30fps vs. 24fps - for TELEVISION DOCUMENTATIES ??

[Craig Parkes]

But... best thing is - know your end market and (if they have them) your delivery requirements.

This. If you can ascertain your primary market and acquire for it thats best. Acquisition frame rate should be decided upon firstly by production requirements, while taking primary deliverables into consideration, then ancillary markets for your content.

The ever growing issue I guess is just how fractured those ancillary markets are (especially when you include web), and the financial fall out to your business model of having barriers to sell into secondary markets if your primary market isn't as successful as you had hoped.

Great or unique content doesn't face this issue nearly as much, because great or unique content will overcome the technical hurdles in most cases or is handed a set of deliverables before they start. Independently produced 'Cost effective content' whatever that may be, needs to take a much closer eye on easing the path of delivery so that you not only maximize returns but maximize returns quickly.

I guess my answer is more 'If your project is completely on spec, and you aren't following fast motion, then 23.98 acquisition has technical advantages delivering to all territories, but technical hurdles when shooting. Ensuring you have a smooth road in post is important, but not if you compromise production by foisting an acquisition frame rate not understood by your crew onto them for the preception of potential sale further down the line.'

If you're that crew, the ultimate answer is to ideally understand all acquisition formats and their implications, but failing that shoot what you know.

There is no right answer (except when you have network deliverables and a contract!), but listening to someone else who doesn't know your exact circumstances is probably always the wrong answer.

 

[Steve Gibby]

For fiction programming (and I include Survivor et all in fiction) the United States is a big market. For true non-fiction, still a big market, but less so. Few Americans ever watch real documentaries, but most Europeans do on a regular basis. American networks are also much more conservative about what you can or cannot say on air. For example, if your show questions the value of consumerism or suburban living you might struggle quite a bit. If your show deals with sexuality in a frank way, then the U.S.A. might not be a T.V. market at all. Every household in Europe (well, I think it's about 90%) has a TV. What's a "TV household" then but a parity count of population? Americans watch much, much more TV though, that's true, but still. This TV household count sounds suspect.

You are wrong on your assumptions. Taking into account all broadcast and cable networks in the U.S., the total number of non-fiction programs far outnumbers the total number of fiction programs. I can back that up with National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) data if you’d like. There are an ever-increasing percentage of documentaries airing in the U.S. - not just the Documentary Channel, but on networks and channels like VH1, ESPN, Fox Sports Net, History, A&E, Discovery, Nat Geo, Animal Planet, Palladia, Speed, Fuel, and several more networks. How do I know that? Those networks I named are among the 18 different networks that have aired programs and series I’ve produced and directed. If you don’t believe the TV household counts I’ve quoted, then simply look them up yourself via the IDATE, Nielsen, and NAB web sites. Again, as I mentioned in my previous posts, as a producer in this industry its not necessarily about households, whether you’re an indie, network packager, or in-house producer - its about net profits. Though we're artists we also need to take good care of the business end of things or we won't last long in this industry.

OK, but I don't know of any PAL networks that will happily accept 29.97 content. It looks terrible when converted to PAL. So by your statement, which I agree with, 29.97 only "suits the content" if your program has zero sales potential outside NTSC territories. When I say "non-fiction" I really mean documentary, which is what the OP is talking about. There is no way that more people watch documentaries than fiction (or quasi-fiction like Survivor). I have yet to encounter a network that refused a 23.976p timeline-based program in their specs. Most accept it with no conversion. Some demand that you hand in something converted to 1080i or 720p or whatever. Such a conversion never costs more than $100, maybe $250, depending on HD cam tape prices. So it's really not an issue. However, try converting 29.97 to 25p/50i for Pal and you are in for a world of hurt.

