@@mr.blackhawk142 Well, he is a brilliant mind. He created Interstellar so whatever he does I simply can't doubt his intelligence and creative way of thinking
Kids are growing up watching this motion smoothing crap and they think it's normal. Hell, is IS normal to them and high frame rates will likely become the new standard. But that's why FILMMAKER MODE is important--so that there is a clear delineation for the viewer, ensuring they watch movies as they were intended to be seen. I think that, going forward, young people can manage to do this because they already understand putting themselves in the best light as far as wearing cool clothes and style, getting good lighting for Instagram, saying and performing positive things online and for their friends and followers. It's the same concept. You want to ensure that things are being seen just right--these movies look their best when the visual tv settings governing color, frame rate, contrast, etc are set such that what you see is not tinkered with or altered...only what the filmmaker intended.
Only thing is Filmmaker mode actually doesn't allow you to see the movie as the filmmaker intended as it's not based on metadata unique to each movie and because the raw panel colour of every brand of TV is different (hence the fact that calibration on one TV won't apply to a different panel of the exact same TV model). so you're not going to see what they saw on their Sony monitor. It's a gimmick to get the average user to turn off motion smoothing.
I'm afraid of upgrading from my Panasonic plasma 1080p JUST because of that shitty motion smoothing/soap opera look. I hope this film maker mode fixes that
@@balzac308777 I have the last generation of Panasonic plasma TVs and if you haven't noticed there's a little setting where you can turn it off. Try it. besides unless you go for an OLED the Panasonic plasma is still going to give you a better black level than an LED.
I used to like this mode but I noticed being an oled user that having no motion smoothing at all made persistent stutter between frames pretty bad. Also I find a target gamma of 2.2 rather than bt.1886 better for day time film watching as I don't always watch it in a dark setting. I think it's a great picture mode but its probably a bit too aggressive at defeating some of your tvs processing that allow it to offset some of your panels shortcomings or quirks. I would still use it but manually adjust some settings if you find shadow detail hard to see or generally find it too dark or you find it looks too juddery.
please turn off the processing for which you paid 1500€ and watch a movie without it. I understand why. I don't understand how that could be an advertisement of a TV.
For me, it rarely worked fine. Usually, Filmmaker mode tones down the colors and makes the image more misty, milky and darker. No bright colors, nothing, just as a on dusty tv from 30y ago (with uncleaned dust on the screen). The only time that had fine results was season 1 from "The Wheel of Time", on Amazon's Prime Video. I usually turn it off.
I dunno how Filmmaker Mode looked back when it first started. I'm sure it had its kinks as all new technology and settings do. However, since I bought a Hisense U8K which has Filmmaker Mode on it, I've taken all the complaints into account and I just don't see what the problems are. Now, a setting had to be turned off in order for the brightness to be on point(the automatic light sensor ON made the picture look dim to the point of almost no luminance whatsoever), but with FM mode chosen, I see a picture that is pure cinema. The colors are on point, not drab or muted, the brightness and contrast is fantastic, and the motion with 24hz(from the UHD player) and the 120hz(from the TV) produces 24FPS beautifully. This is truly a worthwhile picture setting, but there may be certain models that use it better or worse. Just gotta shop smart and also DO YOUR RESEARCH.
I prefer Filmmaker Mode 1000 X to Dolby Vision, Dolby Vision makes my eyes cringe… if Marty Scorsese and Company says Filmmaker Mode is the way, then it is my go to Video setting and it has been for some years now…
Yeah cinematic motion is the one you want to deal with stutter while stilling honouring 24fps. I'd use cinema home or cinema presets. Colour is still accurate and you just turn off what you want in the clarity menu.
How does it work? I mean, the idea is cool, but how the heck do you know if the movie is compatible with the mode? Cause I guess that my old dvds won’t benefit from this, right?
They will, basically it's just a fancy name for disabling motion smoothing and similar image postprocessing effects in your TV, which lead to the so called "Soap Opera Effect".
It's not about a movie being compatible with FILMMAKER MODE. It's about the TV having the FILMMAKER MODE setting. Every movie can be viewed in FILMMAKER MODE if you have the right TV.
