Is Soarin' getting a makeover?

[doconeill]

I wasn't impressed with the clarity of Soaring the last time I went. It's gotta be digital, right?

They should not only increase the resolution, they should increase the frame rate. That's partly the secret to why Captain Jack looks so realistic in that new ride at HS.

It's not digital, it's film. As I've been saying, it's taking time for digital projection to get up to snuff. It will be there later this year (if on time).

[Some over-simplification below...]

Increasing the frame rate is not generally a solution that is needed, either. On average, the human eye can't discern more than 30 frames per second. That's the frame rate of North American standard TV video (with new digital standards, it can vary somewhat), and film is typically 24 true fps (shutters - those spinning disks with the holes in them, multiply the "frame rate" two or three times, but it was of the same frame two or three times...but it tended to fool the eye as smoother motion.

Why 30 and 24? In North America, Alternating Current electricity is fed into houses, etc. at 60 cycles per second. NTSC TV (the old analog standard) actually projected 60 half-frames per second...one frame was the odd lines, and one frame was the even lines. It happened to be convenient to use the AC as a timing mechanism. In other countries where AC runs at 50Hz, the video full frame rate is 25fps (PAL and SECAM systems). New digital standards have adopted similar rates, but also have additional ones (like full 50/60fps "progressive" video, etc.)

For film, the reason is a bit less clear, but it happened to work out to be 18 inches of 35mm film per second.

The 48fps being tested by some films mainly reduces "motion blur", which you can see especially when there is fast motion and you look at an individual frame - the object moving is blurred. A faster frame rate reduces that blur, so can provide a crisper image in situations of motion.

That's why there are two different standards for HD resolution and frame rate in the US...1080i and 720p. 1080i is a higher resolution, which is generally desirable - but it is also an interlaced video at 30 full frames per second (also called 60i). But broadcasters that were sports heavy wanted smoother video, and pushed for a progressive 60 frames per second (60p), but the resolution had to be smaller to fit in the same bandwidth.

Response on The Hobbit's 48fps were mixed...I haven't seen it yet, but I think it was just that the sharpness threw people who are used to film. It's sort of like when I see an LED-lit HDTV, vs. my older fluorescent unit...it just looks different.

 

[punch57]

Just saw this on American Coaster Enthusiasts Facebook page and didn't see a thread here on it.

Thoughts?

http://disneyandmore.blogspot.com/2013/07/soarin-update-soarin-hd-version-in-2014.html?m=1

Will they update the dome screen ??? It is starting to look pretty shabby !!!

 

[dizzwizz]

As much as Id like a new film, they need to do something with the projection system, and get a new one. The film's quality is out of date and is scratched and flakey. If they would just clean the film, remaster it in HD, and keep it nice, Id be happy. When I go on the ride anymore I feel like I'm watching an old documentary.

I couldn't agree with you more. The big, black dot completely annoys me every time I try to watch this. I don't know how others either don't see this massive dot (either on the print or on then wall) or can handle it better than me!

 

[Mac4life30]

Soaring over FL

Please anything but that!

 

[castlecouture2011]

Soaring over FL

Please anything but that!

That entire article is about "Soarin over the world." Not once have I seen any mention of a Soarin over Florida option.

 

[StephyDee]

Well, when Soarin' eventually DOES get redone (and obviously it will at some point), I agree with the author of that blog, in that, I hope they keep either the same score, or keep the key elements of it. It's such an epic piece that I love listening to when I ride, and to imagine a completely different soundtrack would be too much of a sudden shock for me. Gradual change in that department would be fine.

 

[Jonathan Swift]

Increasing the frame rate is not generally a solution that is needed, either. On average, the human eye can't discern more than 30 frames per second.

That's incorrect. http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

The 48fps being tested by some films mainly reduces "motion blur", which you can see especially when there is fast motion and you look at an individual frame - the object moving is blurred. A faster frame rate reduces that blur, so can provide a crisper image in situations of motion.

It's crisper because your eyes can tell the difference and more realistic. The camera doesn't need to rely on motion blur to make your brain believe the motion is continuous. TVs with that gimmicky 120Hz feature are interpolating frames. http://www.hometheater.com/content/frame-interpolation-godsend-or-devils-spawn

 

[doconeill]

That's incorrect. http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

Well, I did say it was a simplification - what I probably should have said is that 30fps was generally sufficient for the average eye.

It's crisper because your eyes can tell the difference and more realistic. The camera doesn't need to rely on motion blur to make your brain believe the motion is continuous.

