24p questions

Mike Zorger · October 30th, 2003, 08:30 AM

WAIT-so 24p is pretty much a rip off because It doesn't show up if you put it out on DVD or Tape????????????? Whats the point then????????? Thats soooo gayy

Stephen van Vuuren · October 30th, 2003, 11:05 AM

Mike - read links at the top of this forum (Sonic/Sony 24p whitepaper, Adam Wilt etc.).

Pulldown and 24p can be confusing until you get the hang of it.

Barry Green · October 30th, 2003, 11:47 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Mike Zorger : WAIT-so 24p is pretty much a rip off because It doesn't show up if you put it out on DVD or Tape????????????? Whats the point then????????? Thats soooo gayy -->>>

Don't fret... 24P is the real deal, and it looks like film motion, regardless of how you edit it or where you output it. There is no ripoff involved.

Mike Zorger · October 30th, 2003, 02:00 PM

So if I take all the 24p footy i have and put into premier and edit my movie, and put it back onto my mini dv tape to take to the place to get my 500 copies it wont it will still look kind of like film.??? and no way i'm reading adam page again. Thats crazy hard to understand. No offence to him, it's just i just got my dvx100 1 week ago.

Barry Green · October 30th, 2003, 03:27 PM

If you shoot in 24P, it will have film-like motion. No matter what editing program you use, or where you transfer it to (VHS, DVD, Beta, film, etc) it will always have that film-like look.

Sean R Allen · October 30th, 2003, 05:22 PM

You really should invest in reading and understanding that page if you ever want to take full advantage of what you have.

NTSC is 29.97i period. So all tapes, all television shows, all movies shown on TV, all DVDs have to play at 29.97i. Your TV (unless you have a newer HD progressive or something) can only display 29.97i. The only venues to see differing frame rates are the 1) movie theater, 2) computer screens, 3) progressive televisions.

But, just because something is showing at 29.97i doesn't mean it was shot at that or looks like 29.97i. It's just a way of converting the 60 intelaced fields into showing 24 progressive frames. Again, you really need to go read and understand how pulldown is applied.

Mike Zorger · October 30th, 2003, 07:39 PM

Thanks barry you're a trustee so I trust you.

Stephen L. Minor · October 31st, 2003, 02:11 PM

I might be getting a new DV camera soon, possibly for myself, possibly to give out in a contest. I've done alot of researching on this 24p stuff, and can't find any valid reason one would use a 24p DV camera. Unless your a filmmaker who specifically wants your film to look like DV footage and have an easy transfer to film, AND already have this budgeted. This would be a fraction of a percent of filmmakers. I see NO other reason.

I think this is a gimmick. I'm throwing down the gauntlet, to find out if anyone has a good reason for shooting 24 fps. Or, just how many people are shooting w/ this cam in 24p mode (usefully).

Now let's be clear. In NO way am I saying the DVX is a bad cam. I feel from what I've seen it's one of the best DV cam's on the market right now. It's the 24 fps that's in question.

Stephen van Vuuren · October 31st, 2003, 03:24 PM

Sean:

No disrespect, but it's not much of a gauntlet to throw down. A reading of the many threads here about 24p, the links at the top of the forum and the many sites on the internet will reveal the many reasons people want to shoot at 24 frames per second.

Of course, there is the insignifigant fact that 24fps was, is and will be for many years to come the worldwide standard for movie distribution and progressive DVD.

And most of all, the hundreds of millions of dollars Panasonic and Sony have spent R&D, production and marketing all manner of DV/HD cameras capable of 24 (and other frame rates) fps - sounds like a pretty expensive gimmick to me.

PS. Don't forget the PROGRESSIVE part of the DVX100, which works at both 24 and 30 fps (the 30p of the DVX100 is often ignored - see a thread about that here). That's probably the most important part of the technology.

24fps is kind of like many things - if you don't know why it's so important, you've answered your own question.

Why do I shoot 24fp?

(1) I started watching and shooting film at 24 fps. I love the way that feels for narrative and experimental storytelling.

(2) So does my audiences. They don't know why but I experimented with various film looks back when I had my XL1 and they feel a difference even if they don't consciously notice it.

(3) It edits, renders, composites and outputs to DV faster and at better quality.

(4) I can output it to digital projection, progressive DVD and/or film with much higher quality than shooting 60i.

(5) Film look degrades footage, consumes enourmous time and does not allow you to see in camera how 24p is working.