But what if I prefer higher frame rates (loved the Hobbit 48fps), and prefer the standard mode over FMM :( interstellar looks incredible in the imax with a perceived HFR and really saturated HDR.
@@samgod yeah problem is though, most film directors choose to use 24p, and also choose to use legacy cameras cause they don’t want to spend 10’s of millions of dollars to upgrade legacy equipment. This is why we still have media being filmed at 24p, as well as many films use “fake HDR” cause they don’t want to upgrade to 10-12bit cameras or upgrade their grading equipment.
@@TheLazyGamers filmmakers don't shoot at 24 fps because they lack gear capable of higher frame rates, but because 24 fps gives audiences natural, cinematic feel. An emotional, tender, or romantic scene would basically fail at 30 fps, 60 fps, or higher frame rates. The technical superiority of high frame rates doesn't translate into artistic integrity. Attributes for technical filmmaking for science and engineering differ drastically than for storytelling and entertainment.
@@samgod I guess this is subjective, but I’d highly disagree bro. I’ve been playing games upwards of 120hz, games with romance, massive cinematics, and I find that 24hz is more “unnatural”. To me, 24 fps content is way more unnatural, because it doesn’t even look like I’m watching a video, it looks like I’m watching a slideshow. Especially on technology like OLED (which offers instant pixel response time/no blurring between frames), causes major stutter at 24fps, extremely unnatural. I’ve felt more emotional/romance during mass effects sex scene with liara than I’ve ever felt with during any kind of 24fps playback. The same goes with storytelling, there’s a reason why video gaming has surpassed Hollywood in revenue and income. The storytelling in most indie games surpasses anything that Hollywood has released in years. Hollywood and film has mostly become a saturated industry designed to create profit for shareholders rather than compelling stories and pushing the boundaries of video media. You ask video editors why they haven’t moved from rec709 (8-bit) to DCI-P3 (10-bit) despite being around for almost 20 years now and they’ll tell you because it takes more time and money to push out content that way. Same thing goes with 24fps vs 48fps, it takes double the time to render and grade those frames, at least this is what I’ve been told by people I know in the industry. You’ve been fed a lie, it’s not about artist intent, it’s not technically that the gear doesn’t exist, it’s that they don’t want to take the extra money, time, and effort when the industry already operates on thin margins as it is. If that was the case, and they cared about artist intent, then they would still be making films on 70mm. Oh wait that costs more money though, so can’t have that.
@@TheLazyGamers sure, it's subjective, but I've worked in visual effects, broadcast television, and have even as a director of photography. The video game industry has entirely different objectives than filmmaking. For example, the race toward higher megapixels and frame rates is generally counter the goal of cinematographers. Even back when we were shooting exclusively 35mm film, if we happened to be working with a particularly fine grain film stock (equivalent to high resolution), we'd throw a diffusion filter on the lens to soften some scenes. We're not trying to show audiences every pore and blemish on an actor's face. We'd use higher shutter angles to give intimate, tender scenes softer (blurred) motion and lower shutter angles for crips, fast-paced action (comparable to high fps in gaming). We'd use a large aperture to blur backgrounds and direct the viewer's eye to specific points. Gaming, on the other hand, is rooted in user interaction. This distinction creates additional requirements not faced by filmmakers. Game creators must work within the boundaries of human reflexes and perception. It's critical to provide as much information to the player as possible so that he doesn't miss actions and details like bullets and swift movements. Movie viewer's aren't expected to respond to bullets whizzing by as are game players. It's not critical that movie audiences follow fast, chaotic action within a single second of a movie as players do in a game. You do make some valid points. Yes, as much as I hate the annoying soap opera effect in modern TVs and have disabled it completely on my LCD TV, I set it to 1 on my OLED to avoid its characteristic stutter. Yes, video EDITORS don't need to work with HDR content because grading isn't their job. They may cut downscaled proxy footage while the final edit is conformed with the actual raw footage (in film). In broadcast, it depends on the genre: news, sports, and reality programming differ significantly from dramas and sitcoms. Basically, cinematography isn't about presenting as much visual information to audiences as possible. It's about showing only what we want audiences to see. So we use motion blur, shallow depth-of-field, diffusion, and even shadows to minimize visual noise and overload. Audiences were generally turned off by Peter Jackson's experiment with HFR on The Hobbit. He shot 5k, 48 fps, and on a dual-cam 3D rig. Audiences ultimately didn't like such an insane amount of visual information pumped into their eyes.
