An interesting article came across my Twitter feed (@InByTheEye) today about the the high frame rate of 48fps and what it means to cinema: http://badassdigest.com/2012/12/11/how-48fps-will-wall-off-cinema-history/

@WillMcKinley asked "Will 48fps do to 24fps what color did to black & white?" In other words will it render 24fps obsolete?  Will today's filmmakers and audiences lose their eye for a smaller frame rate and come to think those films simply look outdated - and dismiss them for 48fps, until something "better" comes along in technology and then switch to that?  For those of us that love old black and white and films, choppy silent movies, and bright technicolor films of the 50's - the answer is No.  But to many - they want their picture to be made from the latest technology - that's part of the draw to the theater.

I think it's exciting that our industry is constantly evolving and coming up with new technologies. But rather than constantly trade one method in for the next, and phase out film stock or editing systems, I'd like to see directors choose a "material" that is right for their story: 24fps, 48fps, film, digital video, 16:9, 4:3, technicolor, b/w, 35mm, 70mm, 2D, 3D, etc...  I understand that cost is factor. But I think it would make the film world so much more interesting if filmmakers chose their medium like painters choose oils over water colors or pastels.  It's been done recently, and it's always a novelty when realeased.  But I see a tremendous creative opportunity here and would like to see it become the norm rather than the exception.

What are your thoughts? 

(film still from "The Docks of New York"