Sorry didn’t mean to imply that it was intentional. History shows it was a combination of other random factors.
It’d be more accurate to describe it as a Happy Accident. I might even argue that had the founders not been concerned with film stock costs and that 60fps became the de facto standard, I’d wager film as a medium would not have been as successful. And at some point creatives would have discovered the eerie otherworldly, impressionistic feeling if slightly reduced capture rates.
I disagree with tue contention that “we’re just used to 24”. To reran my analogy, it’s like all those painters who, after photography because widespread as a means of reproducing portraits, began to experiment with forms beyond simply realism. I’m certain that it just struck them immediately as a compelling format. Honestly can you imagine witnessing the first impressionistic painting after a lifetime of consuming only realism? I think it’s impact would be significant.
You might be right, but this analogy to impressionism is an uncompelling argument for me, repeating it doesn’t help me. A lot of older people report feeling like 24fps looks higher quality and more realistic than 60fps, that 60fps feels campy or faked or just “strange”. That isn’t well explained by your posts at all. Being used to realism is a real confounding factor here, since realism doesn’t come in 24fps.
Like many people, I experience some negative reaction to high frames; watching LOTR in 48fps was like watching BBC. But I’m just not convinced that this is something true or fundamental about frame rates, it does feel like the preference might be learned.
And like I said, there seems to be real evidence for this learned association that your argument is completely ignoring. People growing up now who’ve watched 60fps TV and YouTube a lot don’t seem to have the same reaction. How do Brits feel about high frame rates? I’m going to ask a few, I’m not sure I ever have, and it might be informative here. Personally, the strangeness of 60fps has been waning over time, and that seems to support the idea that I was biased to 24 by years of moving watching.
It’d be more accurate to describe it as a Happy Accident. I might even argue that had the founders not been concerned with film stock costs and that 60fps became the de facto standard, I’d wager film as a medium would not have been as successful. And at some point creatives would have discovered the eerie otherworldly, impressionistic feeling if slightly reduced capture rates.
I disagree with tue contention that “we’re just used to 24”. To reran my analogy, it’s like all those painters who, after photography because widespread as a means of reproducing portraits, began to experiment with forms beyond simply realism. I’m certain that it just struck them immediately as a compelling format. Honestly can you imagine witnessing the first impressionistic painting after a lifetime of consuming only realism? I think it’s impact would be significant.
Being used to realism wouldn’t change that.