shutter speed

Steve Mullen · July 1st, 2006, 02:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan Nelson

So, movie goers don't really care about the timeless effect of 24p?

I am sure people will adjust to new formats but I just find it hard to believe that people are willing to drop 24p to some cheesy reality look.

Maybe I am just too old to accept this new generation stuff.

You are not too old -- you are simply assuming the only thing folks care to shoot are "movies."

If I'm filmimg a battle, tigers leaping at me, an ER, training how to defuse a bomb, chanting in a temple, a climb to the top a mountain, a visit to the Titanic, etc. -- I want to put the audience RIGHT IN THE SITUATION.

It amazes me that when there are so many interesting "real" events to shoot all over the world, so many want to make "movies." I'd sure rather shoot on the International Space Station. And, I'd only want to shoot 60p.

I suspect that next fall, this list will find a lot of 60p shooters who love the look of HD VIDEO and have no interest in a "film look."

Giuseppe Pugliese · July 1st, 2006, 03:19 AM

It seems this comes up a lot... I am a huge fan of solid 24p 1/48th shooting... as said before, its been the standard from 1920 and on. There is a big reason why when you look at a soap opera you think... cheesy soap opera... its because they shoot at a "high frame rate" (yes it is interlaced so not the best example but...) this is the whole difference between the film look and not. When people go to see a movie they don’t want to see the same affect that they see coming out of their little sony handy cam at 60p they want to see it at 24p weather they realize it or not.

MANY tests have been done with control audiences trying to introduce 60p and even interlaced formats, and from what I read they always like the look of 60p projected, but they always say the wouldn’t like it when they were watching a film. Its "just to real". I truly believe the only reason why 60p is on the new camera is so we can "over crank" our cameras so we can shoot slomo.

There is a big reason why we all are interested in the jvc hd100 and thats for the 24P, HD, and real lens. I highly doubt this camera would have taken off at all if it was a 60p camera trying to be introduced as a new film standard... there’s just no way...

I’ve said it before and ill say it again - The people with a problem with 24p are usually the people who are not used to working with it, or are used to interlaced formats and just don’t realize how important the 24p standard really is. You must have a favorite movie, if not more than one... guess what, its shot in 24p haha. I think instead of worrying about what you "cant do" with 24p (don’t think there is anything you cant do) try to LEARN how to use it the way the rest of us do.

It’s a tool, use it as a tool, but don’t put the 24p down, if you like 60p for your own work, then that’s all fine and well, but if you want to make it in the film business and try to get distribution, it better be in 24p. there’s a very small and limited amount of area where you can use 60p or interlaced formats and get away with it… like spots. But other than that, if you are telling a story, 24p it is.

Personally I don’t like to push anything, but I just think its kinda silly that people keep bringing up “problems” with 24p when this whole part of the site is dedicated to a camera that’s main selling point is to shoot at 24p! Yes there are lots of other “real world situation shooting” that you can use higher film rates… but then why would you be using the jvc, when its not a camera known to shoot that type of stuff ?

I know there will be a rebuttal to this, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I think I’m speaking for the majority of the people who talk about this camera, own this camera, and shoot with this camera.

Sorry If i sound frustrated, i think ive just seen this come up too many times, and its kinda boring seeing this come up over and over again.

I know that was a long post haha.

Scott Jaco · July 1st, 2006, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith Ward

And most folks who've used it caution strongly against using motion smoothing. I haven't tried it, however, so I can't vouch for the advice; but definitely try it out before you use it.

I agree. Motion smoothing adds a double image ghost trace behind any moving object, which means you can't make snapshots pics from your video.

It looks better with it off.

Scott Jaco · July 1st, 2006, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

And, by the way, as soon as the new JVC's arrive many of us will be shooting 60p.

You can view 60p right now with the HD-100 by simply using the analog component jacks into a High Definition TV.

I hate 60p. It looks too much like 60i. Too sterile and "live" looking.

30p seems to be just right if you aren't planning on using it for film.

Greg Boston · July 1st, 2006, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Mullen

You are not too old -- you are simply assuming the only thing folks care to shoot are "movies."

If I'm filmimg a battle, tigers leaping at me, an ER, training how to defuse a bomb, chanting in a temple, a climb to the top a mountain, a visit to the Titanic, etc. -- I want to put the audience RIGHT IN THE SITUATION.

It amazes me that when there are so many interesting "real" events to shoot all over the world, so many want to make "movies." I'd sure rather shoot on the International Space Station. And, I'd only want to shoot 60p.

