Frame Mode Question for Charles Papert

Bob Benkosky · March 3rd, 2004, 04:28 PM

Well, since MB 1.5 is associated with After Effects it's like a 2 step, and then some process. Vegas is pretty much a one step output.

Go 24fps Mpeg2 for DVD-A, although I don't use it, then combine the audio in Adobe Encore and bam a 24fps dvd that looks darn good.

How much better can it get?

Supposedly Procoder has a master mpeg2 encoder which takes forever and does a 2-pass, but it takes forever.

Anyone see a big improvement on procoder by any chance on master settings output?

Josh Brusin · March 4th, 2004, 11:37 PM

hate to say this in light of just snagging a IBM NT Avid box but if workflow/process is your bag than I can't think of anything beating XL1 (frame) or DVX 24p to FCP (add sountrack/livetype/etc if you want) to DSP... Despite all the neato competitive programs you have to hand it to apple as their process really does play very nicely together.

The argument for me hinges on the manipulatability (wow long, and likely made-up, word). Specifically slow motion, speed ramping, etc... 60i should give you more to work with especially if you adjust for speed/effects and then drop frames... who knows.

Stephen van Vuuren · March 5th, 2004, 12:24 AM

Bob:

I use Vegas (and had Magic Bullet 1 & 1.5 but sold it) but Magic Bullet will give far better results (though very long renders) at turning 60i into 24p than Vegas, good as program as it is.

DV Filmmaker 2.0, just released, is faster and much cheaper than Magic Bullet though I have not seen A/B tests yet with version 2.

Josh:

Shooting 24p give you much better options with slow motion and speed ramps than shooting 60i. On the DVX, shooting at 24p means 24fps is your base. Shoot at 30p give you a perfect slow-mo with no interpolated frame. Shoot 60i for more slowmo, though you're only getting one field.

However, if 60i your base, you can't shoot more frames/fields that that, so all slow-mo will have to be interpolated in post.

Josh Brusin · March 5th, 2004, 10:18 AM

right... but 60i gives you the most for your computer to guess with in post..?

Stephen van Vuuren · March 5th, 2004, 10:56 AM

Let me try to explain. If you timeline base is 60i, you only have 60 fields to "guess" as the camera is shooting 60 half resolution images a second.

If the cam could shoot 120i, then you would have enough field for 50% slowmo (i.e. 120fps). If want 33% or 25% slow mo, 120i would give you more to guess with.

But since you cannot shoot 120i, if you want good slow mo in post, you need the slowest possible timeline (24p). Then, shooting 30p or 60i gives you more frames/fields to use or "guess" with in post.

Ignacio Rodriguez · March 6th, 2004, 10:46 AM

> The argument for me hinges on the manipulatability
> (wow long, and likely made-up, word).

I think the word some people use for this concept is granularity.

Charles Papert · March 6th, 2004, 11:05 AM

I would like to officially announce that despite the appearance of my name in the title of this thread, you guys have deftly moved this beyond my knowledge base and thus I am simply a figurehead in the manner of "George Forman Grill". Perhaps we should rename "Charles Papert Manipularity Thread". I am, however, enjoying the royalties and will continue to support the existence of this thread and all others that bear my name, except possibly for that "Charles Papert Sucks Eggs" discussion in the "TOTEM Poll" section.

Stephen van Vuuren · March 6th, 2004, 11:10 AM

Hopefully Canon will call it the "Charles Papert Frame Mode" in the XL2 - then those George Forman sized royalty checks will roll in for sure :)

Josh Brusin · March 6th, 2004, 12:34 PM

back to slo mo... final out in 24p got it... but (since I started in effects.. sort of) I'm strictly looking for best origination format. I've looked at twixtor as well as frame by frame adjustment and am under the impression that capturing in 60i helps by giving the pc more guides for original action rather than tweened action... but final out to 24p would maximize the total ability to output. I get that and never really thought much about it before- even though when you have to go back to ntsc it transcends itself back into fields... so? Doesn't that reduce it (or increase it) back to the original strobey 24p look? I guess it would and that would be strobing the slow motion as if it were slow motion again. Wow lots of coffee in bed with the airport... thinking out loud.

Bob Benkosky · March 6th, 2004, 05:39 PM

So what's simply better?

Canon's Frame Mode or 24fps in Vegas?

I've used both and they both appear good but which one yields a better overall picture?

One would think shooting normally would give you better resolution and more to work with. You certainly cannot convert Frame Mode to 24fps mode in Vegas because I've done it and it looks really jerky.

Shooting in Frame Mode might make it less demanding for Vegas in the end, but 24pfs looks pretty movie like as well after all said and done if you don't mind the rendering time. I can't say that one takes longer than the other but it would seem like it would.

Guess the only way to be sure is too shoot the exact same thing twice and compare it.

