All this for nothin'!

[Robert Jackson]

<<<-- Originally posted by Sanjin Jukic : Richard,

I must repeat again: it works for a small screen (60p on tv, computer, plasma or all electronic devices using a screen) but in movie theater 60p is too fast (by the way have you any real theatre experience?), for sure it is not about conditioning and it is about a nature and that is a human eye perception and human brain reception (that you mean to envolve conditioning) or maybe, i would say, you were perhaps conditioned to watch 60p, that's it...tv+computer games generation...

think about it once more...

Sanjin -->>>

I haven't seen film projected at 60 fps, but a *lot* of well-known cinematogaphers preferred it when the Showscan process was first making the rounds. I've seen a lot of large-screen projection of video and I have no problem with it at all. I know there's this Cult of 24p and a lot of people who think the human brain evolved for the last ten million years into a 24p-appreciating machine, but I personally don't buy it.

Personally, I prefer the additional frame rate over the impressionistic, jittery feeling of 24 fps. Not to say that even a crappy format like 24p doesn't have its place. Hell, if you want to hand-crank at 16 fps and that's the format that makes you feel most creative then more power to you. You'll never sell me on 24p as the One True Frame Rate. It never was. It never will be. It's just what a lot of people settled for with the coming of sound and now there are a lot of people clinging to it because it's familiar.

[Sanjin Jukic]

OK Robert,

You are on your own, but I am still thinking what is standing behind your opinion because you are a student, and you are influented by your environment...so that should be a key somehow of your opinion...but to change a standard is not so easy way...it is also about power...

Sanjin

[Robert Jackson]

<<<-- Originally posted by Sanjin Jukic : OK Robert,

You are on your own, but I am still thinking what is standing behind your opinion because you are a student, and you are influented by your environment...so that should be a key somehow of your opinion...but to change a standard is not so easy way...it is also about power...

Sanjin -->>>

Actually, what I call the "flicker people" are all around me. And I'm a returning student. I started working in video on 3/4" U-Matic 20 years ago. The "standard" will change as the industry slowly migrates to digital projection and people aren't tied to a set frame rate, IMO. The 24p people will probably cling to it for some time to come, but with as many professional cinematographers who've expressed a distaste for slow frame rates I imagine a lot of product will start shooting at 30p or 60p when the opportunity presents itself.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Robert,

as I said it is not so easy to change this standard, film started with 24p, computer and digital stuff came later, it is so called industry standard that is accepted all over the world and if you want to change it you must have a good reason for that, for example I have JVC HDV camcorder PAL and my shooting mode is 50p, so I do not fits in yours 60p or 30p, I would say do not observe the thing locally, have a look around the world and see how digital industry spread different standards for DV and DVD etc., but for the film it is unique one: 24p all over the globe, I remind you now on one example before Panasonic introduced DVX100 24p enabled camera that even so called award winning director Steven Sodebergh was shooting one film about two years ago with Canon XLS1 PAL just because it was closer to kick one frame from PAL to get 24p than do it and mess it from NTSC version that can make 60p or 30p. THIS IS NTSC PROBLEM AND THAT SHOULD BE A KEY OF YOUR 24p FRUSTRATION. Sorry but you must be deeply NTSC guy but the film world is not NTSC neither PAL, it is 24p only.

Sanjin

[Robert Jackson]

<<<-- Originally posted by Sanjin Jukic : Robert,

as I said it is not so easy to change this standard, film started with 24p>>

No, film started with no standardized frame rates at all. 24 fps was a consensus that was agreed to when sound came in 30 years or so later.

<<<-- I remind you now on one example before Panasonic introduced DVX100 24p enabled camera that even so called award winning director Steven Sodebergh was shooting one film about two years ago with Canon XLS1 PAL just because it was closer to kick one frame from PAL to get 24p than do it and mess it from NTSC version that can make 60p or 30p. THIS IS NTSC PROBLEM AND THAT SHOULD BE A KEY OF YOUR 24p FRUSTRATION. Sorry but you must be deeply NTSC guy but the film world is not NTSC neither PAL, it is 24p only.

Sanjin -->>>

Don't burst any blood vessels there, Sanjin. You've made it clear that you think 24 frames per second is the only choice for moving picture production. I encourage you to work in that format if that's the format that makes you happiest. 24p is the defacto standard right now because people want to be able to easily transfer to film. In the long term the ability to transfer to film isn't going to be an issue anymore. You can dance around in circles proclaiming that 24p is the One True Frame Rate and the only international standard and that 24p is the result of human evolution's intent, but that doesn't change the fact that many well-respected cinematographers (and even a few little guys like me) prefer a faster frame rate that eliminates the stuttering and strobing of 24p. As digital projection gains more acceptance I'm sure that 30p and 60p will become more common.

As for PAL? We'll always be working to accommodate non-NTSC programming. We've been working around your 25 fps film productions for decades because your broadcasting wouldn't comply with a standard that worked properly with our 24 fps production standards. Luckily, most of the production being done in the world is being done in NTSC nations and we don't really grind the wheels of progress to a halt because of some European nations that can't seem to agree to our standards until they're 100 years old and we're ready to move on.

