Forgot to mention that cork does not collapse in the same way as the foams usually specified in hemlmets. Nor will that thick wooden shell deform as it should. I don't know who the testing authority are, but I don't trust them.
LisaL as Chad has already pointed out many cinemas/theaters are not making huge profits now, so the only way they will be able to upgrade is by putting up ticket costs. This will be quite a dilemma for them; do they upgrade and put up the prices and risk driving customers away; or do they stay at 24fps and risk losing punters to competitors who have 48fps.
Were I in the business I would wait and see. 3D looked like being huge, but audiences preferring 3D have really dropped off. Many just don't see the point of paying extra to see the movie in 3D, others find 3D gives them a headache. Either way audience figures for the UK at least show that where audiences have a choice the majority are choosing 2D. Likewise with 48fps, will people be willing to pay the premium it will cost over 24fps? As 3D audiences seem to have found, it's the content that matters more than the technology. We will pay for the content, most of us are not so happy to pay extra for a technical gimmick.
Two things. Firstly I recall a study some years ago which found that the human eye can't detect any significant difference beyond about 30fps. If that's true then this is nothing but a gimmick.
Secondly anonymous coward 60Hz is not 60fps and we're not talking 48Hz here were talking 48fps. Go an read up on the difference between scan frequency and frames per second.
And how many people voted? What choices were they given?
I suspect you may no be dealing with a group that represents the feelings of most Britons. I think if you asked most Brits you would get the answer Adolf Hitler.
Love it. And it's very well done. Some people thing you just have to stick your voice through a ring modulator to sound like a Dalek, but it still takes some vocal talent to get the voice just right. And what's more the new Daleks just don't sound right.
Don, they call it my lane myopia, a condition typified by the statement "it shouldn't be there, so I don't have to look for it". However I think that guys hitch cover sums it up even better. Anybody with that sticker probably spends a lot of time hitting the vehicle in front.
The reason a lot of movies set in England are filmed elsewhere is not because there are no remnants of, say, Victorian England left. The real reason in that it's quite hard to film in England for logistical reasons. Especially when you have to close a road, remove the modern traffic, dress the "set" to get rid of traces of modernity, etc. etc.
They once shot a factual programme down our street and didn't need permission from householders. When they wanted to shoot a period drama piece (set in the 1950s) and the production company needed permission in the form of a signed contract from the owner of every house that was in shot and had to pay each of them a facility fee. Obviously they needed permission from the local authority and had to jump through legal hoops for the road closures. In some European countries, especially the old eastern bloc things are much easier and cheaper.
Were I in the business I would wait and see. 3D looked like being huge, but audiences preferring 3D have really dropped off. Many just don't see the point of paying extra to see the movie in 3D, others find 3D gives them a headache. Either way audience figures for the UK at least show that where audiences have a choice the majority are choosing 2D. Likewise with 48fps, will people be willing to pay the premium it will cost over 24fps? As 3D audiences seem to have found, it's the content that matters more than the technology. We will pay for the content, most of us are not so happy to pay extra for a technical gimmick.
Secondly anonymous coward 60Hz is not 60fps and we're not talking 48Hz here were talking 48fps. Go an read up on the difference between scan frequency and frames per second.
I suspect you may no be dealing with a group that represents the feelings of most Britons. I think if you asked most Brits you would get the answer Adolf Hitler.
No. You make your own choices. If you choose to be influenced by others that's your problem.
They once shot a factual programme down our street and didn't need permission from householders. When they wanted to shoot a period drama piece (set in the 1950s) and the production company needed permission in the form of a signed contract from the owner of every house that was in shot and had to pay each of them a facility fee. Obviously they needed permission from the local authority and had to jump through legal hoops for the road closures. In some European countries, especially the old eastern bloc things are much easier and cheaper.