Hollywood 23.976 vs 24.00

[Linda Barzini]

I remember reading a post year a couple years ago that said almost all Hollywood movies were filmed at 23.976 and almost never at 24.00. Is this still true (or was it ever)?

 

[M Most]

Assuming you're talking about digital productions (you used the term "film," to some of us that has a specific meaning), they have mostly been done at 23.98 for some time. In the last year or so, some studios (Fox and Universal specifically) have begun to mandate 24 fps for feature work (NOT for broadcast), although there are some exceptions. In Europe, it's been 24fps for quite a while, unless it's specifically for a US based studio that requested 23.98. In North America, this is all due to legacy viewing formats, and legacy post sound infrastructures that have traditionally been built around "video 24" frame rates. That is now changing as the need for it (i.e., legacy hardware) is eroding.

 

[Martin Stevens]

Dear M Most,

So based on your expertise, can you say if we should shoot 24fps or 23.98 today?

 

[Kazu Okuda]

I do a lot of Moco work and the jitter is so bad at partial frame rates. It's stable at 24, so i've been shooting 24fps on those jobs. I shoot editorials, personal work, and web only deliveries, if they don't ask for a specific frame rate, i shoot 24. If they ask for 23.976 deliverables after the fact, then i just reconform it in smoke or compressor. Of course 23.976 if that is on the spec sheet.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

Just an obvious and dumb-ish question, but is there any reason that sound can't be shot at a 24 fps synch? Or is it just the "norm" to do 23.976 based on legacy issues?

 

[Marc Wielage]

Just an obvious and dumb-ish question, but is there any reason that sound can't be shot at a 24 fps synch? Or is it just the "norm" to do 23.976 based on legacy issues?

Sound can use integer timecode (24.00 or 30.00), which will sync up just fine with 24.00fps digital projects. It's not a problem to take an entire 24.00fps project and pull it down .1% to 23.98fps for broadcast or cable.

And by the same token, it's not a problem to take a project shot entirely at 23.98 and then pull it up .1% at the very end for release to theaters at 24.00fps.

 

[Michael Tiemann]

I don't remember the precise conditions--may have been shooting at 60p/180 degree under some flickery LEDs, but more than once I noticed flicker problems with NTSC base rates that went away when I changed the base rate to 24fps.

 

[M Most]

Dear M Most,

So based on your expertise, can you say if we should shoot 24fps or 23.98 today?

If you're not in North America or Japan, you should probably use 24. If you're in North America or Japan, you should use whatever your client is telling you to use. If they're not telling you either one, you should use what your pipeline (including post sound) is used to.

In reality, that choice is not particularly important. You design a post pipeline around target deliverables, and tailor it to the vendors that are involved. Anything that's 23.98 can be played at 24, and anything that's 24 can be played at 23.98. You choose which one to start with based on the particulars of the project - where you're shooting, who you're shooting it for, where you're posting it, and what you're delivering as a primary delivery target.

 

[Phil Holland]

I don't remember the precise conditions--may have been shooting at 60p/180 degree under some flickery LEDs, but more than once I noticed flicker problems with NTSC base rates that went away when I changed the base rate to 24fps.

I personally would role 1/60th and still shoot 23.976 or 24 if the project is destined for that. The difference in motion cadence is minimal but you do have to adjust your pan/tilt/operating speed effectively to make it work well.

 

[Aaron michaels]

Shoot at 24 FPS All of my feature films were shot at that rate and I had no issues with sound , film cameras or digital cameras. 23.98 was a question when people started shooting digital. The argument of digital vs film and formats. Same as PC vs MAC at one time but now they are on the same 64 bit platform and get the job done on both ends.

 

[Peter Lyons Collister ASC]

I don't think it is a big deal but I have been asked to shoot my digital features at 23.98.

On Transformers 4 & 5 we shot 24 fps because we also shot film cameras. Film cameras cannot shoot at 23.98

 

[Marc Wielage]

On Transformers 4 & 5 we shot 24 fps because we also shot film cameras. Film cameras cannot shoot at 23.98

Some film cameras actually can shoot at 23.98fps (crystal sync variable-speed motors), but we recommend against it and generally tell people to keep it simple and just shoot at 24.00fps for film.

As long as all departments know what speed is being used, and it's enforced at every step of production and post, either 24fps or 23.976fps can work. The trick is to get it in writing and make sure it's rigidly enforced across the board.

Note that stock footage is all over the place: 23.98fps, 24fps, 25fps, 29.97fps. 30fps... it's quite a mess. It's fine if you can slow down the source material to whatever you need for release, but not always good if it has to look like real-time speed.

 

[Martin Stevens]

Okay, so if your pipeline is all in-house, as in, you are not hiring any outside help or sending your work to
any post houses etc., then which is it best to use, 24 fps or 23.98 fps?

 

[Rakesh Malik]

At this point, I think the answer you're looking for is probably, "Yes."

I prefer 24fps, so I just use that unless a client requests something different, but so far none have.

 

[Marc Wielage]

Okay, so if your pipeline is all in-house, as in, you are not hiring any outside help or sending you work to
any post houses etc., then which is it best to use, 24 fps or 23.98 fps?

For most indie features and TV-based projects, I'd say go 23.976. The vast audience for projects like this is going to be home video and streaming, and (for the most part) that's always loosely based on broadcast standards.

If the widest audience is going to be theatrical, you can make an argument for 24.00fps provided every single department is aware of it and can adjust accordingly. There's always the risk of getting a freelancer in or a B-crew (or a C-crew) who doesn't get the memo and shoots the wrong way. Trust me, stuff like this happens and can cause train wrecks.

If it doesn't matter (theatrical vs. TV), then I would shoot 23.98 because the post path is less prone to possible error.

 

[Martin Stevens]

THANKS!!!!!!

 

[Rakesh Malik]

There's always the risk of getting a freelancer in or a B-crew (or a C-crew) who doesn't get the memo and shoots the wrong way. Trust me, stuff like this happens and can cause train wrecks.

One problem I've run into already has been cameras that have a 24fps mode that's actually 23.98 and we didn't realize that until we started running into syncing problems in post.

 

[Marc Wielage]

One problem I've run into already has been cameras that have a 24fps mode that's actually 23.98 and we didn't realize that until we started running into syncing problems in post.

There is always that problem. It never hurts to shoot a test first to be absolutely sure. Always check the workflow before committing.

 

[Remington Chase]

Lot's of cameras that say they are 24p are actually shooting 23.976 like the Sony FS7. As NTSC is still a delivery requirement for all feature films it's still best to shoot 23.98 which was always a workaround way to get 24 fps material into a 29.97 downconverted world.

One problem that often comes up in test screenings is when editorial generates a DCP from the 23.98 avid QT's and then does DCP playback at 24fps and then the AE can not sync audience reaction footage shot at 23.98 or 24 fps back up in the avid, unless they figure out how do to do a stretch.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

What a mess! But it's another reminder of how shooting motion is about an order of magnitude more involved than just taking photos. I feel sorry for photographers who are asked to "just shoot a bit of video while you're at it."

Bob: "Hey, my stills camera can do 4K video - isn't that great? Film making is democratised! Now I can make movies with little effort!"

Alice: "LOL."