Barry Green · October 31st, 2003, 03:47 PM

The reason is simple: 24P looks like film. It looks decidedly different from video, giving the artist another tool in their arsenal. If you like the look of "video" you can shoot in 60i, or if you like the look of "film" you can flip the dial and shoot in 24P. It's not EXACTLY like film, but it is very, very close. You don't have to edit in a 24P timeline, you don't have to transfer to film or any of that: just shoot in the 24P mode and you'll have footage that looks very much like it was shot on film instead of video.

I shoot almost exclusively in the 24P mode. Until getting the DVX my work (TV commercials, corporate profile videos, etc.) was about 75% film, 25% video. Since getting the DVX it's now shifted to about 90% DVX/24P, 5% film, 5% "video".

Stephen L. Minor · October 31st, 2003, 05:55 PM

Excellent! Good points. BTW Stephen my name is Stephen, not Sean, But you can call me Steve.

Side note: Stephen, I understand the progressive superiority, no argument there, but other cam's have progressive modes as well.

The film "LOOK" is not determined by the frame rate, infact I contest that any audience is advanced enough to tell the difference between 30, 25, 24 fps. Especially if there is not much movement of the camera (Hollywood style filmmaking is very efficient in this regard). The reason it's done in films, I believe was an issue regarding sound sync. Back when motion pictures began to have sound. It was adopted and all equipment for film was setup since then for 24 fps. So, it makes since that the new and improved verion of the film cameras HD, 4k's, Cinealta's whatever. Should shoot 24 fps, as to make the transitions through post (edit/score/telecine) as smooth as possible. This dosen't apply to this camera since I don't see Lucas/Spielberg gearing up to do the next Indiana on a DVX. The "Look" of film varies, like how Saving Private Ryan doesn't look like Batman, or Full Frontal doesn't look like Thirteen (some digital some film, all artistic). Color data is the MAIN deciding factor in how it looks.

The money on R&D is irrelevant, companies spend millions if not Billions on gimmicks all the time (i.e. Reebok Pump/Nike Air Sole or the shinny new box company A uses for it's widget). The entire commercial industry is based on the gimmick approach. How many good commercials actually have anything to do w/ the product there selling? Do any food commercials use real food anymore? I've never bought a hamburger that looks even close to like one on TV. A gimmick is whatever it takes to make you buy it, period. If there already developing it for the Pro's why not slap it on the Prosumer one to make them feel good about it. (ever see a kid holding a piece of plastic to it's head thats suppose to be a cell phone, so they can be like Mommy and Daddy?)

I have heard all these points before:

I agree there are some rendering advantages of 24 fps but then there also have to be trade offs, such as juddering or smearing, like in films. This looks horrible to anyone. I remember hating how pans looked in films long before I knew why.

I agree films in America will stay 24 fps for a while. The way of capitalism is to continue milking the old equpiment as long as the Suckers... upt, I mean consumers :-) will pay for it. Hence, why you can't have a clear cell phone conversation in the midde of any major city, but Armstrong can make a call from the moon. And yep, I'm part of this too, I have a cell phone.

Don't most Sound Post Prod. want 30 fps timecode?

I respect your opinions. I greatly appreciate all of your input, I take it very seriously. I want to believe, help me to believe. I think this might be the best cam on the market, but for the price I have lots of options. If this boils down to preference, then none of it matters.

Stephen van Vuuren · October 31st, 2003, 06:14 PM

Sorry about the name - i was confusing this with another post.

Other miniDV cams do not have usual progressive modes. Only DVX100, CineAlta, Varicam and new Panasonic SD cam.

The old Opture PI had 30P progressive, but was a small 1-chip consumer cam. The JVC "Indy Cam" had progressive but suffered from terrible quality etc.

Some Sony's have a 15fps progressive mode - not usable. Canon's and some older Panasonic's have frame mode which loses 33% of resolution and some latitude to offer a 30p mode. (I had an XL1 for 3 years).

Speilberg et al may not shoot with a DVX, but they shoot 24 fps. That's the real point.

The money on R&D is not irrelavent because obviously they are selling a lot of camera to a lot of people who want the feature. You may not be one of them, but that does not make 24fps less desirable. You are only one person.

Pro sound labs can work with any frame rate - I don't understand your 30fps comment.

Don't forget, a lot of people HATE the look of 60i interlaced video (me). It's not about film vs. video. It's about the ulginess of interlaced.