this is in response to all the numbnuts going to their local best buy picking out the brightest, overly saturated, blue dominant displays with blown out colors
Yes because Filmmaker mode looks terrible and isn't accurate at all. It is just a gimmick to get the average user to turn off motion smoothing, it doesn't improve colour accuracy
@@loughrey101 Obvious you've never seen Filmmaker Mode. 2021 LG C1 77 inch OLED owner. By the way this was straight out of the box. Can it be improve with color calibration? I'm sure it can but I've never seen anything look this good!
@@CesarGonzalez-kt7vp I have the CX, it's basically just an LG panel with post-processing off, it doesn't add anything beyond disabling everything, which you can do manually anyway, unlike Dolby Vision where there is movie metadata for it and is mastered for Dolby Vision. It's essentially a convenient way to turn everything off but you won't get close to reference picture as picture quality varies so much between OLED TV brands.
@@loughrey101 Thanks Christopher. Still doing my research, there's a bit of a learning curve, especially when you have one person likes and the others dislikes.
I think TV manufacturers know a thing or two about these presets they put on their TV. Usually Movie mode is very accurate when you use a calibration disk. At the end of the day you want to choose the right setting according to your environment. Filmmaker mode and Movie mode are intended to be used in total darkness, just like in a movie theather.
How about filmakers stop being so cheap and use modern cameras and equipment that can shoot in 60-120 FPS ? I' really tired of this 24 FPS crap whe the motion is blurred everywhere. I want crisp images no matter how fast the action is!
@@murpho999 Except for the fact that everything is blurry. Would you go in real life to see a blurred race or any other competition ? My fucking phone videos at 60 FPS look better than a movie and they are not games.
I hate 24 and I’d prefer 60fps too but that’s definitely not a budget issue, it’s a cinema standard that hasn’t gotten too much popular demand for them to change. You can also search for The Hobbit trial to increase to 48fps but it was a failure due to the public perception of the film.
@@AndrewNiccol Just because you like to watch movies while you’re driving, working, and doing schoolwork doesn’t mean the vast majority of the rest of us do. Also it’s pretty unsafe to watch videos while driving…
"Filmmaker mode is a mode." -Christopher Nolan.
🤣🤣
Yup! BRILLIANT aint he?!?
@@mr.blackhawk142 Well, he is a brilliant mind. He created Interstellar so whatever he does I simply can't doubt his intelligence and creative way of thinking
And it's crap!
As it's always the lowest quality from Hollywood.
After hearing the name “Filmmaker Mode” that many times, I don’t think I want it anymore.
Like how my boy James Cameron didn't take part by saying "See it in the way it's intended to be seen" and "Filmmaker mode" at the end.
Kids are growing up watching this motion smoothing crap and they think it's normal. Hell, is IS normal to them and high frame rates will likely become the new standard. But that's why FILMMAKER MODE is important--so that there is a clear delineation for the viewer, ensuring they watch movies as they were intended to be seen.
I think that, going forward, young people can manage to do this because they already understand putting themselves in the best light as far as wearing cool clothes and style, getting good lighting for Instagram, saying and performing positive things online and for their friends and followers.
It's the same concept. You want to ensure that things are being seen just right--these movies look their best when the visual tv settings governing color, frame rate, contrast, etc are set such that what you see is not tinkered with or altered...only what the filmmaker intended.
Only thing is Filmmaker mode actually doesn't allow you to see the movie as the filmmaker intended as it's not based on metadata unique to each movie and because the raw panel colour of every brand of TV is different (hence the fact that calibration on one TV won't apply to a different panel of the exact same TV model). so you're not going to see what they saw on their Sony monitor. It's a gimmick to get the average user to turn off motion smoothing.
