the speed at which an image changes conditions our experience
of it as a temporal object: we can only see things in real time*
to perceive changes happening in real time (life) we must produce movies which
condense the real time into a sped-up version for gradual changes (real time) to
become visible to us in real time
[* which is to say the speed at which we as humans live and interact]
an image change rate of 1 frame per day would be invisible to us as movement until
projected at some faster rate (above 18 fps for smooth movement) we can only see
change rates happened when they are below our visible threshold -- approximate 12 fps
(which is faster than real time change rates) change rates which are equivalent to
real time (or slower) we cannot perceive expect as real time.* This is why narrative
dramatic film can compress real time without causing the audience to be confused:
movies already are a compression of real time
all frame change rates are related to real time
experience, so they can be seen in real time --
they are abstractions of that real time experience
and so are understood by the audience in those
terms -- as artificial time
frames per second
frames per hour
frames per day the speed at which paintings, trees, etc.
frames per week change is measured at a rate much
frames per month slower than what we see in real time
frames per year (i.e. we cannot see it change by sitting and
frames per decade watching except in unusual circumstances)
frames per century
frames ad infinitum...
* the threshold point has something to do with the physical properties of
our nervous-cognitive system, which has evolved to perceive the world at
a specific rate, the zero point called 'real time.' Movies appear to move
because their change-rate is faster than real time, while statics (if they
change) change at a speed much slower than real time.
|
