jpg




No Marvel movies was ever on 60p for a consumer!


Which proves our point and with this I'll close Doom9, stop replying and get back to actually do far more productive work than replying to you here.

[Balling]

I also watch Tom Scott, but it is not 60 fps...

What I was talking about is Marco Reps, this video... https://youtu.be/qhr6h7wuqo0

This was very nice, it was talking about some Switzelrand references of resistence. Nice thing.

AAC is obsolete for youtube. No one should use it. No one does usually. A problem with frequncies is due to them no using the flag to preserve all frequncies, 14-20 kHz are removed https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/Encode/AAC

"Which proves our point"

IMAX is also not availble on Blu-ray, only on Disney+.

As for Tom Grennan, I see opus, I do not know what did you use, but certainly nothing official like youtube-dl https://imgur.com/a/1IOSIwg

Opus is everywhere, try to find some video without opus.

[wonkey_monkey]

What is your point? No Marvel movies was ever on 60p for a consumer (on a blu-ray or streams)!

Nor in cinemas, nor anywhere, because they are not shot or produced in 60fps.

So why have you been claiming they are?

All Marvel is 60 fps.

Half of all cinema content is at least 60 fps nowadays [...]. All Marvel is.

Still in any big city you would have at least 60.000 fps Marvel. Again, all masters for Marvel are 60 fps...

Of course it is possible to assign fps and megapixels to our vision by reading the neural network that processes it, and it was done for vision and for hearing.

I think you have a very mistaken understanding of how the senses work.

[wswartzendruber]

I'm just remembering now that Iron Man was shot on 35mm film.

[Balling]

Oh, I also love this channel. It was 60 fps 4 years ago. https://youtu.be/cQCsDfEqr9o

"I think you have a very mistaken understanding of how the senses work."

I at least use tensorflow and alphafold. You did not ever use any neural filters in Photoshop or new AI stuff in Davinci (18) or use some cool AI stuff in nuendo, did you? Again, I say cinemas use 60p fps masters often. Frankly speaking 60 fps of Gemini man looks like 24 fps. As it supposed to be, there is only some [big] differenes in craziest motorcycle sequencies.

Anyway, I said I can't prove it to you. :) So you may want to prove it to me. Some NDA pdf. Haha.

P.S. you do not even know that if you were to wear flipped glasses that put the picture upside down, it will in 3 days make you see upside down picture without glasses. I do not think you know how many ms is spend on AI rendering of binocular fusion (or binocular rivelry) in the brain and how much with one eye open. Do you know we understand position of sound from the nanosecond difference between left and right ear using an immensly compilcated neural network, but also through the bones? Do you know that google proved that emotions can be emulated by selective overactivation of nuerons in 2021, partially how ot is done in humans too? If all those answers is no, then you are not in any way experts in this field (machine learning and maybe some neuroscience, so medical).

[wonkey_monkey]

This is just turning into some weird stream-of-consciousness nonsense now.

[wswartzendruber]

Yeah you guys kind of went off the tracks there.

[spoRv]

AV1 is only available on videos after 1 000 000 views.

Absolutely false; one day I decided to check every single clip I watched with less than one thousand views, and most of them were AV1; I'm talking about two months ago, more or less.

About Marvel movies: an insider assured me that all their DCPs are at 24fps - apart the ones in 3D which are 48fps.

[Balling]

Absolutely false; one day I decided to check every single clip I watched with less than one thousand views, and most of them were AV1; I'm talking about two months ago, more or less.

About Marvel movies: an insider assured me that all their DCPs are at 24fps - apart the ones in 3D which are 48fps.

That is 24 for each eye... AV1: I watch most of stuff on a tablet without av1, so situtation may have changed recently. A link to some video?

[spoRv]

That is 24 for each eye...

I know, just to point out that they are NOT 60fps :)

AV1: I watch most of stuff on a tablet without av1, so situtation may have changed recently. A link to some video?

It depends on what you watch clips; on a PC and a media player which support AV1, even videos with hundred views is AV1, like the following for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqpfSoVlVqY

[richardpl]

What those pictures above should represent? That filter is bad at representing high frequencies.
Its only useful to display low frequencies. Most of high frequency data is cut out.

[FranceBB]

Most of high frequency data is cut out.

Yeah, precisely.
YouTube cuts off high frequency data on AAC files, which is why you can't see them in the chart.
I'm currently at IBC, so I can't show you another graph, but if I did the same thing on a non YouTube encoded AAC, it would fill up the whole graph, showing high frequencies. The same goes for pcm etc. ;)

This is just to show that YouTube is applying a pre-processing before re-encoding to AAC 128 kbit/s.


About Marvel movies: an insider assured me that all their DCPs are at 24fps - apart the ones in 3D which are 48fps.

Just like I thought. Thanks for confirming this. :)

one day I decided to check every single clip I watched with less than one thousand views, and most of them were AV1

Yeah, I can confirm this.
The only ones that were not AV1 were live streams which were kept as VP9.



Anyway, long story short, now that the whole community has proven balling wrong on all points, I think we can call it a day.

And please balling, do yourself a favour and don't reply to this topic any further.
I don't mind open discussions, but there's literally no point in keeping this going at this point.



Thanks everyone who chipped in to state the truth and get facts right, I'm sure debunking those it's really gonna be useful for everyone who's gonna read this conversation in the future. :)

Have a lovely evening, everyone! :)

[Balling]

Yeah, precisely.
YouTube cuts off high frequency data on AAC files, which is why you can't see them in the chart.


Not youtube, but libfdk-aac and BTW, I think Paul was talking about the filter, people use Audition for this usually. Again, opus does not do it AFAIK, and no one should use (chrome and android app does not) mp3 or mp4's aac no longer, they are all too old and low quality. You do not use GSM codec, you use VoLTE's EVS... I am still not convinced about Marvel issue, but at this point I may be mistaken.

[rwill]

Balling truly is spectacular. Theoretically he practically knows everything.