Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

RED is 24P? or True 24?

N

nik

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
India
Website
www.ikshots.blogspot.com
RED camera has the frame rate of 24p? or is it like a film camera of true 24 frames? I don know my question is right... but what is the difference between this true 24 frames and 24p. and what is the option that we have in RED camera?

Thanks
nik
 
it's hard to know exactly what you're asking, but I THINK you mean is it 23.98 or 24 frames per second. If that's your question, then the answer is that it's capable of either, along with 25, 29.97, etc.

or was that not your question?
 
Ok I'll Bite... I always smile when someone tells me video is much more like film if shot in 24p! Yes I understand shooting video in 24p gives the project a stuttered "film look".

Yes Film is shot in 24p, but how is film displayed by the projector?
Each frame is shown two times, allowing the viewer to see the screen at 48 frames, very close to PAL @ 50 frames and NTSC @ 60 interlaced frames, (Two fields of 30 combined).

The 1st time I viewed PAL the flicker drove me nuts at 1st, then after a few hours my eyes adjusted and I no longer noticed the flicker.

My favorite Surprise from Jim was the High frame rates the Red camera can achieve!
It can shoot from 24P all the way up to 120 Frames,(2K 2:1) making it the most cost effective high frame rate camera on the market!

Dave
 
I know what you're saying, all I meant is that you aren't going to see a difference in look between 23.98P and 24P if for some reason you're convinced that you aren't getting that "true" 24 fps film look because you are shooting at 23.98 fps.
 
yes sir what u said is correct... and How 24p giving a film like look why not the other frame rates?? what behind this process? is it the only reason it is Progressive?
 
24P looks like 24 fps film, 30P would look like 30 fps film, 60P would look like 60 fps film. There's no particular reason that 24P looks any more like film than other frame rates except that most movies are shot at 24 fps, so IF you want to match that look, then you should match that frame rate.

Also, most of the effort towards a "film look" has really been about getting away from an interlaced-scan look, which is unique to video origination.

So half the things we do to video cameras to get a film look is really more about getting away from their inherent video look, whether it is excessively deep focus because of small sensors, or interlaced-scan shutterless motion, or excessive edge enhancement.

Now all that said, there are many other aspects to why film looks the way it does.

Also, when people say "film look" what they really mean is the look of 35mm movie color negative shot at 24 fps, since that is the most common shooting format for major motion pictures. But obviously you could have a film format with excessively deep focus, or high frame rates, etc.
 
24.00fps vs. 23.98fps

24.00fps vs. 23.98fps

Nik brings up an interesting point.

For those of us who work in regions that have used the NTSC standard for Standard Definition, do we really need to continue to use the 'work-around' created for a nearly obsolete color video standard, shooting 23.98fps? How about a simplifying the work flow, shooting straight 24.00fps!

An added benefit: double system sound could be shot at normal sampling rates such as 48.00k or 96.00k without use of pullups and pulldowns to hold sync. There would be no need to use 48.048kHz or 96.096kHz if the workflow is to avoid the use of pullups and pulldowns

PAL users have never had to put up with this compensation. 25fps is 25fps, whether it was film for telecine transfer, HD, SD video, high band or low band.

The international film standard for projection has always been 24fps. As the world gradually moves toward HD projectors for movie theaters, why not reaffirm the original standard now? Let's shoot movies at straight 24fps, whether they are created on a chip or on emulsion.
 
Thats interesting, simple and true. But as a camera production company they may have any limitation that the product should be accepted in all means!
 
Robbie Anderson said:
Nik brings up an interesting point.

For those of us who work in regions that have used the NTSC standard for Standard Definition, do we really need to continue to use the 'work-around' created for a nearly obsolete color video standard, shooting 23.98fps? How about a simplifying the work flow, shooting straight 24.00fps!

An added benefit: double system sound could be shot at normal sampling rates such as 48.00k or 96.00k without use of pullups and pulldowns to hold sync. There would be no need to use 48.048kHz or 96.096kHz if the workflow is to avoid the use of pullups and pulldowns

PAL users have never had to put up with this compensation. 25fps is 25fps, whether it was film for telecine transfer, HD, SD video, high band or low band.

The international film standard for projection has always been 24fps. As the world gradually moves toward HD projectors for movie theaters, why not reaffirm the original standard now? Let's shoot movies at straight 24fps, whether they are created on a chip or on emulsion.
Click to expand...

Sure it's possible to drop 23.98, but you'd have to coordinate with your post sound people because that's where the problem lies -- they traditionally have cut and mixed sound (dialogue, efx, foley, ADR, etc.) to NTSC downconversions watching the footage on 59.94i monitors. So you'd have to make sure editorial gave them true 24P material and that all the sound editors could display it properly, etc. Should be possible today with Quicktime files and computer displays, etc. instead of watching video. Same goes for the mix and their video projectors.

The basic problem is standard def video equipment is still used in the post environment, so even when you shoot 24 fps film, it gets transferred to video at 23.976 fps for post.

You also have to keep in mind that U.S. HDTV broadcast will also make 24 into 23.98 because we broadcast in 720/59.94P or 1920/59.94i.
 
Last edited:
David Birdy said:
but how is film displayed by the projector?
Each frame is shown two times, allowing the viewer to see the screen at 48 frames, very close to PAL @ 50 frames and NTSC @ 60 interlaced frames, (Two fields of 30 combined).
Click to expand...

I didn't know this. Very interesting. Can video be rendered this way for playback on computers? Are there players that can play back 48fps?
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Also, most of the effort towards a "film look" has really been about getting away from an interlaced-scan look, which is unique to video origination.
Click to expand...

True - but it's noteworthy that the interlaced scan look has much more to do with refresh rate than interlacing per se: If you shoot and play back film at 50 (or 60) fps, it looks remarkably like interlaced video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top