Who said to submit 29.97 content to PAL networks? Me and several others said to analyze what networks are your target airing outlets, consider the best fps acquisition choice for your particular genre of production, then shoot accordingly. But in the end no matter whether your programs are indie, barter, part barter, packaged, or in-house they must conform to the airing network’s tech specifications for delivery to them. If the airing market for your programs will be mostly in NTSC areas, and it’s in a genre that aesthetically calls for acquisition in 29.97 or 59.94 (both of them progressive), but will also air to a lesser extent in PAL areas, then the acquisition choice is obvious – 29.97 or 59.94 – but it will still have to be converted to 720p or 1080i for delivery to the network. If the majority airing markets will be mixed NTSC and PAL, and it’s a narrative program or series, then acquisition in 23.976 makes perfect sense. If the major airing markets are in PAL areas, and the program or series is in various non-fiction genres, especially those will a lot of high motion content, then 50p acquisition make good sense – but it will still have to be delivered in 50i to the network for airing. ATSC HDTV standards define broadcast standards as either 1080i or 720p – thus networks broadcasting in HD require the airing master be delivered in the one of those two formats that the network broadcasts. You keep saying that you’ve never encountered a network that refused 23.976 – and yet myself and several others on this thread have given you many examples of networks that specify no 23.976 deliveries for airing – namely Discovery Network (DCI – Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, etc.), specifies 1080i or 720p for acquisition, 1080i for delivery, and 23.976 only with special permission, with Nat Geo various res/fps are OK for acquisition but all programs must be delivered in 59.94fps. The huge NBC Universal family of networks (NBC, Bravo, Telemundo, Golf, etc.) will let you acquire images at 23.976 or whatever fps you want – but all programs must be delivered in 1080i 59.94 fields or 29.97 frames per second. Of the 18 networks I’ve produced/directed programs for airing not one of them routinely accepts 23.976 submissions for airing (masters), with only a few of them like Discovery accepting a 23.976 master by very special permission. If someone has shot a program in 29.97p, and needs to convert it to 23.976p there are numerous good software applications capable of that – IMO the best solution is offered by my friend Graeme Nattress.

I know what the term means, but most shows I work on master in 1080p23.976. Out of that comes a prores file. Then there are many conversions made, for many markets/networks/media types. 59.976 is not a very practical mastering format unless your show will never leave NTSC territory broadcast, and if your timelines is set to that, all your titles will look funny on a plasma or LCD. The explanation wasn't just for you (or really for you at all) it was to clear up a common source of confusion. In the digital world the term mastering is being used less and less, at least around here. I hear "timeline render" more and more. You can make a render at any resolution, at any time, depending on need. Even colorspace varies, so you want that RAW timeline kept as your "master", not some HDcam tape.

If most of what you work on is mastered in 1080p23.976 then that simply means that your work is in genres that are traditionally shot in 23.976. Which networks are you delivering 1080p23.976 masters to? As I illustrated above, if you were delivering that 1080p23.976 program for airing on an NTSC network, transcoding to an airing master of 59.94i is still required by basically all NTSC networks. Anyone who is a veteran of television production should be way familiar with the terms “master” and "mastering”. When we use the term “master” it can either mean backups of the completely edited program - or what I referred to, which is the airing copy sent to a network or station. BTW for basically every one for the networks I’ve done TV programs, the terms in their own Producer’s Guidelines for the airing delivery copy they receive are “master” and “mastered”. Also, each of those networks still required the mastering be via HDCam SR, with some of them also accepting a D5 tape. Legacy investments in tape machines are still dying away slowly among TV networks.

We produce content for air + web. We have music videos, commercials and have two non-fiction TV series on the plate, one a little more currently active than the other, this through private spec financing. I used to own a post-prod boutique that did 2D and 3D for mainstream commercials. As advert directors my wife and I are represented (as a team) in Toronto at a top-flight boutique where our specialization is fashion and romantic spots. I used to be represented in L.A. as a screenwriter, but missed sets, so I went back to production, joining creative forces with my wife. I am am well under 40, but nonetheless I know my s__t, as do you, I'm sure, but I think we have very different visions of the world, live in different worlds and sell ourselves to different people in very different ways. You seem to have taken all this a bit personally, it was not meant that way. To me a post on Reduser is a post to the general Red user public, to anyone specific.

Sounds like you’re doing some fun and interesting work! I found your profile on Linked In. Cool stuff…

I’m 63 years old, been working in TV and film for 32 years now, contributed work to about 950 broadcast and cable network TV programs, which aired on 18 different networks, as an executive producer, field producer, director, DP, cameraman, scriptwriter, and editor. Here’s a link to my bio: http://redconnector.com/user/gibby


----------------------------------------------


I have no personal axe to grind here with you or anyone else. I just come here to learn and share my own experiences to help others. On page 3 of this thread, in your post #26, it was you who first took exception with what I had posted – essentially calling me out on it. Since then we’ve been exchanging our opinions and experiences. Basically that’s how forums like Red user should work. Readers can then draw their own conclusions.

 

[Steve Gibby]

Mark and Craig,

Some very good points in both of your last posts...

