The 48fps format makes ‘Avatar 3’ hyperrealistic. It’s just what turns back part of the public
The new installment of ‘Avatar‘ is distanced, in technical terms, from practically all the other films with which it shares the billboard: Cameron’s thoroughness when it comes to capturing his vision in images has led him to generate, for example, 45 different versions of the film adapted to the conditions of each possible type of theater. This has also led him to declare that the best format to see this third installment it is at 48fps. But not all cinemas are prepared nor does it necessarily have to be a dish to the taste of all viewers. What are 48 frames per second. James Cameron wants us to see 40% of ‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’ at 48 frames per second, double the film standardconvinced that this system offers the most natural visual experience to capture the world of Pandora. However, all previous attempts to impose HFR (High Frame Rate) have failed, since ‘The Hobbit‘ until ‘Gemini‘ by Ang Lee. The reason: to the untrained eye, the image is too sharptoo similar to home video. The question that remains is: why does Cameron opt for a technology that systematically causes visual rejection in viewers? Why Cameron likes it. James Cameron maintains a personal position on HFR: he refuses to classify it as a cinematographic format, but rather defines it as a creative tool at the service of narrative, comparable to any other technical resource. Approximately 40% of ‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’ has been shot at 48 frames per second, concentrating mainly on the underwater sequences and flight scenes where, according to the filmmaker, the increase in visual clarity enhances the feeling of spatial presence. How it works. Cameron’s technical strategy is articulated through the Variable Frame Rate (VFR), which dynamically switches between 24fps and 48fps according to the expressive needs of each scene. As Cameron explainshe framerate high is counterproductive in moments of dialogue or everyday interaction, where it generates an unwanted hyperrealism that emotionally distances the viewer from the fiction. Therefore, scenes with characters talking or walking remain in the traditional standard. The technical process is completed with TrueCutMotiona technology that allows you to adjust the level of motion blur and image smoothness scene by scene. This granular control is intended to avoid the dreaded “soap opera effect” that worked so poorly in ‘The Hobbit’. Cameron conceives of the HFR fundamentally as a technical improvement for 3Dnot as an autonomous aesthetic revolution. In Spain what is closest to Cameron’s proposal is lto Cinity technologyof Chinese origin, which only screens the Odeon network in five theaters and which combines 4K, 3D and HFR. Why does it look like that? The reason we see 48fps with that extreme smoothing effect is because cinema has operated at 24 frames per second since sound demanded standardization of projection speed a hundred years ago. Each frame captures the image for approximately 1/48 of a second, generating a motion blur that the human brain interprets as natural or rather, as “cinematic.” He HFR duplicates that information: 48 images per second with half speed motion blurwhich equals more sharpness in fast movements. The technical advantages apply above all to 3D projections, as Cameron assures: framerate High resolution prevents the image from blurring when panning, and reduces eye-straining flicker in 3D projections. It also helps maintain clarity in low-light scenes, where traditional 24fps results in blurry images. It’s your fault. What we must keep in mind is that the problem that we associate with 48fps It’s psychological, not technical.. Viewers have been trained for a century to associate 24fps with cinematic narrative and framerates superiors with television broadcasts. When the image is too sharp, the brain immediately detects the artifices of the staging. Digital effects, makeup, sets, everything is camouflaged with 24fps images, because we enter more easily into the lie of cinema. The HFR, however, is too clear, too revealing. Previous failures. The first major commercial commitment to HFR came in December 2012 with ‘The Hobbit’. Peter Jackson filmed his entire Tolkien trilogy at 48fps using RED Epic cameras, but the critical and public reaction was devastating because the image was too sharp, almost like that of a reality show. Technically there were no objections to the result, but at the same time it proposed an aesthetic opposite to what was expected from a fantasy story. The HFR versions were never released in domestic format, which makes them curious pieces of lost media in the digital age. Ang Lee went further with the semi-unknown ‘Billy Lynn’ and with ‘Geminis’, which raised the fps to 120. The first could only be projected in those conditions in six theaters around the world and the second, a few more but not many: fourteen in the United States. Both failed commercially, since the HDR versions were released covertly fearing a failure like ‘The Hobbit’. Once again the hyperstylized and fantastical aesthetic came face to face with the dizzying hyperrealism of 120fps. The exhibitors, in addition, they had to acquire HFR licenses for $500 for equipment that they would almost never use. In Xataka | It is possible that ‘Avatar 3’ will sweep and raise millions of dollars. And it is perfectly possible that you lose money despite it