March 3rd, 2004, 04:28 PM	#16
Bob Benkosky Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Lake Park, Florida Posts: 202	Well, since MB 1.5 is associated with After Effects it's like a 2 step, and then some process. Vegas is pretty much a one step output. Go 24fps Mpeg2 for DVD-A, although I don't use it, then combine the audio in Adobe Encore and bam a 24fps dvd that looks darn good. How much better can it get? Supposedly Procoder has a master mpeg2 encoder which takes forever and does a 2-pass, but it takes forever. Anyone see a big improvement on procoder by any chance on master settings output? __________________ http://www.veoh.com/channels/filmmaker My clips and films.

March 5th, 2004, 12:24 AM	#18
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	Bob: I use Vegas (and had Magic Bullet 1 & 1.5 but sold it) but Magic Bullet will give far better results (though very long renders) at turning 60i into 24p than Vegas, good as program as it is. DV Filmmaker 2.0, just released, is faster and much cheaper than Magic Bullet though I have not seen A/B tests yet with version 2. Josh: Shooting 24p give you much better options with slow motion and speed ramps than shooting 60i. On the DVX, shooting at 24p means 24fps is your base. Shoot at 30p give you a perfect slow-mo with no interpolated frame. Shoot 60i for more slowmo, though you're only getting one field. However, if 60i your base, you can't shoot more frames/fields that that, so all slow-mo will have to be interpolated in post. __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

March 5th, 2004, 10:56 AM	#20
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	Let me try to explain. If you timeline base is 60i, you only have 60 fields to "guess" as the camera is shooting 60 half resolution images a second. If the cam could shoot 120i, then you would have enough field for 50% slowmo (i.e. 120fps). If want 33% or 25% slow mo, 120i would give you more to guess with. But since you cannot shoot 120i, if you want good slow mo in post, you need the slowest possible timeline (24p). Then, shooting 30p or 60i gives you more frames/fields to use or "guess" with in post. __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

March 6th, 2004, 10:46 AM	#21
Ignacio Rodriguez Contributor Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 932	> The argument for me hinges on the manipulatability > (wow long, and likely made-up, word). I think the word some people use for this concept is granularity. __________________ Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.

March 6th, 2004, 11:05 AM	#22
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	I would like to officially announce that despite the appearance of my name in the title of this thread, you guys have deftly moved this beyond my knowledge base and thus I am simply a figurehead in the manner of "George Forman Grill". Perhaps we should rename "Charles Papert Manipularity Thread". I am, however, enjoying the royalties and will continue to support the existence of this thread and all others that bear my name, except possibly for that "Charles Papert Sucks Eggs" discussion in the "TOTEM Poll" section. __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

March 4th, 2004, 11:37 PM	#17
Josh Brusin Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 439	hate to say this in light of just snagging a IBM NT Avid box but if workflow/process is your bag than I can't think of anything beating XL1 (frame) or DVX 24p to FCP (add sountrack/livetype/etc if you want) to DSP... Despite all the neato competitive programs you have to hand it to apple as their process really does play very nicely together. The argument for me hinges on the manipulatability (wow long, and likely made-up, word). Specifically slow motion, speed ramping, etc... 60i should give you more to work with especially if you adjust for speed/effects and then drop frames... who knows.

March 5th, 2004, 10:18 AM	#19
Josh Brusin Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 439	right... but 60i gives you the most for your computer to guess with in post..?

March 6th, 2004, 11:10 AM	#23
Stephen van Vuuren Space Hipster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,508	Hopefully Canon will call it the "Charles Papert Frame Mode" in the XL2 - then those George Forman sized royalty checks will roll in for sure :) __________________ stephen v2 www.insaturnsrings.com

March 6th, 2004, 12:34 PM	#24
Josh Brusin Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 439	back to slo mo... final out in 24p got it... but (since I started in effects.. sort of) I'm strictly looking for best origination format. I've looked at twixtor as well as frame by frame adjustment and am under the impression that capturing in 60i helps by giving the pc more guides for original action rather than tweened action... but final out to 24p would maximize the total ability to output. I get that and never really thought much about it before- even though when you have to go back to ntsc it transcends itself back into fields... so? Doesn't that reduce it (or increase it) back to the original strobey 24p look? I guess it would and that would be strobing the slow motion as if it were slow motion again. Wow lots of coffee in bed with the airport... thinking out loud.

March 6th, 2004, 05:39 PM	#25
Bob Benkosky Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Lake Park, Florida Posts: 202	So what's simply better? Canon's Frame Mode or 24fps in Vegas? I've used both and they both appear good but which one yields a better overall picture? One would think shooting normally would give you better resolution and more to work with. You certainly cannot convert Frame Mode to 24fps mode in Vegas because I've done it and it looks really jerky. Shooting in Frame Mode might make it less demanding for Vegas in the end, but 24pfs looks pretty movie like as well after all said and done if you don't mind the rendering time. I can't say that one takes longer than the other but it would seem like it would. Guess the only way to be sure is too shoot the exact same thing twice and compare it. __________________ http://www.veoh.com/channels/filmmaker My clips and films.