ohhhhhhhhhhh

23.976 / 29.97 / 24f / 24p / 24pn / 30i / 60 !!!!!!!


God I love PAL !

Just straight up, honest to god, 25 frames per second.

The only pulldown I do is in the toilet.

To be fair, the pulldown stuff really isn't anywhere near as difficult to grasp as most people seem to think it is. And we NTSC shooters have more frame rate options than you do. :)

And for the record, there's no such thing as 30i. :)

Life would have been much better had we simply given up NTSC and gone PAL and to hell with all the different HD formats. The first time I saw a PAL broadcast (when I was in Greece) I was blown away by the quality.

Plus you'd not have to spend the money to make the extra masters...

LOL

I have to agree here. We NTSC users keep making excuses for NTSC and why we think it is good but really we have had to deal with some pretty odd crap over the years. Forget about pulldown, what about 29.97 instead of 30? How about 720x486 for uncompressed but 720x480 for DV and mpeg2? Then there is the drop frame vs. non drop frame timecode. Sometimes I really do think NTSC was thought up to be a really really sick joke. Us NTSC users spend so much time learning how to deal with all of this crap while PAL users just get to what they want to do with the video.

By the way I do know why all of the stuff above had to happen the way it did. I'm just making fun of our format.

In addition to PAL being a better format than NTSC, the broadcast TV spots in European countries are usually better and more creative than ours. They don't have to worry about prudery so much.

And for the record, there's no such thing as 30i. :)[/QUOTE]

Give it a year or two and I am sure it will pop up as a new 'standard' to add to your list.

;)

okay... let me see if I got this right...

24F and 24P are just different way methods of making 24fps video... neither is "better" or "worse" than the other one.

Is it like having two cars that can both do 0 to 60mph in 5 seconds flat One is a front-wheel-dirve and the other one is a rear-wheel-drive. They are are equally fast going down a straight line.

Forgive me for hijacking but - I am about to buy the FX1, that does the Cineframe 24, correct? Would it be better to shoot 24cf and then slap it on a 23.976 timeline OR shoot 60i and convert it to 24p with a 3rd party conversion app???

There's already a thread that might help:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=79589

Much appreciated.

@Nate, If Canon is calling it 24f because they are using interlace CCD's then why is the Sonys' V1 calling it 24p even though they're using interlaced CMOS? XDCAM HD is also calling it 24p. Is it because they don't lost horizontal resolution?

Because Sony apparently doesn't feel uncomfortable stretching the truth.

To me personally, it doesn't matter. My personal definition of 24p is 24 discrete frames, each taken 1/24th of a second apart and lasting an identical length of time. I don't care how they get there, as long as it looks like what I'd get with a film camera/telecine.

The Canons, the XCDAMs, and the V1 all look fine to me.

Hey Nate,

This might be abit off topic but I wanna ask anyway lol....

The mechanics of a film camera 25fps (PAL) is achieved with the shutter going at 1/25th sec which I'm sure alot of people already knows. But for video cameras, DV or HDV, why is it that some sources recommend shooting at 1/50th sec to achieve 25fps?