Mark - for sports programming, which I've done a lot of, if its airing on an NTSC network, ABC and ESPN air shows in 720p, and the other sports networks air their programs in 1080i. In those situations with Red One we've shot 29.97 (obviously progressive because its Red One). But with Epic when shooting non-hardlined sports programs we've been shooting in 4k HD 29.97 or 59.94 (obviously progressive), overcranking for slow motion up to 120fps. The footage has looked stellar...

 

[Rob Ruffo]

Mark and Craig,

Some very good points in both of your last posts...

Mark - for sports programming, which I've done a lot of, if its airing on an NTSC network, ABC and ESPN air shows in 720p, and the other sports networks air their programs in 1080i. In those situations with Red One we've shot 29.97 (obviously progressive because its Red One). But with Epic when shooting non-hardlined sports programs we've been shooting in 4k HD 29.97 or 59.94 (obviously progressive), overcranking for slow motion up to 120fps. The footage has looked stellar...

That, I maintain, gives you what amounts to a mildly visible effect, the "live TV 30p effect", and takes way any opportunity for PAL distribution. I suggest users try and convert 30p to 25p or 24p to see the problem. You have very ugly skipping motion (not a subtle thing) or you have to use Twixtor on every shot (not an easy nor by any means automatic process, which often leaves artifacts despite skillful application). You'll need 24p even for some net streamers, liek Vimeo - but all can play 24p wither straight (Vimeo) or through non-ugly pulldown (youtube)

You can get most of that "live TV super-real" feel by just using deep depth of field or a more ENG-like small sensor camera (P2, Sony EX3 et all., etc.) At a look level, you'll notice that a lot more than the frame rate, and you won't be cutting off a large chunk of you potential market from ever being able to buy or even easily preview your product.

Of course you can transcode 24p to any tape or digital format or frame rate. It takes a few minutes.

I suppose some sports are only of semi-local interest. American football few would ever watch in Italy, just like soccer has a small audience in North America. Other topics have a more international, or more specifically inter-TV standard, potential appeal.

 

[Rob Ruffo]

You are wrong on your assumptions. Taking into account all broadcast and cable networks in the U.S., the total number of non-fiction programs far outnumbers the total number of fiction programs. I can back that up with National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) data if you’d like. There are an ever-increasing percentage of documentaries airing in the U.S. - not just the Documentary Channel, but on networks and channels like VH1, ESPN, Fox Sports Net, History, A&E, Discovery, Nat Geo, Animal Planet, Palladia, Speed, Fuel, and several more networks. How do I know that? Those networks I named are among the 18 different networks that have aired programs and series I’ve produced and directed. If you don’t believe the TV household counts I’ve quoted, then simply look them up yourself via the IDATE, Nielsen, and NAB web sites. Again, as I mentioned in my previous posts, as a producer in this industry its not necessarily about households, whether you’re an indie, network packager, or in-house producer - its about net profits. Though we're artists we also need to take good care of the business end of things or we won't last long in this industry.




Who said to submit 29.97 content to PAL networks? Me and several others said to analyze what networks are your target airing outlets, consider the best fps acquisition choice for your particular genre of production, then shoot accordingly. But in the end no matter whether your programs are indie, barter, part barter, packaged, or in-house they must conform to the airing network’s tech specifications for delivery to them. If the airing market for your programs will be mostly in NTSC areas, and it’s in a genre that aesthetically calls for acquisition in 29.97 or 59.94 (both of them progressive), but will also air to a lesser extent in PAL areas, then the acquisition choice is obvious – 29.97 or 59.94 – but it will still have to be converted to 720p or 1080i for delivery to the network. If the majority airing markets will be mixed NTSC and PAL, and it’s a narrative program or series, then acquisition in 23.976 makes perfect sense. If the major airing markets are in PAL areas, and the program or series is in various non-fiction genres, especially those will a lot of high motion content, then 50p acquisition make good sense – but it will still have to be delivered in 50i to the network for airing. ATSC HDTV standards define broadcast standards as either 1080i or 720p – thus networks broadcasting in HD require the airing master be delivered in the one of those two formats that the network broadcasts. You keep saying that you’ve never encountered a network that refused 23.976 – and yet myself and several others on this thread have given you many examples of networks that specify no 23.976 deliveries for airing – namely Discovery Network (DCI – Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, etc.), specifies 1080i or 720p for acquisition, 1080i for delivery, and 23.976 only with special permission, with Nat Geo various res/fps are OK for acquisition but all programs must be delivered in 59.94fps. The huge NBC Universal family of networks (NBC, Bravo, Telemundo, Golf, etc.) will let you acquire images at 23.976 or whatever fps you want – but all programs must be delivered in 1080i 59.94 fields or 29.97 frames per second. Of the 18 networks I’ve produced/directed programs for airing not one of them routinely accepts 23.976 submissions for airing (masters), with only a few of them like Discovery accepting a 23.976 master by very special permission. If someone has shot a program in 29.97p, and needs to convert it to 23.976p there are numerous good software applications capable of that – IMO the best solution is offered by my friend Graeme Nattress.




