Frictional Games Forum (read-only)
Technology in Film Survey (For College) - Printable Version

+- Frictional Games Forum (read-only) (https://www.frictionalgames.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Frictional Games (https://www.frictionalgames.com/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: Off-Topic (https://www.frictionalgames.com/forum/forum-16.html)
+--- Thread: Technology in Film Survey (For College) (/thread-23588.html)

Pages: 1 2

RE: Technology in Film Survey (For College) - Khyrpa - 10-13-2013

1. 20
2. 10?
3. Sci-fi, adventure, fantasy, drama, documentary?
4. Almost never
5. I don't know
6. home
7. Pros: sound, video quality. Cons: getting there, other people, no pause, I guess in some cases localization (subtitles, dubs).

8. While equipment at homes is getting closer to the sound and video quality of cinema, figure something that makes the experience better (3D, 100fps, whatever that is still too expensive for home).

9. Avatar
10. No
11. Once people get over the "soap opera effect" I think it will just straight out feel better. Sure 24fps can be like an artistic choice.

RE: Technology in Film Survey (For College) - Mechavomit - 10-13-2013

1. 21

2. 9

3. Sci-fi, adventure, horror

4. Once every two/three weeks on average.

5. Fairy reasonable, even cheap compared to other countries.

5. I prefer cinema

6. Pros: video and sound quality, chance to hang out with friends. Cons: costs and annoying people (though I very rarely get those)

8. Anything CGI-animated

9. I always pick 2D over 3D anyway, so I can't say for sure.

10. Anything that is more than 25 frames looks weird to me. Too smooth, much like a home-movie.

But people were saying similar things about color TVs, so I guess I could get used to it.

RE: Technology in Film Survey (For College) - Bridge - 10-13-2013

(10-13-2013, 11:06 PM)i3670 Wrote: I thought we could only register 24 frames/second. So I guess it'd be redundant.

This is clearly not true, otherwise there would be no difference between 24 Hz and 60 Hz refresh rates. There is a very noticeable difference between 24 fps and 60 fps when playing video games for example. Anyway, the answer to this is much more complicated than a simple number, since there is no "refresh rate" as such. I'm not completely sure, I have only read a little on the issue, but it seems that humans can theoretically "register" up to 200 frames per second under the right circumstances.

RE: Technology in Film Survey (For College) - Froge - 10-14-2013

1. 18-21


2. 8


3. Sci-fi / Fantasy


4. every 3-4 months


5. 10% more expensive than I'd want it (about $13 per movie where I live)


5. completely equal 50/50 split


6. pros: theatre much more immersive, cons: i have to go out


7. Make better stories


8. dark knight rises


9. yes


10. should be 60/fps like my games

RE: Technology in Film Survey (For College) - VaeVictis - 10-14-2013

Spoiler below!


1. How old are you?
26-30

2. On a scale of 1-10 how much do you rate Film as a form of entertainment?
6-7. Depending on what we're talking about here.

3. What are your favourite genres of film?
Documentary, drama, psychological, sci-fi

4. How often do you go to a cinema to watch a film?
Rarely. I'm not much for the crowds.

5. How do you feel about the prices of going to the cinema?
Little to expensive.

5. Do you prefer going to the cinema or watching films at home?
At home.

6. Name one of your biggest Pro's and biggest Con's of watching films in a cinema.
Pros-more immersive experience
Cons-crowds, expense

7. What do you think producers can do to increase the amount of people that go to the cinema?
Probably have to take that up with the marketing department.

8. Off the top of your head, name one film that relies on modern technology in order to entertain?
Avatar

9. Do you feel too many films are being produced in 3D at the moment?
Yes. This technology seems to come in waves and patterns. It does little for me.

10. Many feel that the future of film is the switch to 48 frames per second, your thoughts on this?
No opinion.



RE: Technology in Film Survey (For College) - CarnivorousJelly - 10-14-2013

Spoiler below!

1. How old are you?
13-15, 15-18, 18-21, 21-26, 26-30+?

2. On a scale of 1-10 how much do you rate Film as a form of entertainment?
Insignificant - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - Most significant thing in the world

3. What are your favourite genres of film?
Horror, sci-fi, drama, pretty much everything that matches my interest in books

4. How often do you go to a cinema to watch a film?
Once a month-ish

5. How do you feel about the prices of going to the cinema?
They're a little bit high - even higher when 3D is involved

5. Do you prefer going to the cinema or watching films at home?
At home

6. Name one of your biggest Pro's and biggest Con's of watching films in a cinema.
Pros:
- Get ticket stubs
- Socialize
- See movies closer to release date
Cons:
- Not cheap at all
- Long line-ups
- Set times for movies (arriving either early or late is a pain)
- Limited viewing (seat sales)

7. What do you think producers can do to increase the amount of people that go to the cinema?
There's not too much. They could start taking some small risks in stories and characters (I can understand some of the ideas would be considered 'too risky'), like having more movies that actually make you think. The cinematography could also use a few tweaks, for example, the cinematography in the BBC Sherlock series (each of those words is a different link) is phenomenal, and the slow-motion scenes in the Sherlock movie are pretty neat too.

8. Off the top of your head, name one film that relies on modern technology in order to entertain?
Avatar - without the digital art and the 3D, the movie would not have been received so well. Story line was cheap and predictable, characters were shallow and undeveloped, etc., etc..

9. Do you feel too many films are being produced in 3D at the moment?
Absolutely. 3D adds to the price and it's not all that interesting - the novelty wears off within a few minutes, glasses are uncomfortable, and the effect causes headaches in some people

10. Many feel that the future of film is the switch to 48 frames per second, your thoughts on this?
It's probably going to be more significant for the producers than for the audience. I don't think I would notice the change that much unless it's implemented in a unique or interesting way. Similar to graphics in video games (I don't mean aesthetics), the importance of frame rate in movies is not going to make much of a difference past a certain point. Once all major issues are fixed (think silent-film era or N64 games and compare that to Avatar and Dear Esther), it's not going to have much impact or hype.

I hope that helps :D