I'm afraid of upgrading from my Panasonic plasma 1080p JUST because of that shitty motion smoothing/soap opera look. I hope this film maker mode fixes that
@@balzac308777 you can just switch it off 🤔
@@loughrey101 I've tried that with the demos and the picture and motion still looks unnatural and like a soap opera
@@balzac308777 I have the last generation of Panasonic plasma TVs and if you haven't noticed there's a little setting where you can turn it off. Try it. besides unless you go for an OLED the Panasonic plasma is still going to give you a better black level than an LED.
I used to like this mode but I noticed being an oled user that having no motion smoothing at all made persistent stutter between frames pretty bad. Also I find a target gamma of 2.2 rather than bt.1886 better for day time film watching as I don't always watch it in a dark setting. I think it's a great picture mode but its probably a bit too aggressive at defeating some of your tvs processing that allow it to offset some of your panels shortcomings or quirks. I would still use it but manually adjust some settings if you find shadow detail hard to see or generally find it too dark or you find it looks too juddery.
please turn off the processing for which you paid 1500€ and watch a movie without it. I understand why. I don't understand how that could be an advertisement of a TV.
For me, it rarely worked fine. Usually, Filmmaker mode tones down the colors and makes the image more misty, milky and darker. No bright colors, nothing, just as a on dusty tv from 30y ago (with uncleaned dust on the screen). The only time that had fine results was season 1 from "The Wheel of Time", on Amazon's Prime Video. I usually turn it off.
I dunno how Filmmaker Mode looked back when it first started. I'm sure it had its kinks as all new technology and settings do. However, since I bought a Hisense U8K which has Filmmaker Mode on it, I've taken all the complaints into account and I just don't see what the problems are. Now, a setting had to be turned off in order for the brightness to be on point(the automatic light sensor ON made the picture look dim to the point of almost no luminance whatsoever), but with FM mode chosen, I see a picture that is pure cinema. The colors are on point, not drab or muted, the brightness and contrast is fantastic, and the motion with 24hz(from the UHD player) and the 120hz(from the TV) produces 24FPS beautifully.
This is truly a worthwhile picture setting, but there may be certain models that use it better or worse. Just gotta shop smart and also DO YOUR RESEARCH.
I prefer Filmmaker Mode 1000 X to Dolby Vision, Dolby Vision makes my eyes cringe… if Marty Scorsese and Company says Filmmaker Mode is the way, then it is my go to Video setting and it has been for some years now…
You can use FILMMAKER MODE on Dolby Vision. Dolby Vision is fantastic.
using FM on C1 is great. Although I need motion set to Natural to be acceptable because to much stutter on OLED
I switch everything to “Cinematic” Motion on my G1. It enough to get rid of most if not all of the stutter, with the least soap opera effect possible.
Yeah cinematic motion is the one you want to deal with stutter while stilling honouring 24fps.
I'd use cinema home or cinema presets. Colour is still accurate and you just turn off what you want in the clarity menu.
Please Philips make available for all 4k TV's I hated motion on my Philips it's making sonar Opera all the movies
Your can just turn it off it the settings
Who's Phil May Kermode?
I thought it was 'Feel my commode' like they are so rich so they can afford that great furniture in their bedrooms.
How does it work? I mean, the idea is cool, but how the heck do you know if the movie is compatible with the mode? Cause I guess that my old dvds won’t benefit from this, right?
They will, basically it's just a fancy name for disabling motion smoothing and similar image postprocessing effects in your TV, which lead to the so called "Soap Opera Effect".
It also sets the colors temperature to the cinema standard, so that you have the most accurate colors possible.
It's not about a movie being compatible with FILMMAKER MODE. It's about the TV having the FILMMAKER MODE setting. Every movie can be viewed in FILMMAKER MODE if you have the right TV.
But what if I prefer higher frame rates (loved the Hobbit 48fps), and prefer the standard mode over FMM :( interstellar looks incredible in the imax with a perceived HFR and really saturated HDR.
If it was shot at 48fps and you prefer to watch it at 48fps, then filmmaker mode should theoretically honor that.
@@samgod yeah problem is though, most film directors choose to use 24p, and also choose to use legacy cameras cause they don’t want to spend 10’s of millions of dollars to upgrade legacy equipment. This is why we still have media being filmed at 24p, as well as many films use “fake HDR” cause they don’t want to upgrade to 10-12bit cameras or upgrade their grading equipment.