Bruce A. Christenson · October 31st, 2003, 06:45 PM

Adam's page indicates that if your NLE understands 24p advanced (i.e. Vegas 4, etc.) then you should use the 24p advanced mode of the DVX100. Otherwise, use the regular 24p mode.

I've seen 24p DVX100 footage played back on a regular miniDV camera. It looked great.

Don Donatello · October 31st, 2003, 07:12 PM

i look at 24p NTSC as another tool to use along with 30P & 60i ..
i find the pull downs distracting so i use it for effect ( the few times i've used the camera) .. i love the 30P !! and that alone makes it worth the $$ .... i really dislike NTSC viewed in FEET ( as in big screen ) .. i think NTSC looks very good viewed in INCHES ( TV ) ...

at the moment nobody seems to be following panasonic on NTSC 24p .. i see on consumer HD several manufacturers agreed on 30P.
what i find interesting is that even with 24fps DVD's most are viewing it at 29.97 with either the TV or dvd player adding the pull down so where's my 24fps ???

Sean R Allen · October 31st, 2003, 07:59 PM

- "I contest that any audience is advanced enough to tell the difference between 30, 25, 24 fps."

I disagree. They may not know the exact framerate, but they can sure tell the difference. It's funny, I was showing my sister (who is clueless about video/film stuff) a lot of footage I shot of my son, different clips shot in 60i, 30p and 24p. When I showed some of the 24p footage, she said "Wow! This looks like a movie! How did you do that?"

The "film look" isn't just about framerate, but that is a large part of it. It's why a lot of the big TV shows are actually shot in 24, because people sub-consciously associate it with film and thus a high quality production. You really should try it or watch a lot of 24p footage shot from it before you call it a gimmick.

- "find interesting is that even with 24fps DVD's most are viewing it at 29.97 with either the TV or dvd player adding the pull down so where's my 24fps ???"

This is true, but it's still just 24 discreet frames being shown per second, even if it's being split back out into 60i. It still gives you the film like cadence that you're used to seeing with DVDs or on HBO or whatever. And more and more people are getting progressive TVs each day, hopefully in 5 years or so it'll be the norm.

October 30th, 2003, 11:05 AM	#317
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	Mike - read links at the top of this forum (Sonic/Sony 24p whitepaper, Adam Wilt etc.). Pulldown and 24p can be confusing until you get the hang of it. __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

October 31st, 2003, 02:11 PM	#323
Stephen L. Minor Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: L.A., CA Posts: 35	Why 24P??? I might be getting a new DV camera soon, possibly for myself, possibly to give out in a contest. I've done alot of researching on this 24p stuff, and can't find any valid reason one would use a 24p DV camera. Unless your a filmmaker who specifically wants your film to look like DV footage and have an easy transfer to film, AND already have this budgeted. This would be a fraction of a percent of filmmakers. I see NO other reason. I think this is a gimmick. I'm throwing down the gauntlet, to find out if anyone has a good reason for shooting 24 fps. Or, just how many people are shooting w/ this cam in 24p mode (usefully). Now let's be clear. In NO way am I saying the DVX is a bad cam. I feel from what I've seen it's one of the best DV cam's on the market right now. It's the 24 fps that's in question. __________________ -S

October 31st, 2003, 03:24 PM	#324
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	Sean: No disrespect, but it's not much of a gauntlet to throw down. A reading of the many threads here about 24p, the links at the top of the forum and the many sites on the internet will reveal the many reasons people want to shoot at 24 frames per second. Of course, there is the insignifigant fact that 24fps was, is and will be for many years to come the worldwide standard for movie distribution and progressive DVD. And most of all, the hundreds of millions of dollars Panasonic and Sony have spent R&D, production and marketing all manner of DV/HD cameras capable of 24 (and other frame rates) fps - sounds like a pretty expensive gimmick to me. PS. Don't forget the PROGRESSIVE part of the DVX100, which works at both 24 and 30 fps (the 30p of the DVX100 is often ignored - see a thread about that here). That's probably the most important part of the technology. 24fps is kind of like many things - if you don't know why it's so important, you've answered your own question. Why do I shoot 24fp? (1) I started watching and shooting film at 24 fps. I love the way that feels for narrative and experimental storytelling. (2) So does my audiences. They don't know why but I experimented with various film looks back when I had my XL1 and they feel a difference even if they don't consciously notice it. (3) It edits, renders, composites and outputs to DV faster and at better quality. (4) I can output it to digital projection, progressive DVD and/or film with much higher quality than shooting 60i. (5) Film look degrades footage, consumes enourmous time and does not allow you to see in camera how 24p is working. __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

