FLA FUR BIS FLE Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 I don't think that's from the Hobbit lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 samples of score: http://player.qobuz.com/#!/album/0794043163920 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr lopez Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 I don't think that's from the Hobbit lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salvatorin Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Did you like me on 1:10? yeah that part was dramatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaarg Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 We shot it like four times. On one shot I got 4 arrows in my thighs and balls. It was supposed to be funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 I can't wait for this film, i hope the dodgey Narnia animal CGI will be improved for the final movie. The original trailers for King Kong made King Kong himself look kinda shit, but in the end he looked really solid ( i thought) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubin Farr Posted November 8, 2012 Author Share Posted November 8, 2012 Do they meet the trolls seen in Fellowship in this first movie? That will be a cool tie in besides Gollum, etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 yes they do for sure, but Smaug probably not until movie 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J3FF3R00 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 You guys. I am excite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Haven't been this excited for some jaw dropping visuals in awhile. I suspect this will be the best 3D film (if @ 48fps) yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 one thing i just found out that makes me a little bummed out about the Hobbit is no bigatures this time around. Something about not being able to film them in 3d to match them up with the live action scenes. Oh well, from the trailer it looks alright but now at 2nd glance i can definitely tell we're seeing a much more CGI-ified landscape, especially in the shots of Rivendale. To me the bigatures in the LOTR trilogy is part of what makes it so breathtakingly beautiful. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. King Kong had some great bigature work as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J3FF3R00 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Haven't been this excited for some jaw dropping visuals in awhile. I suspect this will be the best 3D film (if @ 48fps) yet. I feel like I'll have to see it in 3D/48fps, just because it was shot in that format. I usually prefer to skip 3D presentation, unless it is a horror movie. I'm still suspicious as to how 48fps projection will look. I'm a die-hard film nerd and something in my gut tells me it won't feel as "filmic" as good ol' 24 fps. I guess we'll see, won't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 guess the camera rigs are too large. that is a bummer, but I suspect the CG will look more impressive at 48fps as well because for me one of the bigger issues with CG currently is how it blurs and composites with the surrounding real elements and with its own elements. with everything at a higher frame rate the motion blur will more naturally impact around/surrounding where you focus, providing a more fluid and constantly detailed rendering that has depth and details depending. basically its more precise and relies less on artificial blurring. more akin to real life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 maybe it's not that big of a difference, but couldn't find a bigger picture unfortunately to me it just looks slightly less realistic and more of a Pixar cartoon, i hope i'm wrong in the end though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 which footage is that from? the old technique is definitely superior but I know CG is capable of looking better than that lol so hopefully its still early footage/looks doper in theaters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 the first still is from the 2nd Hobbit trailer, the bottom still is from Fellowship of the Ring when Frodo visits Rivendale right before the council scene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-vHWLmLBIc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J3FF3R00 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 guess the camera rigs are too large. that is a bummer, but I suspect the CG will look more impressive at 48fps as well because for me one of the bigger issues with CG currently is how it blurs and composites with the surrounding real elements and with its own elements. with everything at a higher frame rate the motion blur will more naturally impact around/surrounding where you focus, providing a more fluid and constantly detailed rendering that has depth and details depending. basically its more precise and relies less on artificial blurring. more akin to real life That makes sense, but higher playback frame-rates usually end up looking "video-y". I think all of this was discussed in this thread at some point. I'm not about to look it all up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 at least we'll just some score work that is actually halfway decent and memorable. One of the thing that bothers me about modern hollywood movies is the scores are so fucking mundane. There are a few exceptions though, the score to Dark Knight Rises, a handful of modern Elfman scores like his score for the Errol Morris doc Standard Operating Procedure and Speilberg's Tin Tin film. Inception was alright too but beyond those i have little to no memory of anything that's stuck with me after watching a new movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 guess the camera rigs are too large. that is a bummer, but I suspect the CG will look more impressive at 48fps as well because for me one of the bigger issues with CG currently is how it blurs and composites with the surrounding real elements and with its own elements. with everything at a higher frame rate the motion blur will more naturally impact around/surrounding where you focus, providing a more fluid and constantly detailed rendering that has depth and details depending. basically its more precise and relies less on artificial blurring. more akin to real life That makes sense, but higher playback frame-rates usually end up looking "video-y". I think all of this was discussed in this thread at some point. I'm not about to look it all up. My suspicion is that it looks videoy in 2D but in 3D it looks realer... just as 24fps frame rate in 3D looks stuttery (when elements are moving faster/panning shots). The higher level of detail at 48 in 2D is bringing more attention to the fact that you are looking at something on a plane. 24fps provides a natural blur/softness to motion that resembles real life. 48 in 3D is closer to reality (has natural blur). Natural 24fps blur/softness is over the top in 3D basically and makes a more blurry image that causes headaches. Cameron is shooting Avatar 2 at 60 fps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Official HFR list: http://www.thehobbit.com/hfr3d/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaarg Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Hobbit: 6.5/10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 How does it compare to the other movies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 pretty sure gaarg is fucking with us, not even Prince William got his advance screening yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaarg Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 It's a joke prediction, didn't mean to fool anyone. I do imagine it will strike my taste at around 6.5 out of 10 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.