@@TheLazyGamers filmmakers don't shoot at 24 fps because they lack gear capable of higher frame rates, but because 24 fps gives audiences natural, cinematic feel. An emotional, tender, or romantic scene would basically fail at 30 fps, 60 fps, or higher frame rates.
The technical superiority of high frame rates doesn't translate into artistic integrity. Attributes for technical filmmaking for science and engineering differ drastically than for storytelling and entertainment.
@@samgod I guess this is subjective, but I’d highly disagree bro. I’ve been playing games upwards of 120hz, games with romance, massive cinematics, and I find that 24hz is more “unnatural”. To me, 24 fps content is way more unnatural, because it doesn’t even look like I’m watching a video, it looks like I’m watching a slideshow. Especially on technology like OLED (which offers instant pixel response time/no blurring between frames), causes major stutter at 24fps, extremely unnatural.
I’ve felt more emotional/romance during mass effects sex scene with liara than I’ve ever felt with during any kind of 24fps playback. The same goes with storytelling, there’s a reason why video gaming has surpassed Hollywood in revenue and income. The storytelling in most indie games surpasses anything that Hollywood has released in years.
Hollywood and film has mostly become a saturated industry designed to create profit for shareholders rather than compelling stories and pushing the boundaries of video media. You ask video editors why they haven’t moved from rec709 (8-bit) to DCI-P3 (10-bit) despite being around for almost 20 years now and they’ll tell you because it takes more time and money to push out content that way. Same thing goes with 24fps vs 48fps, it takes double the time to render and grade those frames, at least this is what I’ve been told by people I know in the industry.
You’ve been fed a lie, it’s not about artist intent, it’s not technically that the gear doesn’t exist, it’s that they don’t want to take the extra money, time, and effort when the industry already operates on thin margins as it is. If that was the case, and they cared about artist intent, then they would still be making films on 70mm.
Oh wait that costs more money though, so can’t have that.
@@TheLazyGamers sure, it's subjective, but I've worked in visual effects, broadcast television, and have even as a director of photography. The video game industry has entirely different objectives than filmmaking.
For example, the race toward higher megapixels and frame rates is generally counter the goal of cinematographers. Even back when we were shooting exclusively 35mm film, if we happened to be working with a particularly fine grain film stock (equivalent to high resolution), we'd throw a diffusion filter on the lens to soften some scenes. We're not trying to show audiences every pore and blemish on an actor's face. We'd use higher shutter angles to give intimate, tender scenes softer (blurred) motion and lower shutter angles for crips, fast-paced action (comparable to high fps in gaming). We'd use a large aperture to blur backgrounds and direct the viewer's eye to specific points.
Gaming, on the other hand, is rooted in user interaction. This distinction creates additional requirements not faced by filmmakers. Game creators must work within the boundaries of human reflexes and perception. It's critical to provide as much information to the player as possible so that he doesn't miss actions and details like bullets and swift movements. Movie viewer's aren't expected to respond to bullets whizzing by as are game players. It's not critical that movie audiences follow fast, chaotic action within a single second of a movie as players do in a game.
You do make some valid points. Yes, as much as I hate the annoying soap opera effect in modern TVs and have disabled it completely on my LCD TV, I set it to 1 on my OLED to avoid its characteristic stutter. Yes, video EDITORS don't need to work with HDR content because grading isn't their job. They may cut downscaled proxy footage while the final edit is conformed with the actual raw footage (in film). In broadcast, it depends on the genre: news, sports, and reality programming differ significantly from dramas and sitcoms.
Basically, cinematography isn't about presenting as much visual information to audiences as possible. It's about showing only what we want audiences to see. So we use motion blur, shallow depth-of-field, diffusion, and even shadows to minimize visual noise and overload.
Audiences were generally turned off by Peter Jackson's experiment with HFR on The Hobbit. He shot 5k, 48 fps, and on a dual-cam 3D rig. Audiences ultimately didn't like such an insane amount of visual information pumped into their eyes.
ISF/Cinema mode without motion smoothing >>> FILMMAKER MODE
Totally agree
this is in response to all the numbnuts going to their local best buy picking out the brightest, overly saturated, blue dominant displays with blown out colors
You are referring to oled TVs.
