Ben X

I just went and read one of those pages that Kroms recommended, and I just want to warn people that it is (very well thought-out, convincing but unconfirmed) theories, rather than stuff you might have missed or which is pretty much definite. So if you don't want people working out stuff ahead of time on your behalf, don't read them! The bits about are great to have pointed out, though, because they support something you already know. It's a matter of taste, some people like to be part of the community figuring everything out as much and as soon as they can. Personally, I like to wait for the text to reveal something conclusively, so even if everyone else has guessed something three books ago, I might have missed the clues and be all OMFG. After that is when I like to have people point out all the clever hints that I completely missed.

Yeah, it's that (it apparently eliminates a lot of the judder, strobing etc that can make 3D a headache for some people) and just a more immersive feel, even in 2D. God, I hope I don't absolutely hate 48fps now!

You're not going for an accountant job or something, are you?

Yeah, that's crazy talk, Mington. I did hear that UK cinemas will only be showing the 3D 48fps version, but as far as I can tell (though I can't immediately find anything that outright states this) there's no reason there couldn't be a 2D 48fps version. I found this quote from Jackson, which is pretty cool:

Any thoughts on this, tech nerds?

That's what she said. (The Fleshlight.)

Yeah, I just meant in the "knee-jerk reaction to new film tech that may turn out to become the awesome standard" way. 48fps may turn out to not be any good, but it sounds like the complaint from people who have seen it (only anonymous people who have seen exclusive sneak peeks of The Hobbit, and articles fluffing those quotes up as much as possible, as far as I've read so far) is that they're not used to it being so sharp and smooth. It's not the same as (horrible) motion interpolation on HDTVs which extrapolates a load of non-existent frames and gives the whole thing a weird sped-up feel. I have also seen the term "Soap Opera effect" be explained as due to the fact that soaps shoot on cheap tape with extra frames, so filming at 48fps gives a similar feel. This sounds unlikely to me for a variety of reasons, but perhaps as a British tv viewer (who gets PAL at 25fps to start with) I'm not grasping what people are referring to.

Hmmm, I've heard people complain that it looks like tv soap operas or something, but I'll file that along with the people who complained about widescreen when it was first introduced.

I just thought of another example of this. I remember when, very soon after Buffy S5 (spoilers, I won't bother tagging) introduced Dawn abruptly at the end of the first episode, sci-fi magazine SFX complained about it, saying something along the lines of "Buffy just does NOT have a sister!" It's stuck with me all these years because I was so stunned that when something unexpected happened, this staff of supposedly smart, genre-savvy reviewers immediately just assumed that the writers of one of their favourite shows had changed from being forward-planning and continuity-minded to employing utterly lazy and clumsy retcons. What's more, they screamed about it like Internet idiots. Completely off-topic, but I wanted to rant!

OH NO YOU DON'T.

I SAID: That goes for everyone. TP unclearly stated his opinion that The Hobbit is a very simplistic book, Erkki used a potentially rude sweary acronym, an argument was avoided, the end. Let's all stop stirring up arguments or paying attention to people stirring up arguments, shall we? Ahem, so: how far through did you get, Twig? Is this another thing like The Terminator that you need to retry? Back to the movie, I've realised that I'm particularly set on seeing it in 48fps because I've become a tech junkie. Maybe it comes from being a (quasi) PC gamer, but I nearly wept at the beauty of the opening shots of sand in Inception when I moved from DVD and CRT to Blu-Ray and plasma. About a week later it seemed oh-so standard. I want to be wowed again!

My input was good, right?

A BTTF2 hoverboard prop replica is out: http://www.mattycoll...uctID=259520100 And bttf.com are running a competition to win one. I can't think of anything. But we may as well all have a go. MILD ETHICAL WARNING: don't enter if you want to accept gifts off a man who censors the word "gay" on his forums and gives his status as a Christian as explanation.

Ah ha, I was thinking of getting something like this to keep an eye on my smallish SSD. Do you think the warning to verify with hashes is overkill? I'd need to download a separate program to do that, but then can I trust that program to verify itself correctly?! Who watches the watchmen?

I'll get hover-conversion done in the early 21st century.

Well it's a good thing that TP and Erkki sorted it out already and we don't need to worry about it any more then, isn't it? I remember The Hobbit being a great kids book, although very lightweight (especially now it has LOTR to stand next to). I haven't read it in years, though.

Fleshlight.

Yeah, but "original ideas". Not taking any chances, this is for a goddamn hoverboard.

Don't want any lurkers nicking it!

I was about to say, either every car in Russia has a dash cam with burnt-in timecode, or every Russian cop in a car is a complete lunatic.

I submitted one. I think I have a 30% chance of winning.

You could

Oh bollocks, i copied this over from a similar post at Size Five and it doesn't allow quote trees which always trips me up. Here's the pertinent bit of the email I got from bttf.com: Also added to OP.

It was "how do I contribute to this forum".

That's good. I hear it's very difficult to find a clutterist.