At its core, tastes are subjective, and this is no exception.<p>The appearance of video is harsh and artificial. It's cold, but also at times exceptionally clean, crisp and vivid.<p>Music videos (as the very term suggests) often display a mastery of this style of production, which, when met with intent, can prove evocative in its own way.<p>If you approach movies knowing that the motion smoothing is a side effect of the monitor, it's actually an interesting way to rewatch old movies and shows. It has a surreal effect, and the movies themselves are otherwise impossible to truly change. It is unquestionably the technology introducing a new layer of distortion.<p>Which can only mean one thing: the preference is generational, and with time it might just so happen that a generation gap will erase all knowledge of the way things were, and there will arrive a new normal, distorted and alien to those who grew up exposed to the original norms.
I remember I got a tv a many years ago that had a cinema setting with accurate colors.<p>The only problem was that you pretty much had to watch it in dark room (LCD before LED backlighting).<p>During the day I had to switch back to vivid.<p>I will say that most aspect ratio problems have gotten better over the years (excepting maybe youtube)
Old man yells at cloud. I bet he reminisces the "good times" at Yale learning on hand cranked 16mm. Dont want Motion Smoothing? Start shooting in 60Hz.<p>> motion smoothing is fundamentally ruining the way we experience film<p>and fluid perception of reality is ruining this journos life I bet
If I’m not mistaken, video already is broadcast at 50/60 Hz. If so, how do broadcasters turn a 24 frames per second movie signal into a 50/60 frames per second video signal?<p>I would guess they use some (advanced) interpolation. If so, isn’t the problem one of a) interpolating twice instead of in one go and or b) using lower quality software inside the tv?