If most of what you work on is mastered in 1080p23.976 then that simply means that your work is in genres that are traditionally shot in 23.976. Which networks are you delivering 1080p23.976 masters to? As I illustrated above, if you were delivering that 1080p23.976 program for airing on an NTSC network, transcoding to an airing master of 59.94i is still required by basically all NTSC networks. Anyone who is a veteran of television production should be way familiar with the terms “master” and "mastering”. When we use the term “master” it can either mean backups of the completely edited program - or what I referred to, which is the airing copy sent to a network or station. BTW for basically every one for the networks I’ve done TV programs, the terms in their own Producer’s Guidelines for the airing delivery copy they receive are “master” and “mastered”. Also, each of those networks still required the mastering be via HDCam SR, with some of them also accepting a D5 tape. Legacy investments in tape machines are still dying away slowly among TV networks.




Sounds like you’re doing some fun and interesting work! I found your profile on Linked In. Cool stuff…

I’m 63 years old, been working in TV and film for 32 years now, contributed work to about 950 broadcast and cable network TV programs, which aired on 18 different networks, as an executive producer, field producer, director, DP, cameraman, scriptwriter, and editor. Here’s a link to my bio: http://redconnector.com/user/gibby


----------------------------------------------


I have no personal axe to grind here with you or anyone else. I just come here to learn and share my own experiences to help others. On page 3 of this thread, in your post #26, it was you who first took exception with what I had posted – essentially calling me out on it. Since then we’ve been exchanging our opinions and experiences. Basically that’s how forums like Red user should work. Readers can then draw their own conclusions.

You've done some great work Steve. If I didn't respect you I wouldn't bother arguing with you - this is my Latin heritage showing . Thanks for the kind words.

As for no networks refusing 24p, I meant no networks refusing spec productions originated from a 24p (i.e. 23.976) timeline, anywhere in the world. You can convert that to any regional flavor of 1080i, 720p 1080p- its' all seamless - and requires no money or skill - just send the master as prores to a suite and ask for an HDCAM SR master, 720p or 1080i, for Pal and NTSC. It won't cost much aside form buying the physical tapes.

30p to 25p (or 1080i50) is a nightmare - there are NO truly good tools for this, only crappy quality or super expensive and time consuming (or both) and many agree with me (like LightIron and the like). If you shot at 30p, or rendered your effects at that framerate you are kind of screwed outside North America. If you shot or rendered your effects at "true 1080i" (I.e. 60 different fields a second, not just 30 or 24p split into fields for broadcast or encoding) , your show will look crappy on any modern display - only CRTs will properly display an interlaced format without nasty artifacts of one type or another.

 

[Derek Devine]

Speaking of which, what's the best software to convert a 23.98 Red-spot to 29.97i (3:2 pull down) for broadcast? FCP doesn't do it right (just repeats every 4th frame) so the only way I can get it to look right is to output via my Kona 3 card and recapture as 29.97i on another system.

There has to be better software to accomplish this. I've tried Compressor's frame controls but instead of 3:2 pull down it wants to interpolate new frames which looks artificially smooth, and After Effects seems to just repeat every 4th frame like FCP does. I've heard Natress makes some FCP plug-ins for this, but I haven't tried them yet. Any suggestions?

Edit: did a search and came across the answer!

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/8/1070377

Our famous post. That guy used to work for me. Smart. We were really frustrated with this issue and would typically round trip to our HD150 through a kona card. Finding this solution was a real lifestyle change. All the pull down presets we found looked awful. I'm always curious to hear how others are adding pull down. Any chance we could get some feedback on that front? It's easier said than done in some cases and just letting final cut do it isn't doing it right. I'm betting most here offload to a deck.

 

[Steve Gibby]

You've done some great work Steve. If I didn't respect you I wouldn't bother arguing with you - this is my Latin heritage showing . Thanks for the kind words.

