[erichocean]

The argument for 24 frames per second is that:

a) adequate sound sync is maintained when projecting film

b) reducing the frame rate to the minimum humans need to perceive something as continuous motion leaves the maximum amount of detail "missing". This in turn produces a dream-like quality, and frees up the mind to spend brain cycles on non-visual things, like the story, acting, etc.

(a) is now outdated: we can get rock-solid sound playback at any frame rate today, thanks to digital projection. Personally, I find playback of 24fps material on a 60fps LCD monitor to be annoying – there's always that judder.

This makes me wonder if we shouldn't drop the frame rate further, to 20 fps. This would have a nice even multiple for our 60 fps LCD screens, and also maximize the dream-like quality we associate with films, but with zero judder.

Anyway, food for thought. :)

[excuse-me]

Alternatively you could run your TV at 50h so you can simply convert 24/48 fps film while saving yourself 4% of the time to make a nice cup of tea