I suspect that next fall, this list will find a lot of 60p shooters who love the look of HD VIDEO and have no interest in a "film look."

For the record Steve, I don't make movies and have no interest in doing so. I am a reality kind of guy and I love full on deep DOF high framerate stuff. I even looked into buying one of the really high speed motion capture cameras for some specialty jobs I want to do. I'm talking several hundred fps.

But with that said, I understand the 'aesthetic look' of 24P and how it takes an audience 'out of reality' which as I stated earlier is what audiences like. Most people don't know what 24P and framerates are, they just know they like how it looks on the big screen.

Yes, give us folks some 'you are there' reality type stuff at 60P on Discovery HD or National Geographic. If you shoot it, I'll watch it, just not while I am curled up next to my sweetheart with a bucket of popcorn. I save those moments for feature length 24P. ;-)

-gb-

Tim Dashwood · July 1st, 2006, 11:04 AM

Well this one tumbled out of control quickly! I think all views have been equally represented on the temporal framerate thing... and all are valid.
Traditional filmmakers were attracted to 24P in the HD100 as a means of simulating the temporal properties of film, and reality based videographers and sports broadcasters will be attracted to the HD200/250 for 60P clarity. We've all seen the superbowl broadcast in 720P60 it it looked awesome, especially slo-mo replays.

So "Suum cuique!"

I think Amos' original question was answered accurately, so I'm going to lock this one now.

July 1st, 2006, 03:19 AM	#17
Giuseppe Pugliese Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York Posts: 392	It seems this comes up a lot... I am a huge fan of solid 24p 1/48th shooting... as said before, its been the standard from 1920 and on. There is a big reason why when you look at a soap opera you think... cheesy soap opera... its because they shoot at a "high frame rate" (yes it is interlaced so not the best example but...) this is the whole difference between the film look and not. When people go to see a movie they don’t want to see the same affect that they see coming out of their little sony handy cam at 60p they want to see it at 24p weather they realize it or not. MANY tests have been done with control audiences trying to introduce 60p and even interlaced formats, and from what I read they always like the look of 60p projected, but they always say the wouldn’t like it when they were watching a film. Its "just to real". I truly believe the only reason why 60p is on the new camera is so we can "over crank" our cameras so we can shoot slomo. There is a big reason why we all are interested in the jvc hd100 and thats for the 24P, HD, and real lens. I highly doubt this camera would have taken off at all if it was a 60p camera trying to be introduced as a new film standard... there’s just no way... I’ve said it before and ill say it again - The people with a problem with 24p are usually the people who are not used to working with it, or are used to interlaced formats and just don’t realize how important the 24p standard really is. You must have a favorite movie, if not more than one... guess what, its shot in 24p haha. I think instead of worrying about what you "cant do" with 24p (don’t think there is anything you cant do) try to LEARN how to use it the way the rest of us do. It’s a tool, use it as a tool, but don’t put the 24p down, if you like 60p for your own work, then that’s all fine and well, but if you want to make it in the film business and try to get distribution, it better be in 24p. there’s a very small and limited amount of area where you can use 60p or interlaced formats and get away with it… like spots. But other than that, if you are telling a story, 24p it is. Personally I don’t like to push anything, but I just think its kinda silly that people keep bringing up “problems” with 24p when this whole part of the site is dedicated to a camera that’s main selling point is to shoot at 24p! Yes there are lots of other “real world situation shooting” that you can use higher film rates… but then why would you be using the jvc, when its not a camera known to shoot that type of stuff ? I know there will be a rebuttal to this, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I think I’m speaking for the majority of the people who talk about this camera, own this camera, and shoot with this camera. Sorry If i sound frustrated, i think ive just seen this come up too many times, and its kinda boring seeing this come up over and over again. I know that was a long post haha. Last edited by Giuseppe Pugliese; July 1st, 2006 at 04:17 AM.

July 1st, 2006, 11:04 AM	#21
Tim Dashwood Wrangler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Posts: 3,637	Well this one tumbled out of control quickly! I think all views have been equally represented on the temporal framerate thing... and all are valid. Traditional filmmakers were attracted to 24P in the HD100 as a means of simulating the temporal properties of film, and reality based videographers and sports broadcasters will be attracted to the HD200/250 for 60P clarity. We've all seen the superbowl broadcast in 720P60 it it looked awesome, especially slo-mo replays. So "Suum cuique!" I think Amos' original question was answered accurately, so I'm going to lock this one now. __________________ Tim Dashwood