As for no networks refusing 24p, I meant no networks refusing spec productions originated from a 24p (i.e. 23.976) timeline, anywhere in the world. You can convert that to any regional flavor of 1080i, 720p 1080p- its' all seamless - and requires no money or skill - just send the master as prores to a suite and ask for an HDCAM SR master, 720p or 1080i, for Pal and NTSC. It won't cost much aside form buying the physical tapes.

30p to 25p (or 1080i50) is a nightmare - there are NO truly good tools for this, only crappy quality or super expensive and time consuming (or both) and many agree with me (like LightIron and the like). If you shot at 30p, or rendered your effects at that framerate you are kind of screwed outside North America. If you shot or rendered your effects at "true 1080i" (I.e. 60 different fields a second, not just 30 or 24p split into fields for broadcast or encoding) , your show will look crappy on any modern display - only CRTs will properly display an interlaced format without nasty artifacts of one type or another.

A quote from you in your post #26 of this thread "NO network refuses 24p content. simple none". That was a fully erroneous statement. Did you add "unless it is converted to (network's airing resolution/frame rate)"? No you didn't. Now after several posts you're finally clarifying that over to "I meant no networks refusing spec productions originated in 24p (I.e. 23.976)". You were wrong in the beginning - and now you're only partially right. Several networks specify in their Producer's Guidelines for non-fiction programming that 23.976 is not acceptable for acquisition. Why is that? For exactly the reasons I've repeated several times in this thread: 1) Non-fiction audiences are not looking to have reality suspended in the visual presentation 2) Non-fiction audiences are seeking to be immersed into the present 3) The judder characteristics of 23.976 fast pans and tilts following fast motion content are highly distracting to non-fiction audiences seeking to be drawn into the "now" 4) 23.976 footage converted to faster frame rates never looks as natural and smooth in motion for non-fiction content as faster frame rate originated content.

Products like BlackMagic Teranex VC100-BMD Universal Format Converter & Frame Synchronizer with Standards Conversion Capability do an extremely good job of converting just about any format/resolution/frame rate to any other format/resolution/frame rate. Link: http://teranex.com/products/vc100-datasheet
Price: $19,995 USD

Large production entities include a Teranex or other high-end standards converters in their studios and mobile production trucks. For boutique production companies something like a Teranex is a bit costly, but even then the cost of them having masters and footage converted is still quite affordable. Once again, in saying "If you shot at 30p...you are kind of screwed outside of North America", you're overlooking repeated posts by myself and others on this thread outlining why there is a need to shoot most genres of non-fiction at higher frame rates than 23.976, and then not acknowledging that there are affordable outsourcing options like Teranex for high-quality standards conversion.

I see from your online info that you direct and edit. That's fine - those are two of my skill sets too. But I didn't see any reference to your producing television programs for distribution as a network packager or indie television producer. Did I miss that? If you don't produce, then why won't you simply quit arguing and listen to someone (me) who has produced hundreds of TV programs for decades , and had to continually deliver those programs at exactly the tech specs required by the airing networks?

Almost all my work for several years now has been for HDTV distribution - not standard definition NTSC or PAL distribution. As such, the programs me and my crews deliver conform to each network's Producer's Guidelines and ATSC parameters. Its happening slowly, but standard definition NTSC and PAL are inevitably headed the way of the dinosaur. The TV programs I produce meet the network's specs, satisfy the viewing audience's expectations, and playback good on CRT, LCD, and Plasma.

You know what Rob - you can believe what you want to believe. I've taken a lot of time away from my normal production work to share on this thread my thoughts on frame rates for non-fiction programming and certain documentaries which warrant higher frame rates than 23.976. No matter what I say here I get the feeling that you're going to take exception with it. Have you noticed that nobody else on this thread has been doing that? I would guess that would be because they know as a longtime veteran producer/director/DP I do have the "flick" on how to produce, direct, shoot, and deliver TV programs to networks.

George D., the originator of this thread, is based in the USA (California), asked about frame rates for several USA-based networks that I've produced programs for airing on, and made no mention whatsoever needing to air his shows on PAL networks. My advice to him was accurate and direct - for where he lives, the networks he mentioned, and his stated needs.

I've said my piece on this thread, I stand by everything I've posted, and I'm walking away from this discussion now. I have some very important Epic 3D production work to do starting in a few days for a new HD 3D television series I'm executive producing - so I'm going to sign off from this thread for a while and do my normal production work. Discussions on forums don't pay the bills...

