Not an entirely film related question, but also kind of (as it pertains to the traditional frame rate of motion pictures shot on film).
Can you see 'smooth motion' (or any other registered trademark brandname for the same concept) on your TV?
It seems that most modern TV's ship with their version of smooth motion turned on. Smooth motion being: 'ai' interpolated frames (often with sharpening and denoising) added by software in the TV to increase the apparent frame rate (and sharpness) of media shot at traditional frame rates. Essentially making things look like they were shot at high frame rate (and hi-def).
At present, I am 43, I can still see it. My parents purchased a new TV a couple of years ago. They couldn't see it. After digging through menus and sub-menus, I was able to turn it off. They never noticed. My partner's parents also recently bought a new TV. It was the same thing. Her parents couldn't see it.
It is probably one of the most unnerving aesthetics. Makes me want to claw my eyes out. I realize that I have grown up with movies at 24 frames/second. That is what my brain expects.
I'd assume that children growing up today will become acculturated to it.
At any rate, my parents are reasonably sighted individuals. I assume that with age, senses attenuate/diminish and perhaps they simply can't see it because their visual acuity has weakened.
We haven't had a TV in my house in 20 years so I can't answer, but my understanding of the need for this kind of thing is that it's related to the refresh rates. It's the same issue with computer monitors.
The cinema standard of 24 fps provides natural-looking motion blur and works well for motion picture projection in a movie house. But it can be problematic on some televisions and computer monitors. Playing 24fps content on a 60Hz monitor can cause judder (motion stutter), because 24 does not divide evenly into 60. On some monitors you can adjust the refresh rate to 24Hz or a multiple of 24 such as 48Hz, 72Hz, or 120Hz to eliminate the judder.
The judder is noticeable to me at times in my videos (I usually shoot at 24fps because I find 30fps looks too much like "video" for my taste) when I watch them on my monitor. I imagine this "smooth motion" thing on TVs attempts to bring them up to 30 fps to reduce judder (assuming the TV has a 60Hz refresh rate). But that smoothness leads to a more video-like image compared with film.
A similar issue occurs when you shoot 60fps and put it into a 24fps timeline for slow motion. Because 24 does not divide evenly into 60, the results are not smooth. Most video editing software can create interpolated frames to smooth it out for you.
This is all based on what I read a few years ago; it's possible that technologies now exist to rectify some of these issues.
I'm quite a bit older and can see it. The main issue is whether you become accustomed to that or not. I generally turn off the smoother motions, but don't mind it. Frankly I would fine if the archaic 24FPS would just go away.
I think audio and film also have analogies. In the early days of high grade digital cameras, we were missing the grain in various areas and images sometimes seemed less sharp, but we are used to that now. In audio we were used to the tape hiss and then dbx or Dolby reduced noise it and we felt that the highs were missing.
bjhurley wrote:
We haven't had a TV in my house in 20 years so I can't answer, but my understanding of the need for this kind of thing is that it's related to the refresh rates. It's the same issue with computer monitors.
The cinema standard of 24 fps provides natural-looking motion blur and works well for motion picture projection in a movie house. But it can be problematic on some televisions and computer monitors. Playing 24fps content on a 60Hz monitor can cause judder (motion stutter), because 24 does not divide evenly into 60. On some monitors you can adjust the refresh rate to 24Hz or a multiple of 24 such as 48Hz, 72Hz, or 120Hz to eliminate the judder.
The judder is noticeable to me at times in my videos (I usually shoot at 24fps because I find 30fps looks too much like "video" for my taste) when I watch them on my monitor. I imagine this "smooth motion" thing on TVs attempts to bring them up to 30 fps to reduce judder (assuming the TV has a 60Hz refresh rate). But that smoothness leads to a more video-like image compared with film.
This is all based on what I read a few years ago; it's possible that technologies now exist to rectify some of these issues.
_jim_ wrote:
But, lots of people can't see the difference particularly well. Which, I guess, is the shocking part to me.
