24P or 23.976P? That is the question.

[MichaelP]

In my experience, audio is not recorded at a specific fps (especially when recorded externally). I have converted various short film projects to DCP, as a feature length compilation for the Digi60 Spring 2013 filmmaker's festival in Ottawa Canada this year. Audio has to be sped up 100.1% if the project originates as a 23.976fps video to keep sync with a 24fps DCP.

Which is what I referred to in my original post. It's about sample rate to frame rate. Timecode is extracted as "n" number of samples from midnight (00:00:00:00) samples/frame rate = timecode. But all the .1% adjustments are done via a sample rate conversion, which need be to QC'd. For a while, a certain studio mandated 24.000 when there was a day and date release of a large feature because there was no time to QC all the stems for foreign with the sample rate conversion. Working at 24.000 means theatrical DCP was the priority and broadcast deliverables were secondary or had more time to deal with the files.

Michael

 

[Jith Paul]

I agree completely. I have only done a handful of DCPs and it was lucky enough to live in a city with very accommodating indie-friendly theatres that let me QC them. Not having to convert from non DCP compliant frame rates would avoid this issue but as you stated correctly, it becomes a matter of figuring out what your priorities are in terms of delivery.

 

[Tom Gray]

why in hell do we even mess with a this decimal crap any longer, we have been dragging this nonsense along from the 40's and it's time to dump it once and for all. my people in this business don't even know why we have it in the first place. england has no such junk 25P done. americans really think that God made it this way and it has been a pain in the a-- forever . this .that......... please lets dump this antiquated nonsense once and for all, 24p for theatrical release, 30p for tv, done. it's been costing millions just dealing with this in post and i've been around sets when the round table "for hours" are dicking around about this matter. please if their is a God in heaven lets dump this crap. please don't reply telling me it can't be done because i know better; every piece of equipment these days can handle this, over and out, one signature and this nightmare is over at last. the owner of red alone can make this happen.

 

[Bruce Allen]

Americans don't like it much either.

However... nope: not every piece of equipment in use these days can handle it. You do not know better. Sorry.

Sorry bro. You need to wait a few more years. Or cut down your collaboration choices, of course. If everyone you work with or guess that you'll possibly work with on your projects in the future can handle true 24p, then by all means use it.

We haven't moved away at all from 29.97 fps / 59.94i -- HD broadcast in the U.S. is 1080/59.94i. The majority of dramatic television in the U.S. is shot at 23.976 fps (23.98P).

Yup. Even the move away from tapes doesn't change that basic fact. EG even if we shoot and post a promo at 23.98, folks like Discovery often want a 1080i 29.97 HD Quicktime with 3:2 added at the end. And we darn well make sure we provide them that if that's what they want.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Marc Wielage]

Bruce is correct: the client is always right, and you have to deliver what they ask for in the contract. There is no negotiating, 99% of the time.

About 8-9 years ago, I did win a few arguments where a few distributors were still asking for 35mm mag soundtracks, and we were able to get them to accept WAV files and DA88 tapes. But for American TV, 1080i 29.97 dropframe is still very, very standard, and you do have to add the 2:3 cadence to 23.98-frame material for it to work. At least if it's 23.98, you can predict the precise program timing, which is critical for broadcasting.

For theatrical, there's a lot more weasel room as long as you deliver what they ask for.

BTW, it would be nice if Mr. Gray would read the dates on the messages. Just sayin'...

 

[M Most]

why in hell do we even mess with a this decimal crap any longer, we have been dragging this nonsense along from the 40's and it's time to dump it once and for all. t......... please lets dump this antiquated nonsense once and for all, 24p for theatrical release, 30p for tv, done. it's been costing millions just dealing with this in post and i've been around sets when the round table "for hours" are dicking around about this matter. please if their is a God in heaven lets dump this crap. please don't reply telling me it can't be done because i know better; every piece of equipment these days can handle this, over and out, one signature and this nightmare is over at last. the owner of red alone can make this happen.

Regardless of how melodramatic you want to be, it's just a setting, for heavens sake. I honestly don't understand why you and others here want to make this out to be some major problem or industry crisis when it's been the way things are for at least 60 years and has never really been an issue. Your suggestion of using 30fps for television would create far, far more problems than the fractional frame rate does because it would require a standards conversion with frame interpolation to go to 50i systems. That was one of the biggest problems with electronic post when we first started using it for film shows way back in 1985, and it was only solved by coming up with standards converters that identified the 3:2 pulldown pattern in the NTSC material, removed it, recreating the 24 film frames, and playing them back at 25fps. 24/23.98 video systems came along with HD in the mid to late 1990's to eliminate that problem that you would apparently rather bring back.

