June 11, 2016 at 7:53PM, Edited June 11, 8:15PM


Avatar Sequels and why HFR might not work (Film v Digital) and My Stuff....

Hey Guys,

This is my first blog. I have been researching and developing my script and want it to shoot it HFR on 16mm and 35mm film. Do check out link. I wish Nofilmschool had a blog post. I shared many technical things about shooting at HFR on blog. Please share your opinion.



Good information but please don't be another Alex Ferrari and use unrelated tags and advertise your own content.

June 14, 2016 at 8:33AM

Clark McCauley

Thanks..!! And sorry dude... I was just excited... Had hundreds of things in my head.. Though I tagged things I have written in blog.. Next time I will make it short..

June 18, 2016 at 12:50AM, Edited June 18, 12:53AM


If you have the budget to shoot on 35mm you don't need my help. Good luck to you, there is not digital vs film war, just options to shoot your movie, altho shooting film at about 10% of Hollywood movies is more an anomaly.

October 30, 2016 at 2:00PM


Thank you for this post. I especially love the comment from Dean Goodhill and have corresponded with him myself a few years ago. It's a dirty shame his system didn't get off the ground. Not only did it allow HFR and more efficient use of film real estate but virtually eliminated jitter and film flexing. A common flat 1.85:1 print through one of his projectors easily looked far sharper and more stable than the standard projectors of old.

I'm sure you did your research but I suggest shooting your movies on S16 and not anamorphic. Anamorphic optics lose light and clarity, which cannot be spared on HFR/16mm. I suggest a pin-registered Arri with the best prime lens possible. The advantages of HFR are lost if the film flexes and jitters. When I was shooting film almost exclusively, I preferred V2 100T and treated it like 50T even indoors! It was BEAUTIFUL! Sadly, Vision2 100T is long gone, which was higher resolution than Vision3 stocks, but V3 200T shouldn't be too bad. Still, it takes a lot of light to get a 1/120th shutter time and F4-F5.6 iris where the best sharpness is.

One thing people pushing digital cinema didn't like to tell people is that it can do 4K, 48fps and 3D but only one of those at a time. Maxivision could do 4K+ @ 48fps AND in 3D!
P.S. When Showscan was created, people complained that it looked too much like video, so beware of the common perception that smoother motion = cheap TV.

October 31, 2016 at 7:13AM, Edited October 31, 7:54AM


Like what was said before, if you have the money to shoot on 35mm than there's kinda little help needed. One thing I will say, from my own experiences with using film cameras is that the higher frame rate you go the louder it gets. Also some vintage anamorphics open up to T 1.3 and 1.4.... and some are very useable at that stop. IF you want newer than Master Anamorphics go to 1.9, but honestly it's better to shoot on master primes since the master anamorphics are super clean, flat, and have no character. Master primes open to T1.3 have a closer focus distance and can go super wide. Really still puzzled why Zeiss made they're anamorphics that way

December 3, 2016 at 1:51AM


You have a lot going on in your post.

I would recommend against trying for high frame rate film acquisition for anything other than a tech demo. While the concept is sound you will be limited to short takes without having custom mags created. Additionally you need to take into account the ability for the camera bodies to get up to speed and wind down will be longer than for traditional 24fps. Factor in there are no new camera bodies, so you will be over-cranking at the newest a 20 year old camera.

Now if that doesn't scare you off and you go digital the cost and complexity of the project go down a lot. The main thing you need to keep in mind is how do you expect people to see this movie?

Peter Jackson literally had the influence to have special projectors and DCP players made and installed to show his film. Many top end post facilities will be able to master you a DCP, but very few theaters will be able to play it.

You can however attempt to master for a 60FPS youtube presentation as they are an available distribution format. The problem with that is getting paid. Putting a big expense into a production budget that can only been seen in a limited revenue distribution channel will force you to make compromises elsewhere.

If you happen to have access to a distribution channel than can show HDR then you can ignore all of that.

Technically there is a separation between acquisition temporal resolution and display temporal resolution. There isn't the direct link you are making between camera frame rate and display refresh rate. Different aspect of the camera, such as shutter angle and display type keep the delineation.

I am not sure where you got the 55 refresh number for the eye. Perhaps you are referring to flicker perception? Even then that is brightness dependent. There is a pretty marked difference in watching 120fps vs 60fps in terms of image motion appearance.
Doug Trumball gave some presentation of material at differing frame rates using modified playback and projectors to show the material (http://cinefex.com/blog/ufotog/)

Try to focus on the effect of HFR and how the framerate 'unreality' can be used to further a story. There are really interesting effects when you have characters interacting at different framerates.

Imagine a shot captured at 120 fps. You then use motion flow to make your 'super person' the 60fps max. he moves in an unnaturally smooth fashion compared to the other characters that are motion flowed down to 24 then back to 60 so 120->24->60
It makes most shots VFX shots, but it is a really cool effect to see. 2 people moving at the same speed and interacting with objects that react the same but one is different.


February 2, 2017 at 11:35AM


Your Comment