48FPS was hardly even available! Most theaters don't have the equipment to handle it yet. You would have to go out of your way to find a theater showing it. None around me were. Sorry, but the B & W comparison makes zero sense, as there were not 2 versions made of those movies. A great majority of people who saw the Hobbit saw it in standard def. I imagine the Academy screeners were all in standard def, too. It only makes sense to judge it in that format. At least until(if ever?) it becomes more common.
Didn't Life of Pi win best Cinematography? That's an odd one. Especially considering all the best shots were CG. Life of Pi did indeed win Best Cinematography, and the tiger was all CG :P I do agree with you on The Hobbit. 2D, without 48 FPS is how every other nominee was shown, so it's only fair that The Hobbit is given the same treatment. I hate 3D anyway lol.
Was the tiger CG? If it was, it was DAMN well done. I watched that movie assuming the whole time that it was a real tiger.
As far as the Hobbit goes, the merit of the award consideration should be based on the standard movie without 3D, and without 48FPS. I saw it without these and thought it looked great. Not perfect, but still great.
Eh, I dunno, they were pretty intent on pushing The Hobbit as being seen in 48 FPS. To me that's like saying you should watch Crash and Brokeback Mountain in black and white because Good Night, and Good Luck was in black and white. I didn't enjoy the high FPS or 3D at all but I think they can be treated like any other tool used to make a film.
Heh, it was the opposite for me. The theatres I went to only had it in 3D/48FPS.
I didn't really hate the 48 FPS, it's probably like the 3D where some people can see it better than others, but for me the 48 FPS + 3D made everything a blur whenever action scenes were happening.