October 31st, 2003, 05:55 PM	#326
Stephen L. Minor Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: L.A., CA Posts: 35	Excellent! Good points. BTW Stephen my name is Stephen, not Sean, But you can call me Steve. Side note: Stephen, I understand the progressive superiority, no argument there, but other cam's have progressive modes as well. The film "LOOK" is not determined by the frame rate, infact I contest that any audience is advanced enough to tell the difference between 30, 25, 24 fps. Especially if there is not much movement of the camera (Hollywood style filmmaking is very efficient in this regard). The reason it's done in films, I believe was an issue regarding sound sync. Back when motion pictures began to have sound. It was adopted and all equipment for film was setup since then for 24 fps. So, it makes since that the new and improved verion of the film cameras HD, 4k's, Cinealta's whatever. Should shoot 24 fps, as to make the transitions through post (edit/score/telecine) as smooth as possible. This dosen't apply to this camera since I don't see Lucas/Spielberg gearing up to do the next Indiana on a DVX. The "Look" of film varies, like how Saving Private Ryan doesn't look like Batman, or Full Frontal doesn't look like Thirteen (some digital some film, all artistic). Color data is the MAIN deciding factor in how it looks. The money on R&D is irrelevant, companies spend millions if not Billions on gimmicks all the time (i.e. Reebok Pump/Nike Air Sole or the shinny new box company A uses for it's widget). The entire commercial industry is based on the gimmick approach. How many good commercials actually have anything to do w/ the product there selling? Do any food commercials use real food anymore? I've never bought a hamburger that looks even close to like one on TV. A gimmick is whatever it takes to make you buy it, period. If there already developing it for the Pro's why not slap it on the Prosumer one to make them feel good about it. (ever see a kid holding a piece of plastic to it's head thats suppose to be a cell phone, so they can be like Mommy and Daddy?) I have heard all these points before: I agree there are some rendering advantages of 24 fps but then there also have to be trade offs, such as juddering or smearing, like in films. This looks horrible to anyone. I remember hating how pans looked in films long before I knew why. I agree films in America will stay 24 fps for a while. The way of capitalism is to continue milking the old equpiment as long as the Suckers... upt, I mean consumers :-) will pay for it. Hence, why you can't have a clear cell phone conversation in the midde of any major city, but Armstrong can make a call from the moon. And yep, I'm part of this too, I have a cell phone. Don't most Sound Post Prod. want 30 fps timecode? I respect your opinions. I greatly appreciate all of your input, I take it very seriously. I want to believe, help me to believe. I think this might be the best cam on the market, but for the price I have lots of options. If this boils down to preference, then none of it matters. __________________ -S

October 31st, 2003, 06:14 PM	#327
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	Sorry about the name - i was confusing this with another post. Other miniDV cams do not have usual progressive modes. Only DVX100, CineAlta, Varicam and new Panasonic SD cam. The old Opture PI had 30P progressive, but was a small 1-chip consumer cam. The JVC "Indy Cam" had progressive but suffered from terrible quality etc. Some Sony's have a 15fps progressive mode - not usable. Canon's and some older Panasonic's have frame mode which loses 33% of resolution and some latitude to offer a 30p mode. (I had an XL1 for 3 years). Speilberg et al may not shoot with a DVX, but they shoot 24 fps. That's the real point. The money on R&D is not irrelavent because obviously they are selling a lot of camera to a lot of people who want the feature. You may not be one of them, but that does not make 24fps less desirable. You are only one person. Pro sound labs can work with any frame rate - I don't understand your 30fps comment. Don't forget, a lot of people HATE the look of 60i interlaced video (me). It's not about film vs. video. It's about the ulginess of interlaced. __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

October 30th, 2003, 08:30 AM	#316
Mike Zorger Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Norther VA Posts: 163	WAIT-so 24p is pretty much a rip off because It doesn't show up if you put it out on DVD or Tape????????????? Whats the point then????????? Thats soooo gayy

October 30th, 2003, 11:47 AM	#318
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	<<<-- Originally posted by Mike Zorger : WAIT-so 24p is pretty much a rip off because It doesn't show up if you put it out on DVD or Tape????????????? Whats the point then????????? Thats soooo gayy -->>> Don't fret... 24P is the real deal, and it looks like film motion, regardless of how you edit it or where you output it. There is no ripoff involved.

