23.976 or 24 fps??

[Gary Stone]

what if you're not sure whether you're going film out or not? as in, if your film "might" get theatrical distribution? should you shoot 24fps or 23.976? can you get 24 true progressive frames per second out to film from 23.976 if you have to? at full quality?

thanks!

 

[Prem Edpuganti]

If your material is desitned for television, dvd or bluray, then 23.976 is the way to go, because true 24p will only cause major problems down the road. Movies that are shot on film at 24fps are tele-cined at 23.976 for dvd, bluray and television distribution. When shot at 23.976 all it takes is a simple pull-down to get to 29.97 for NTSC delivery, which is the US standard. If you shoot true 24p, you will have to go through complex frame-rate conversions to get your material to look good for dvd and television distribution. There are only a few systems out there that do this well, like a Teranex for example, and time on these is not cheap.

Well, my head is spinning. Do I have to make the choice before the shoot, filmout or not. Pretty hard thing to decide. Like to keep the options open.

 

[Brandon Fraley]

the point is it's easier to shoot and edit and screen 29.98 immediately and then pay for the conversion to 24 with all the other expenses when you're doing your film out, than to shoot 24 and right of the bat have to do a conversion to properly work with the footage and screen it NTSC.

23.98 is the logical choice is you ask me

 

[M Most]

what if you're not sure whether you're going film out or not? as in, if your film "might" get theatrical distribution? should you shoot 24fps or 23.976? can you get 24 true progressive frames per second out to film from 23.976 if you have to? at full quality?

This is a non-issue. Regardless of whether you record on video or as data at 23.98 or 24, a frame is a frame. The only difference is in how fast you play those frames. There is no quality difference because there is no difference, period (other than perhaps an imperceptible difference in motion blur).

If you're working in the US, regardless of final distribution format, there is no compelling reason to work at anything other than 23.98 other than to make yourself feel good. It is almost unavoidable that at various times during both production and post, you will need to create and distribute video versions of what you're doing. And it is equally unavoidable that you'll eventually deal with post sound. Due to the vast infrastructure already in place, this is more easily done with 23.98 than with 24. And if you need to make 24, you run it slightly faster - as you do once you've put those frames on film and project them at 24 fps. And if you need to make it 25fps for foreign markets, you run it another 4% faster. Those kinds of conversions are done every day, and since the frames themselves never change - remember, a frame is a frame - quality is not affected at all.

 

[bobbystone]

Shoot 24 if you're going to the big screen. If you're going to telecine, shoot 23.98

 

[bobbystone]

Let me add that the only reason this matters is that your playback of your film matches your audio. If you shoot 24, then telecine at 23.98 you're gonig to lose sync, as your film will now be played back .01% slower. You CAN change the speed of the audio in post.

 

[Troy Smith]

If you're working in the US, regardless of final distribution format, there is no compelling reason to work at anything other than 23.98 other than to make yourself feel good. It is almost unavoidable that at various times during both production and post, you will need to create and distribute video versions of what you're doing. And it is equally unavoidable that you'll eventually deal with post sound. Due to the vast infrastructure already in place, this is more easily done with 23.98 than with 24. And if you need to make 24, you run it slightly faster - as you do once you've put those frames on film and project them at 24 fps. And if you need to make it 25fps for foreign markets, you run it another 4% faster. Those kinds of conversions are done every day, and since the frames themselves never change - remember, a frame is a frame - quality is not affected at all.

Interesting info mmost, I'm wondering how you go about converting the 23.98 footage to 25fps for pal, which programme do you use mmost, to get the 25fps. Or are u talking about hardware converters when you talk about speeding up the footage to get the transfer?

THanks
Stricko

 

[M Most]

Interesting info mmost, I'm wondering how you go about converting the 23.98 footage to 25fps for pal, which programme do you use mmost, to get the 25fps. Or are u talking about hardware converters when you talk about speeding up the footage to get the transfer?

Neither software nor hardware converters are commonly used professionally. The most common way of producing a 25p master from a 23.98 master is to use an HDCam SR deck (nearly all mastering today is done to HDCam SR). That deck is capable of playing back a 23.98 master at 23.98, 24, and 25 fps directly. That is also how both NTSC and PAL downconversions are usually accomplished, by playing the master at the proper speed and downconverting from 1080 to either 525 or 625 as required without any temporal interpolation (since the frame rate itself does not change), using either the internal downconverter in the deck or an external device (in our case, a Teranex Xantus).

If the material is in the form of a data file - say, a Quicktime file - you can simply conform it to 25fps, accomplishing the same thing.

 

[M Most]

Let me add that the only reason this matters is that your playback of your film matches your audio. If you shoot 24, then telecine at 23.98 you're gonig to lose sync, as your film will now be played back .01% slower. You CAN change the speed of the audio in post.

That is also not a problem. Production sound is pulled down by a variety of methods, all very fast and all very common.

 

[M Most]

Shoot 24 if you're going to the big screen. If you're going to telecine, shoot 23.98

The only time you would be going to telecine is if you're shooting film, since telecine is, by definition, a film to tape transfer. In this case, you would not want to shoot at 23.98. You would shoot at 24fps, and record sound with 30 frame time code. Both will be pulled down during the telecine transfer.

If you're talking about shooting with a Red camera (as I thought we were), it really doesn't matter, for the reasons I stated above.

 

[Harry Clark]

Listen to Mike. Shoot 23.98. For EVERYTHING.
Cheers,
Harry

 

[Jeremy Newmark]

I have to apologize, I really was trying to make things clearer and not confuse people even more. As Harry said, "Listen to Mike". Mike Most is one of the most knowledgeable people on this forum.

In regards to digital acquisition, which is what we are talking about when shooting with the RedOne, then simply shoot 23.976 for the US market, weather you are going to film or dvd. If you are only going to television broadcast, then the frame-rate (23.976, 29.97, etc.) is an aesthetic decision, as to what type of look you are going for, but in this case, don't shoot true 24p. Another Mike (Bravin) once said to me that he simply wished that digital cameras didn't have the option to shoot true 24p, because it only causes more headaches then it's worth due to the fact that it is frequently mis-used due to lack of knowledge. However, all the high-end digital cameras do give us these options, which is good, but it is our responsibility as the professional user to be properly educated in knowing how to correctly use the tools we choose to work with.

 

[Jeremy Newmark]

I think I can be even clearer. If you shoot 23.976, you give yourself the most options open to you with an easy path to get there. If you choose to shoot another frame-rate, then you start to limit those options or at least make them more complex.

 

[Andrew Young]

I concur with Mike. We work in both frame rates all the time and neither is a problem in post. But more people have made costly mistakes using 24p. 23.976 does not require pulldown for video or DVD output so for most users is is actually more 'pure' than 24p. Think about where the most eyeballs will see your work. If is is projected film then shooting 24p would be more 'pure,' otherwise, 23.976 is more practical. And the latter transfered to 24p film is not an issue whatsoever.