60i to 24p

Brandon Freeman · December 14th, 2007, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taky Cheung

I think it was the other way around. You got more motion artifacts from 24F than in 60i. It shows especially if you do some panning shots.

I think he's referring to MPEG-2 encoding artifacts. Less pictures to encode per second = less stress on the codec.

Cole McDonald · December 14th, 2007, 12:00 PM

Keep in mind that resolution loss is not the only factor in the resulting image...as has been mentioned before. When the software converts from 60i, it has to guess the extra lines using complex mathematical algorithms that can guess wrong. You'll get goofy edge stuff in motion areas with limited contrast. This doesn't happen when capturing in frame/progressive mode...you just get that timeslice written to tape with whatever amount of natural motion blur happens within that timeslice.

Chad Ream · December 16th, 2007, 10:24 AM

I agree with Taky, during a shoot with 24F I experienced the jaggies and was really disappointed. Any other time 24F is very impressive. If its a planned shoot and panning is considered... use 60i just like you would if you were planning a slow motion shot.

Chad

Pat Reddy · December 16th, 2007, 11:35 AM

If you shoot in 24F you should have fewer compression artifacts in panning and high-motion scenes than with 60i in the same circumstances. With 24F the codec has more "headroom". But you will have to watch out for the standard high motion issues associated with any 24P filming. If panning is too fast, the video will be choppy. If the shutter speed is too high you will see a strobing effect. Shutter speeds of 48 are commonly used. You can increase or decrease this to achieve the look you want or to accomodate exposure issues. You can also pan as fast or as slow as you want if it serves the look you are going for and you are happy with the results.

Pat

Seun Osewa · December 16th, 2007, 11:55 AM

Use 60i. Convert it to 24fps only if you want to print to film. 60i is simply better (smoother) than 24p. 24p judder is a shortcoming of film, not a feature!

Philip Williams · December 16th, 2007, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seun Osewa

Use 60i. Convert it to 24fps only if you want to print to film. 60i is simply better (smoother) than 24p.
<snip>

Well that's highly subjective, isn't it? :)

I much prefer my videos from my XHA1 in 24F mode over 60i. I'm not a fan of the standard ultra smooth 60i video look at all. My first DV camcorder was the original Canon Elura which I bought specifically because of its 30P mode. It wasn't quite 24P but it did offer a nice filmic alternative over 60i.

To each their own of course!

Cole McDonald · December 16th, 2007, 06:36 PM

I don't like interlaced at all. The combing during motion drives me nuts and forces me to deinterlace every single piece of footage I shoot, my solution is to shoot in Frame mode to lose my 30% rather than the 50% of deinterlacing. Plus I get the nice averaged motion of a shorter timeslice that looks more cinematic than the right now video feel of 60i.

These are all personal opinions (I think lots of folks here share them), but 60i is great for doing slo mo work and for getting that news-cast immediacy that the public has been assimilated to...in much the same way that they have been assimilated to seeing progressive footage with its associated juddery (assuming you're panning too quickly or not quickly enough in the case of following motion on screen).

Speaking of which, does anyone know if the ASC's panning speed charts are posted online anywhere?

Benjamin Eckstein · December 17th, 2007, 02:35 PM

I am going to hijack this thread, if I may, because it is on topic. What is the best way to deinterlace 60i footage to get to 24? I have some footage, mostly 24F that I am cutting in a 24F sequence but need to use some 60i footage as well. Is there a better way than just dropping the 60i into my 24F sequence in FCP?

Thanks

December 14th, 2007, 12:00 PM	#17
Cole McDonald Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Sauk Rapids, MN, USA Posts: 1,675	Keep in mind that resolution loss is not the only factor in the resulting image...as has been mentioned before. When the software converts from 60i, it has to guess the extra lines using complex mathematical algorithms that can guess wrong. You'll get goofy edge stuff in motion areas with limited contrast. This doesn't happen when capturing in frame/progressive mode...you just get that timeslice written to tape with whatever amount of natural motion blur happens within that timeslice. __________________ Web Youtube Facebook

December 16th, 2007, 06:36 PM	#22
Cole McDonald Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Sauk Rapids, MN, USA Posts: 1,675	I don't like interlaced at all. The combing during motion drives me nuts and forces me to deinterlace every single piece of footage I shoot, my solution is to shoot in Frame mode to lose my 30% rather than the 50% of deinterlacing. Plus I get the nice averaged motion of a shorter timeslice that looks more cinematic than the right now video feel of 60i. These are all personal opinions (I think lots of folks here share them), but 60i is great for doing slo mo work and for getting that news-cast immediacy that the public has been assimilated to...in much the same way that they have been assimilated to seeing progressive footage with its associated juddery (assuming you're panning too quickly or not quickly enough in the case of following motion on screen). Speaking of which, does anyone know if the ASC's panning speed charts are posted online anywhere? __________________ Web Youtube Facebook

December 16th, 2007, 10:24 AM	#18
Chad Ream Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Portage, MI Posts: 38	I agree with Taky, during a shoot with 24F I experienced the jaggies and was really disappointed. Any other time 24F is very impressive. If its a planned shoot and panning is considered... use 60i just like you would if you were planning a slow motion shot. Chad

December 16th, 2007, 11:35 AM	#19
Pat Reddy Major Player Join Date: May 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 288	If you shoot in 24F you should have fewer compression artifacts in panning and high-motion scenes than with 60i in the same circumstances. With 24F the codec has more "headroom". But you will have to watch out for the standard high motion issues associated with any 24P filming. If panning is too fast, the video will be choppy. If the shutter speed is too high you will see a strobing effect. Shutter speeds of 48 are commonly used. You can increase or decrease this to achieve the look you want or to accomodate exposure issues. You can also pan as fast or as slow as you want if it serves the look you are going for and you are happy with the results. Pat

December 16th, 2007, 11:55 AM	#20
Seun Osewa Major Player Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: West Africa Posts: 255	Use 60i. Convert it to 24fps only if you want to print to film. 60i is simply better (smoother) than 24p. 24p judder is a shortcoming of film, not a feature!

December 17th, 2007, 02:35 PM	#23
Benjamin Eckstein Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 380 Images: 1	I am going to hijack this thread, if I may, because it is on topic. What is the best way to deinterlace 60i footage to get to 24? I have some footage, mostly 24F that I am cutting in a 24F sequence but need to use some 60i footage as well. Is there a better way than just dropping the 60i into my 24F sequence in FCP? Thanks