October 30th, 2003, 02:00 PM	#319
Mike Zorger Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Norther VA Posts: 163	So if I take all the 24p footy i have and put into premier and edit my movie, and put it back onto my mini dv tape to take to the place to get my 500 copies it wont it will still look kind of like film.??? and no way i'm reading adam page again. Thats crazy hard to understand. No offence to him, it's just i just got my dvx100 1 week ago.

October 30th, 2003, 03:27 PM	#320
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	If you shoot in 24P, it will have film-like motion. No matter what editing program you use, or where you transfer it to (VHS, DVD, Beta, film, etc) it will always have that film-like look.

October 30th, 2003, 05:22 PM	#321
Sean R Allen Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: RTP, NC Posts: 66	You really should invest in reading and understanding that page if you ever want to take full advantage of what you have. NTSC is 29.97i period. So all tapes, all television shows, all movies shown on TV, all DVDs have to play at 29.97i. Your TV (unless you have a newer HD progressive or something) can only display 29.97i. The only venues to see differing frame rates are the 1) movie theater, 2) computer screens, 3) progressive televisions. But, just because something is showing at 29.97i doesn't mean it was shot at that or looks like 29.97i. It's just a way of converting the 60 intelaced fields into showing 24 progressive frames. Again, you really need to go read and understand how pulldown is applied.

October 30th, 2003, 07:39 PM	#322
Mike Zorger Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Norther VA Posts: 163	Thanks barry you're a trustee so I trust you.

October 31st, 2003, 03:47 PM	#325
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	The reason is simple: 24P looks like film. It looks decidedly different from video, giving the artist another tool in their arsenal. If you like the look of "video" you can shoot in 60i, or if you like the look of "film" you can flip the dial and shoot in 24P. It's not EXACTLY like film, but it is very, very close. You don't have to edit in a 24P timeline, you don't have to transfer to film or any of that: just shoot in the 24P mode and you'll have footage that looks very much like it was shot on film instead of video. I shoot almost exclusively in the 24P mode. Until getting the DVX my work (TV commercials, corporate profile videos, etc.) was about 75% film, 25% video. Since getting the DVX it's now shifted to about 90% DVX/24P, 5% film, 5% "video".

October 31st, 2003, 06:45 PM	#328
Bruce A. Christenson Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Forest Grove, OR Posts: 122	Adam's page indicates that if your NLE understands 24p advanced (i.e. Vegas 4, etc.) then you should use the 24p advanced mode of the DVX100. Otherwise, use the regular 24p mode. I've seen 24p DVX100 footage played back on a regular miniDV camera. It looked great.

October 31st, 2003, 07:12 PM	#329
Don Donatello Hawaiian Shirt Mogul Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: northern cailfornia Posts: 1,261	i look at 24p NTSC as another tool to use along with 30P & 60i .. i find the pull downs distracting so i use it for effect ( the few times i've used the camera) .. i love the 30P !! and that alone makes it worth the $$ .... i really dislike NTSC viewed in FEET ( as in big screen ) .. i think NTSC looks very good viewed in INCHES ( TV ) ... at the moment nobody seems to be following panasonic on NTSC 24p .. i see on consumer HD several manufacturers agreed on 30P. what i find interesting is that even with 24fps DVD's most are viewing it at 29.97 with either the TV or dvd player adding the pull down so where's my 24fps ???

October 31st, 2003, 07:59 PM	#330
Sean R Allen Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: RTP, NC Posts: 66	- "I contest that any audience is advanced enough to tell the difference between 30, 25, 24 fps." I disagree. They may not know the exact framerate, but they can sure tell the difference. It's funny, I was showing my sister (who is clueless about video/film stuff) a lot of footage I shot of my son, different clips shot in 60i, 30p and 24p. When I showed some of the 24p footage, she said "Wow! This looks like a movie! How did you do that?" The "film look" isn't just about framerate, but that is a large part of it. It's why a lot of the big TV shows are actually shot in 24, because people sub-consciously associate it with film and thus a high quality production. You really should try it or watch a lot of 24p footage shot from it before you call it a gimmick. - "find interesting is that even with 24fps DVD's most are viewing it at 29.97 with either the TV or dvd player adding the pull down so where's my 24fps ???" This is true, but it's still just 24 discreet frames being shown per second, even if it's being split back out into 60i. It still gives you the film like cadence that you're used to seeing with DVDs or on HBO or whatever. And more and more people are getting progressive TVs each day, hopefully in 5 years or so it'll be the norm.