@@lewisevanderBro can’t afford an oled lol
@@johnwest6977 I have a c1. So you are wrong lol.
@@lewisevander just a c1?
fill maykah mohd
duffer brothers of netflix stardom
why the reupload?
So if buy a TV with filmmaker mode do I get it calibrated or what?
Yes because Filmmaker mode looks terrible and isn't accurate at all. It is just a gimmick to get the average user to turn off motion smoothing, it doesn't improve colour accuracy
@@loughrey101 Obvious you've never seen Filmmaker Mode. 2021 LG C1 77 inch OLED owner. By the way this was straight out of the box. Can it be improve with color calibration? I'm sure it can but I've never seen anything look this good!
@@CesarGonzalez-kt7vp I have the CX, it's basically just an LG panel with post-processing off, it doesn't add anything beyond disabling everything, which you can do manually anyway, unlike Dolby Vision where there is movie metadata for it and is mastered for Dolby Vision. It's essentially a convenient way to turn everything off but you won't get close to reference picture as picture quality varies so much between OLED TV brands.
@@loughrey101 Thanks Christopher. Still doing my research, there's a bit of a learning curve, especially when you have one person likes and the others dislikes.
I think TV manufacturers know a thing or two about these presets they put on their TV. Usually Movie mode is very accurate when you use a calibration disk.
At the end of the day you want to choose the right setting according to your environment.
Filmmaker mode and Movie mode are intended to be used in total darkness, just like in a movie theather.
Still zero movies supporting it.
It can be turned on for anything though. It just turns all processing off and sets all settings (color, sharpness, etc) to neutral
Watch films the way they were intended to be seen...on film and not video 🤭
Thank you. They should be shot on film too.
@@Toast0808 If the filmmaker doesn't want to shoot on film... then they shouldn't.
ya
can someone lmk when Roku implements this
Uhhhh... just turn off action smoothing?
it took me 5 minutes to find the sub-menu where you can turn it off on my friend's TV.. yeah the tv makers are out of their minds
there could be other post processing that is occurring that this new mode may adjust/remove
I tried that in demo tvs and the motion still looks like crap. Like a soap opera
Oh wow, it disables post processing Lmao!! I can do that already.
bullsh*t
SHOOT films ON FILM, and not video.
thats super costly...
Still doesn't eliminate 'Smooth motion', etc....it's that 'Game only' default setting on most TV's that messes up Movies and their CGI......
can ya'll make a female director mode - jesus
no thanks
Stfu
This sounds like mainstream media promoting the anti co*id vaks🤣🤣🤣
You need help.
It's the cheap Hollywood trying to gaslight us that the filmaker mode is better to accept their cheapness!
How about filmakers stop being so cheap and use modern cameras and equipment that can shoot in 60-120 FPS ?
I' really tired of this 24 FPS crap whe the motion is blurred everywhere.
I want crisp images no matter how fast the action is!
Go play videogames then.
Seriously? There's nothing wrong with 24FPS for movies, they're not games.
@@murpho999 Except for the fact that everything is blurry.
Would you go in real life to see a blurred race or any other competition ?
My fucking phone videos at 60 FPS look better than a movie and they are not games.
I hate 24 and I’d prefer 60fps too but that’s definitely not a budget issue, it’s a cinema standard that hasn’t gotten too much popular demand for them to change.
You can also search for The Hobbit trial to increase to 48fps but it was a failure due to the public perception of the film.
@@Daniel-wn5ye Poor edgy boy, you probably have superhuman eyesight to notice that every single movie is "blurry". Grow up.
Who cares this? People aren't watching movies on TV anymore, we watch movies on smartphone.
Really? I think you're wrong. Everybody watches movies on a TV and it's a much better experience than a telephone and always will be.
I was hoping this was sarcasm omfg
Who the hell wants to watch a movie on a 6 inch phone screen when you can watch on a 65 inch TV?
@@RyanDudziak So I can watch movie on the car, school, office.
@@AndrewNiccol Just because you like to watch movies while you’re driving, working, and doing schoolwork doesn’t mean the vast majority of the rest of us do. Also it’s pretty unsafe to watch videos while driving…