It isn't so much that the motion blur was necessary - it was a side effect of how it was filmed. But our brains accepted the blur as motion.

The interesting thing is that a lot of the feedback regarding the 48fps showing of The Hobbit, in that it was TOO crisp, which people disliked - but that may be due to conditioning of what people were used to.

TVs with that gimmicky 120Hz feature are interpolating frames. http://www.hometheater.com/content/frame-interpolation-godsend-or-devils-spawn

Anything that has a refresh rate higher than the source rate is doing interpolation or "pulldown" (what they do when converting 24fps film to 30fps video, for example), or frame duplication. In the case of those TVs, it had to do with the original refresh rate of LCDs, which was generally slow and had an impact on the display, sometimes making it sluggish. The 120Hz refresh rate TVs do a lot better at it...but they have to show something for the "in between" frames. The can either show the same frame twice, pulldown (display frame 1, display odd lines of frame 1 and even lines of frame 2, then display frame 2 - I think it's a 3:3 pulldown or something like that), and a bunch of other different ways.

 

[JB2K]

Soarn' over Fla can continue to have the orange grove smell....after all, most people associate Florida with Oranges much more than California. But that is just in case they do Soarn' over Florida.

Really? Did you know Disneyland was built next to an orange grove in a place called "Orange County"?

 

[doconeill]

Really? Did you know Disneyland was built next to an orange grove in a place called "Orange County"?

Yes, although there are many counties and towns also named "Orange", but only the ones in CA and FL that I know of are named after the fruit or at least in association with it...others are often named after the principality of Orange in what is now France...

But I can say in my experience up here in New England, I associate oranges with Florida - but that's probably due to locality, and the fact that most orange juice is produced in Florida, where as produce oranges primarily come from other states including CA.

But if you want to get into overall orange production, Brazil has us beat...about 2.5 times the entire orange crop of the US...

Are we sufficiently off topic yet?

 

[Paging Tom Morrow]

What would be the smell soaring over New York?

Success.

 

[Disco]

Really? Did you know Disneyland was built next to an orange grove in a place called "Orange County"?

Considering that Florida produces 70% of the oranges consumed in the US and has earned the nickname "The Orange State", I tend to associate it more with oranges than CA. I'm sure they have an orange county too and I know they have a giant "orange" tower as an attraction. All that packed into a smaller state is a heck of a lot of oranges everywhere you look (except maybe WDW LOL).

 

[Jonathan Swift]

Well, I did say it was a simplification - what I probably should have said is that 30fps was generally sufficient for the average eye.

It's sufficient because we don't perceive the lack of fidelity due to motion blur. That doesn't imply that low frame rates and motion blur are realistic to our eyes. A 60Hz or 120Hz frame rate will seem more real and less like a film assuming the shutter speed is sufficiently small. That's probably why the frame rate of Johnny Depp is so high in "The Legend Of Captain Jack Sparrow" attraction.

It isn't so much that the motion blur was necessary - it was a side effect of how it was filmed. But our brains accepted the blur as motion.

Motion blur helps the brain fill in the gaps of the "low" framerate. The shutter speed is what determines the amount of motion blur, not the frame rate. Here's an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZi7sUhtAVY

The high shutter speed video is not higher frame rate, but has less motion blur and each frame is crisper. The resulting video, however, may look funny due to the low frame rate. Movies and music videos sometimes use this "effect."

http://photo.tutsplus.com/articles/shooting-articles/quick-tip-how-does-shutter-speed-affect-video/

 

[Disco]

24 fps was the minimum speed that they determined would work for creating the illusion that pictures were moving. That was important to note as back in the day as they had to hand crank films. So basically you wanted to find out what the absolute minimal speed was so you wouldn't tire out the projectionist.
Here we are, over a hundred years later, living with the same standard. There is a huge improvement in stepping up to 48fps and I would prefer to see everything at 60.
I did see the Hobbit at the higher rate and it was weird the first 10 minutes as everything looked like well, sort of like a live play. But you get used to it and it is just a better picture. People, in the future, will comment on how crappy our media standards look just like we now look at the 80's standards.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

8k isn't high enough res?

Doc is correct. 8k would be a noticeable decrease in resolution for Soarin'. That's not to say it wouldn't be better, given the current condition of the system, but the res technically would be lower.

I'm with Doc. 2014-2015 at BEST. We're just not there yet.

 

[phineasfan100]

Really? Did you know Disneyland was built next to an orange grove in a place called "Orange County"?

In fact DLR WAS an orange grove. WDW and DL are partly located in an Orange County (there is also an OC in NY (Where I Live)).