Hacker News Reader

You could easily add high quality motion blur in 60 FPS if that was the desired look.

More FPS is really no different that increased resolution. There is nothing sacred about 24, 480 or 1080.

It's all conditioning ;)

How would you add lush blur to a tracked shot in 60fps? The exposure wouldn't last as long so you'd have to do it digitally wouldn't you? Then it can be hard to keep the tracked subjects unblurred or can make things look interpolated.

The lenses would still have a limited depth of field though, like a photo from an SLR.

Wouldn't that make the background be blurred? Or is that kind of blur somehow different to motion blur?

Motion blur indicates direction, you could maybe use a weird aperture shape to simulate it, but things at different depths wouldn't blur right due to not picking up different parallax movements the same way, and other moving objects that weren't in focus wouldn't have their motion blur picked up correctly.

Oh yeah, that makes sense.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com