Contrary to your post, it isn't "costing millions to deal with this in post." It costs essentially nothing to play a 23.98 master at 25 fps for 50 output. It's done every day in thousands of places without incident and without any real trouble. The fractional frame rates are supported by virtually every device in existence in the HD and higher world and are implemented simply by selecting that setting. I really don't understand why anyone here or elsewhere considers it a big deal, other than those who just want to be stubborn or somehow indicate European superiority :undecided:

 

[Ivan McCullough]

Ahhhh that's just a red rag to a bull.

I do not have any interest in european superiority but understand why its not going away for tv, but 24p (hard if you like) for movies is better than 25p. I prefer the American film way, just not the American tv way of 23.whatever.

 

[Tom Gray]

just know way around it, like from props to jets. try to see it this way, just simply go 24p for everything get it. no fiddling around with anything and in short older equipment will follow overnight. think of shooting time base 24p for everything, no, lets go this way, jonny likes it that way or that way just straight 24p FOR EVERYTHING, every box the same just no settings just plug it in and forget it because when you really get down to it all this point this point that has absolutely nothing to do with art, talent or creativity which really is the bottom line is it not. if schindlers list was shot at 18 and 7/8's or 94 & 3/4 it still would be the same film. i'm just trying to get it back to a standard; it simply shouldn't have to be something you have to think about. the business is about art not frame rates and no, today it's not standardized. forget about a few pieces of gear, please give me a rational answer as to why we just simply can't go to straight 24p, of which 99% of hollywood can't even conclude what that really means? 24-23.98-23.97-23.976 i mean really, what's point other than old farts simply can't change.
remember when woody allen decided that his films would only be aired in their original aspect ratio, the networks thought he was nuts and not only did they comply it became the norm overnight just several years before hd. he was only one man! if big time directors told the networks they only wanted their properties aired in there original frame rate this matter would be concluded overnight.
i've been up all night typing with one finger lying on my back with the computer on an end table so to hell with grammar spelling and the like!!!

 

[Tom Gray]

three cheers for ivan....

 

[Marc Wielage]

remember when woody allen decided that his films would only be aired in their original aspect ratio, the networks thought he was nuts and not only did they comply it became the norm overnight just several years before hd.

Actually, that's not exactly what happened. Woody rejected four pan/scan transfers in a row of Manhattan when I was at Modern Videofilm in LA (circa 1983-1984), and in desperation, United Artists made the decision to offer a letterboxed version to him for approval. (Mr. Allen would not come to LA for the final transfer, so it was instead all supervised by the UA people.) The next day, a fax came in accepting it. So Woody never decided anything; it's just a question of what he approved.

Nowadays, directors and DPs are not nearly so cavalier about the home video transfer process, and they typically come in and supervise, rather than doing it by remote control.

The Woody Allen situation has nothing to do with 23.98 vs. 24fps or 25fps, BTW. It's just a number, and it doesn't matter as long as everybody on the production and post team agrees to a specific standard. But eventually, the movie will air on American television at 23.98.

 

[Tom Gray]

do you guys get edgy at the sight of a border collie?

 

[Tom Gray]

i believe i finally figured it out. several years ago i viewed a documentary out of the mideast, subject matter being female circumcision. a father was performing this barbaric clipping of his youngest daughter while the entire family looked on with anticipation. after it was over the interviewer had asked the older sister, which had already had this done, why such an old faith was still being preformed and she screamed out with excitement... it's tradition!!! ................ i rest my case

 

[Ivan McCullough]

Ok, equating 23.whatever to FGM is gong a little bit far.

 

[Craig Parkes]

Tom - that's a crass and idiotic comparison. If you don't understand that there are thousands of broadcast stations ising legacy equipment across the US, and millions of legacy tvs still in operation, and a massive existing broadcast infrastructure that traditionally ran on tape based media (where framerate changes were no simple task because of mechanical realities) and that 23.976 time code was the best solution available to be forward and backwards compatible, then that's just being ignorant of the scope of what's involved with broadcast distribution.

If you then go on to claim all the people tasked with managing and building this infrastructure are merely ignorant fools blinkered by tradition - then you are even more ignorant about the sort of incredibly clever problem solvers that work in the broadcast industry and who have solved some incredibly complex realworld problems with very sophisticated solutions.

And you are showing off all this ignorance for what benefit, the fact that you can't reconcile a two digit number with three digits following the decimal point?

The even more ridiculous aspect to this being you are claiming the purity of 24.000 fps - a format based on a mechanical medium that in it's most common form of playback conditions of 35mm print in an analog projector would almost never have 3 decimal places worth of accuracy in terms of locked frame rate.

If anyone is ignorant following tradition due to a lack of depth of understanding, it's clearly you due to a blinkered view of reality and an ideological, not practical, point of view in respect to the realities of worldwide broadcast distribution.