 

[Steve Gibby]

That, I maintain, gives you what amounts to a mildly visible effect, the "live TV 30p effect", and takes way any opportunity for PAL distribution. I suggest users try and convert 30p to 25p or 24p to see the problem. You have very ugly skipping motion (not a subtle thing) or you have to use Twixtor on every shot (not an easy nor by any means automatic process, which often leaves artifacts despite skillful application). You'll need 24p even for some net streamers, liek Vimeo - but all can play 24p wither straight (Vimeo) or through non-ugly pulldown (youtube)

You can get most of that "live TV super-real" feel by just using deep depth of field or a more ENG-like small sensor camera (P2, Sony EX3 et all., etc.) At a look level, you'll notice that a lot more than the frame rate, and you won't be cutting off a large chunk of you potential market from ever being able to buy or even easily preview your product.

Of course you can transcode 24p to any tape or digital format or frame rate. It takes a few minutes.

I suppose some sports are only of semi-local interest. American football few would ever watch in Italy, just like soccer has a small audience in North America. Other topics have a more international, or more specifically inter-TV standard, potential appeal.

As illustrated in my last post, I disagree with your "shoot it all in 23.976" rationale. As I posted many times when producing television programs, whither someone is in-house, a contract packager, or a full indie, they must in every case conform their deliverables to the airing network's tech guidelines. Beyond that, producers need to select the format/resolution/frame rate that best serves their genre of production and what the viewing audience expects - and I'm sorry, but there's a big universe of non-fiction production genres for which 23.976 isn't the best choice. This is Red User, and obviously the cameras here (Red One, Epic, and Scarlet) shoot various resolutions between 2k and 5k. Is standard definition distribution like NTSC or PAL the crown jewel reason to own and use Red cameras? No - the core reasons people use Red cameras are HDTV, features, even IMAX now, and naturally UHD 3D production.

As I also illustrated in my last post a position of "29.97 can't be standards converted to anything else" is a crock. Products like Blackmagic Teranex (and others) do an exceptional job of standards conversion - and quickly hiring a standards conversion house to convert to anything is quite affordable.

Just because someone is shooting genres that call for higher frame rates than 23.976 is no reason to take the usual cop out and assume that their footage looks like "live TV". Good fundamentals of camera work are just that - good fundamentals of camera work. An attitude that anyone who shoots frame rates higher than 23.976 is somehow inferior, or less of a cinematographer is pure hogwash. In the late '70's I learned to shoot film and cine style. I worked with some incredible cinematographers. But since then I've worked with some incredibly talented EFP cameramen and videographers who do amazing things with a camera. Horses for courses - there is no "better" camera craft than the other - just the right camera craft for each type of production. There is no universal "better" frame rate - just a "better" frame rate for certain genres of production, venues, and airing resources.

As mentioned in my last post I've spent more than enough time on this thread explaining and re-explaining my professional experience and insight as a producer/director/DP of several hundred national and international TV programs in the non-fiction industry. Everything I've posted here is how it works in the real world of producing non-fiction television series. Its time for me to sign off and go do what I do - this time some Epic 3D TV production for a new series being shot worldwide in 5k - and naturally it will be shot in a much higher frame rate than 23.976 - for the same reasons cited many times by Peter Jackson and James Cameron. But I suppose they just don't know what they're doing too...

 

[Derek Devine]

and naturally it will be shot in a much higher frame rate than 23.976 - for the same reasons cited many times by Peter Jackson and James Cameron. But I suppose they just don't know what they're doing too...

Can you share the frame rate that you will be working with? Thanks for you contribution. Very informative.

 

[Steve Gibby]

Can you share the frame rate that you will be working with? Thanks for you contribution. Very informative.

Absolutely...

Peter Jackson prefers 48 fps for 3D, but James cameron prefers 60 fps. Our team has analyzed the pluses and minuses of both those frame rates for our particular 3D productions - and we decided to field test both frame rates for suitability for the "look and feel" of our particular projects - which will be an IMAX 3D feature and a 3D TV series of 16 one hour programs scheduled to be shot on every continent (except Antarctica!). Wish I could share more info - I'll be free to share more sometime in the near future. I'm one of the executive producers, one of the directors, and also will be one of the stereographers.

Hope this helps answer your question...that's all I can share for now

 

[Derek Devine]

Thanks. Looking forward to hearing more in the future.

Here'a dumb question that I kind of don't want to ask, and I'm more curious than anything....so is there a 48fps drop standard? What, would that be 47.952?