-Rob

[Sanjin Jukic]

Rob,

You sound that as you would running kind of A New Motion Pictures Standard Organization and sounds like a warrior. For example one another Jackson (Peter) is coming from New Zealand, one another "poor" PAL country and maybe winning Oscar this year(?). Do not fight with your "brother" about FPS issue. Hollywood and NTSC TV did not discover the film either. Please, calm down a bit, and maybe give us a names of your's respective cinematographers who are "so crazy" about 60p/30p issue that we can have an idea in the rest of a "poor" PAL world. At first I see video and film as creative work and second as technology second or 24p, 60p, 30p, 25p, etc., doesn't matter, this is not making your movie better or worst. Movie is about an IDEA. One creative genius is standing behind all these technology numbers. Always think about an idea when you think about a film, about story, drama, about photography, acting, lighting, characters, time, place, editing, music, sound and fx etc....The most important numbers in film industry are numbers sold tickets or DVD, tapes and other similar media.

Sanjin

[Les Dit]

As projectors for 35mm film are slowly replaced with digital projectors, I think the issue of frame rates will be about as unstandardized as the various sound track formats there are on film today.
The blunt fact is that theater patrons don't give a hoot. They don't even complain of poor 35mm projection. I recently saw a film " The Return" in 35mm, and the projection quality was worse than DVD quality on a mediocre home TV. The audience did not seem to care one bit!
Again, the issue will dissolve when the jittery poorly registered 35mm prints go away.
-Les

[Sanjin Jukic]

I would like to see solved that frame issue by film makers but I am affraid that the Moguls are keeping the keys like always...

Sanjin

[Heath McKnight]

<<<-- Originally posted by Sanjin Jukic : I would like to see solved that frame issue by film makers but I am affraid that the Moguls are keeping the keys like always...

Sanjin -->>>

Sanjin,

What are you talking about? Moguls??

heath

[Heath McKnight]

We're getting a little off topic from the original post, which was why Thomas wanted to get rid of the HD10. Let's try and go back to that. Also, please stay as friendly as we always are. That's what our site is for, to help each other out, while keeping everything friendly!

Thanks,

heath

[Les Dit]

True Heath!
The further you get from Hollywood the odder it seems!
-Les

[Paul St. Denis]

I think most people agree that PAL is a better standard for color representation. Calling NTSC "our standard" sounds nationalistic (isn't "our standard" an oxymoron anyway?). Les does that mean that I am only half as odd in New York as a person twice as far away, in Italy say? Maybe I am just being over sensitive.

[Thomas Ferlauto]

Back in the hippie days, there was a study. Film cameras were given to some Native Americans living on the reservations. They were taught only the rudamentaries of film production. The study proponents wanted to see what filmic conventions crossed culteral barriers, and which new conventions these indiginous people might develop. The films produced (apart from being boring) showed the characters walking from place to place, and the study proponents thought this was evidence of the fact that the "journey of life" was more important to the native americans, etc. But in reality, they just had not learned how to compress action through editing. Their films looked just like the crap I made in my first film class, until I learned better.

How does this apply to your current debate? I'm not sure. In fact, I'm not sure if the native americans in the study were really australian aboriginals. In any event, what you may think is some ingrained culteral truism, might just be ignorance. We accept 24fps because we don't know any better. If we had an opportunity to see 60fps, we would see the increased spacial resolution and learn to prefer it.

[Robert Jackson]

<<<-- Originally posted by Sanjin Jukic : Please, calm down a bit, and maybe give us a names of your's respective cinematographers who are "so crazy" about 60p/30p issue that we can have an idea in the rest of a "poor" PAL world.>>>

Heh...well, Douglas Trumbull takes credit for coming up with the 70mm 60 fps Showscan process. At the time he was pitching the system to studios he assembled a round table of a fair number of prominent cinematographers who agreed that it was a superior presentation system and most of them commented on the fluid quality of the motion. If I'm not mistaken there was an article featuring comments by a number of them in American Cinematographer a while back. Even Michael Brinkman of Panasonic's HD team admits that the only reason 24P has gained acceptance is "cost savings and convenience." In the same article he goes on to say that "60 fps HD is a far better choice than 24 fps. With 2.5 times more frames per second, 60 fps brings a certain fluidity and grace to moving objects that few have experienced before."

You can read the rest of his comments about HD here:

http://2002newsarchive.broadcastengineering.com/ar/broadcasting_dtv_answer_book/

>>> Movie is about an IDEA. -->>>

Exactly. No need to get all worked up about whose preferred format is the "One True" format. Work in whatever you like. I prefer faster frame rates.

-Rob

[Heath McKnight]

Hi all,

This post has gotten so far off topic, I've decided to lock it. In the future, please try to keep on topic when our great discussions come up. Also, just a reminder, keep it friendly.

For more info, check out our FAQ.

Thanks,

heath