Originally Posted by Snowmen
Wouldn't 3D at 48 FPS be 24 FPS per eye anyway?
They don't hand out hundreds of $100 shutter glasses at movie theaters, they use polarized lenses, which is half the problem IMO.
Not that I like current shutterglasses either. I tried them once at a display in a store, it reminds me of running a CRT at 60hz. You can get away with 60hz on LCD's because it's a constant image, it just updates at 60hz, when the entire image is rapidly switching on and off it needs to go faster. Even back in the 90's I was never happy with CRT's below 80hz.
IMO shutter glasses need to run at 120hz with a 240hz monitor (100hz and 200hz would be good enough if they wanted to go that route).
Originally Posted by nolimits882000
I've been reading up on this, and as I shoot short films, I'm not excited about 48fps. I don't like the look of soap opera TV which is what something shot at 48fps is looking like. Read a couple articles as well as critique from people in the industry, and they're not for it either
It's really irritating when progress is stalled due to the personal opinions of a few people in charge.