It's finally time to see how 48fps affects the general public's perception of 3D (or as it's being marketed: "HFR"). I recently got word from a very vocal 3D hater that when watching an early screening of The Hobbit, he did not get the usual headaches and eyestrain, making it much more enjoyable.

Now, assuming 48fps is a good thing and we want to help spread it for use in future movies, it looks like we all need to make an effort to inform our friends and families about it as there seems to be a potentially confusing and complicated path for those who aren't as interested in this as we are. At my local theater there are 4 ways to watch this movie: 2D, "Real"3D, IMAX 3D, and the new HFR 3D. The first 3 options are still in 24fps, and it looks quite easy to become confused if your not already an enthusiast. Making things even more complex is that some theaters showing it in IMAX 3D will be in 48 while others are in 24. Now it looks like some are calling that version "IMAX HFR", while others are being more ambiguous. Please help spread the word that if people want to experience this movie properly they need to seek out confirmed HFR screenings. And once it's out, if you hear someone complaining they couldn't tell a difference or something, try and find out if they were duped into watching a 24fps version while thinking they were supposed to be experiencing something new.

I personally see this movie as very important in helping move 3D film making forward, and we really only get one chance at a first impression here. Hopefully the 400 or so theaters showing it in HFR will be enough to change some minds and open the door for greater possibilities. Cameron has said he wants to film Avatar 2 in either 48 or maybe even 60fps, and how well this movie does in addition to the public's reception will be big factors for whoever tries to break the 24 frame barrier next.

It's been a week now since the Hobbit was released, so hopefully all of you have had a chance to check out the HFR version by now, if it's available in your area. As this community was created explicitly for those of us who actually like 3D and aren't against change, hopefully this will be a good forum for discussion.

I've obviously been a huge supporter of higher frame rates for quite a while now, but it was all theoretical in my head until last weekend. Now that I have real world experience with it, I have to say I'm torn. I don't know what to think about it. I need to go back and see it again I think... There were parts that looked incredible at 48fps, but I definitely understand the uncanny valley arguments now. All the CG looked amazing, but I think we're going to need quite a bit more experimentation and exploration of the format with live action before we get it right. To me, it felt more like I was watching a live play being performed rather than what my brain has the predetermined notion of being so called "filmic."

Oddly enough, while I've read many people arguing that the high motion action sequences looked great, I personally felt they were the most awkward feeling and really enjoyed the slower more intimate scenes myself. I've also been seeing quite a few discussing that the concepts of what makes for proper panning and cutting need to be completely rethought for this format, and I definitely agree.

All that said, I think I like it...maybe? But, I'll need to see a few more directors give it a shot to really form a solid, strong option. What did you think?