Your opinion is shared by many it seems. That’s interesting that you saw it twice. I’m glad to hear the HFR was less jarring and noticeable the second time around.

Yes, the Blu-ray (as well as Blu-ray 3D) standards would have to be reworked to accompany 48p *per eye*, but if HFR catches fire (and I think it will), I am sure a 48p release will happen at some point.

This past Sunday, upon discovering that 48 fps might not be possible on Blu-ray, I decided to go see it again in the same format. This time, aside from the first minute or so, I had no problems adjusting and I pretty much didn’t even think of it anymore. So I do think that it is possible that we will get used to it in time just as I imagine people in the silent era got used to the sudden change from variable 12-24 fps to constant 24 fps.

Thanks for the comment Robert. Yes, daytime soaps, low budget that they are, as well as news, are typically shot on video at a format timing of 60i (with a broadcast rate of 29.97 frame/s). This not only avoids telecine judder but better fits the style of the medium. Even the seemingly trivial jump from 24 to 30 is instantly noticeable; we expect movies to follow the former rate and traditional programming the latter.

As we increase the frame rate, the relative differences become less obvious. So for example, the gap from 24-30 is more readily apparent than the gap from 48-60, all other parameters equal.

Thanks for the comment, Alan. This is an excellent point. While I think our cognitive associations will certainly shift over time (i.e., our central nervous system is particularly malleable), I think younger generations accustomed to MCFI on LCD panels in their parents’ homes may be already there. Since this setting is often enabled by default on modern displays, there may actually be kids out there who haven’t viewed non-interpolated 24p material. This is crazy to me.

So yeah, in these situations, The Hobbit’s format may be old hat.