I guess we could turn the question on its head and ask, if you turn off "smooth motion," do you see occasional judder? You should, if whatever you are watching was filmed at 24fps and there was no adjustment to the project framerate.
I see it only at times; it's not apparent in all scenes but if you watch closely you can usually see a bit of it now and then, it looks like a glitch that goes by in a blink of an eye. I don't find it too distracting myself, but some people can't stand it.
I notice it, but I'd much rather have a mild implementation of "smooth motion" and the occasional artifact than the stuttery panning and motion that I feel like I see when it's turned off.
I don't keep up with TV tech, but I've got some of the LG OLED's (C4's and C5's, I think?) and a Panasonic 820 4k player. Supposedly everything supports true 24hz, but I dunno, still looks stuttery at times without any smoothing. Maybe it's a display tech thing, wrong settings, maybe I just notice flicker more than some... There was just a thread in the Nikon forum about PWM, apparently I'm not the only person to notice LED-related stutter.
Just put a camera up to your face and the problem goes away
I don't think it's an age thing, I think it's a savviness thing. You know exactly what to look for and that's not going away with age, unless of course you're afflicted with memory loss.
Agree, don't think this is an age thing. It looks weird/unnerving to see a movie that way, but I don't feel that way about sports (higher) or video games (variable).
bjhurley wrote:
I guess we could turn the question on its head and ask, if you turn off "smooth motion," do you see occasional judder? You should, if whatever you are watching was filmed at 24fps and there was no adjustment to the project framerate.
I see it only at times; it's not apparent in all scenes but if you watch closely you can usually see a bit of it now and then, it looks like a glitch that goes by in a blink of an eye. I don't find it too distracting myself, but some people can't stand it.
This is a good thought exercise. With smooth motion off you would see more judder.
I guess, for me, judder is not as distracting as smooth motion (especially as it often applied with sharpening and denoising) when watching films on TV. SM is really, really awful to my eyes.
As @Cloud75 mentioned, I have no issues with smooth motion when watching sports (as, I assume, they are natively shot at a higher frame rate).
I can see it and don't like it. Makes everything look cheap, like a soap opera.
That said I haven't checked the latest TV sets. I could imagine there are ways to interpolate frames in a less disruptive manner with AI/ML models. Avoid the 24fps stuttering without making the image look fake..
But not sure TV manufacturers really care. Most image "enhancing" features on TVs are designed to draw attention if the TV sits next to others in a store - they don't actually improve anything..
The old film movies since the 1920s were shot at 24 fps, but broadcast TV changed it. Broadcast shot at 29.97 fps, but it was interlaced. There were two simultaneous streams running at the same time, but time shifted slightly. NTSC had 480 horizontal lines of resolution, and PAL had 525 (i think). Ever other line was a difference time - 240 at one time line and the other 240 were at another time interval. Probably measured in milliseconds from each other. Why? Because it gave the impression of smooth motion. I started noticing motion issues in the analog to digital switchover. I own one 120 mhz TV and it is too real - like looking out a window. My wife and I prefer 60mhz TVs, because it is easier to distinguish it as a 2D representation, or not real. I expect we have been condition over time.
EB-1 wrote:
I thought PAL and SECAM were always 625 lines at ~25 FPS, primarly due to the power generation frequency of 50Hz used in most of the world.
EBH
You are correct. I wasn't sure about the PAL numbers. Even at 25 fps it is an interlaced signal. They both employ the same hack to improve motion. Kind of like dithering 256 colors on the first color computers to make photos look better
They had some 100Hz PAL TVs in the 90s from what I recall, but my German was not very good so I did not enquire further how they worked. I assumed it was a double scanning.
Definitely not an age thing! I was just visiting friends around my age who are not camera/movie people and they had it turned on without a care in the world. I immediately became the annoying friend who demanded access to their television remote.
My mom certainly noticed it on her TV and said "it looks weird." She watches a lot of movies, so I do think it's more about savviness.
