I live in Pal land and have been asked to shoot some file footage for a friend who owns a production company in USA.The question is should I shoot Interlaced or Progressive as im not sure the final medium.Which is the most future proofed medium?

I'm not sure what "file" footage is, but shouldn't the decision for progressive
or interlaced be the "clients" choice? It it is progressive then it can be easily
converted into NTSC 24p. Going to 29.97 fps either in progressive or interlaced
can result in bad looking footage (depends on the program doing the conversion).

Perhaps some test conversions is a good thing to do?

Don,

I'd call your friend and ask which format would suit him/her. There are programs which convert from one format to another but not sure if it wiil work between PAL and NTSC. In the mean time, maybe you could explain to Rob what file footage is.

Dan

File footage/stock footage.
previously-shot footage or film of common elements or scenes, such as canyons or deserts in the American West, or travelogue shots (eg, skylines, airplane takeoffs/landings, famous places, etc.) that are kept in a film archive and used to fill in portions of a production, thereby saving the time of reshooting similar scenes over and over.

I thought that was "stock" footage. Oh well, if you still need to shoot that
then ask your friend what he would like.

Good luck!

Same difference. Newspapers and television newsrooms keep "file photos" or "file footage" to go with stories they print/broadcast. Say they were doing a story on the crash of a 747. If they don't have actual footage of the event, they'll use file footage of a 747. It could be sitting at an airport, or in the air, but it just gives a visual aid to the story. The same with politicians, celebrities, or geographic locations.

Dan