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 :)

Scarlet-W Framerates

Scott Lamoreaux

Scott Lamoreaux

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 14, 2014
Messages
316
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
San Diego/NYC
Pardon my ignorance but my default frame rates on my Scarlet-W are a little different than I'm used to (not the standard 48, 50, 60, 100, 120 etc fps) -- Can someone explain why this is? I know you can edit them in the advanced tab however just curious why this is standard or default and how to shoot these in true 180 shutter
 
You can set the shutter angle to 180 degrees instead of shutter speed, or if you choose shutter, it's FPS X 2 = 180 equivilant.

i tend to just leave it on shutter because in low light I often do a 360 shitter angle which is FPS = Shutter Speed.
 
Gene Sung said:
You can set the shutter angle to 180 degrees instead of shutter speed, or if you choose shutter, it's FPS X 2 = 180 equivilant.

i tend to just leave it on shutter because in low light I often do a 360 shitter angle which is FPS = Shutter Speed.
Click to expand...

Gene: check your shutter spelling :wink5:

How does the 360 shutter affect the look?
 
Gene Sung said:
You can set the shutter angle to 180 degrees instead of shutter speed, or if you choose shutter, it's FPS X 2 = 180 equivilant.

i tend to just leave it on shutter because in low light I often do a 360 shitter angle which is FPS = Shutter Speed.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that info but can you address why the frame rates are different than what I'm used to on my previous Scarlet-X (50, 60, 100, 120 fps) -- (even numbers)
 
Michael Hastings said:
Gene: check your shutter spelling :wink5:

How does the 360 shutter affect the look?
Click to expand...

LOL, 360 Shitter = my new band.

Yes, 360 shutter does have more motion blur, but this is mainly noticeable on fast actions - running, fights, etc...

If someone is doing something liking drinking a cup of tea, it's not that noticeable.

However, the extra stop of light from a 360 shutter makes a huge difference in low light noise. In bright daylight, 1 stop is whatever but in low light the extra stop helps a lot with less noisy image. On jobs where you're shooting with 5Ks and 10Ks you can easily run 180 degrees, but on lower budgets with mere mortal light sources - 1Ks, 650w and lower, the extra stop can come in handy.

Also, with HFP 120fps +, 360 shutter tends to have less flicker from lights.
 
Scott Lamoreaux said:
Thank you for that info but can you address why the frame rates are different than what I'm used to on my previous Scarlet-X (50, 60, 100, 120 fps) -- (even numbers)
Click to expand...

Hmmm... on mine there is definitely a 48fps as I shot with that for much of a shoot last week.
 
Scott Lamoreaux said:
Thank you for that info but can you address why the frame rates are different than what I'm used to on my previous Scarlet-X (50, 60, 100, 120 fps) -- (even numbers)
Click to expand...

Check your Time Base, it should be set to an even framerate in order for your framerates to be even numbers.
 
Demetri Zuev said:
Check your Time Base, it should be set to an even framerate in order for your framerates to be even numbers.
Click to expand...

It's 23.98 which it used to be on my Scarlet-X as well -- Isn't this what is preferred for the most cinematic look or do most films shoot in 24?
 
Scott Lamoreaux said:
It's 23.98 which it used to be on my Scarlet-X as well -- Isn't this what is preferred for the most cinematic look or do most films shoot in 24?
Click to expand...

Correct, you won't get even framerates if your timebase is set to 23.98, because your "base" framerate is 23.98 and after that the camera just multiplies this number, so instead of 48fps you're getting 47.96 (multiplied by 2) etc.

The difference between 23.98 and 24 is negligible to the eye and mostly applies to differences in delivery channels (broadcast TV, cinema, web).
 
Demetri Zuev said:
Correct, you won't get even framerates if your timebase is set to 23.98, because your "base" framerate is 23.98 and after that the camera just multiplies this number, so instead of 48fps you're getting 47.96 (multiplied by 2) etc.

The difference between 23.98 and 24 is negligible to the eye and mostly applies to differences in delivery channels (broadcast TV, cinema, web).
Click to expand...

Thank you - So do most films shoot in true 24fps? Would it be advisable that I just switch my base to 24 as well for simplicity?
 
In my experience, this question does come up a lot, but I always put it in terms of: Will this be printed to film for projection? You need to do true 24 to have your frames match up properly when you go to print for projection purposes. Outside of that, the difference between true 24 and 23.976 is (almost) indiscernible to the human eye. 23.976 will play more friendly with broadcast requirements (in NTSC land) because of its frequency.

I have shot, edited, colored, finished both 23.976 and true 24 without issue for delivery inside of different systems. If it had been up to me, we would have stuck with 23.976 the whole way because everything was web or broadcast (NTSC) delivery.

Sidebar -- is there any "advantage" to shooting true 24 on the S-W from a technical standpoint? My "for instance" reference is the GH4 which shoots 4k DCI @ true 24, but only UHD 4k at 23.976. Speaking only of acquisition differences from a technical standpoint.
 
Brendan_H_Banks said:
In my experience, this question does come up a lot, but I always put it in terms of: Will this be printed to film for projection? You need to do true 24 to have your frames match up properly when you go to print for projection purposes. Outside of that, the difference between true 24 and 23.976 is (almost) indiscernible to the human eye. 23.976 will play more friendly with broadcast requirements (in NTSC land) because of its frequency.

I have shot, edited, colored, finished both 23.976 and true 24 without issue for delivery inside of different systems. If it had been up to me, we would have stuck with 23.976 the whole way because everything was web or broadcast (NTSC) delivery.

Sidebar -- is there any "advantage" to shooting true 24 on the S-W from a technical standpoint? My "for instance" reference is the GH4 which shoots 4k DCI @ true 24, but only UHD 4k at 23.976. Speaking only of acquisition differences from a technical standpoint.
Click to expand...


If you're shooting for DCP - e.g. festivals or theatrical distribution, then you'll get converted t true 24.000 at some point so shooting at 24.000 rather than 23.976 is preferable.
 
Tom Dowler said:
If you're shooting for DCP - e.g. festivals or theatrical distribution, then you'll get converted t true 24.000 at some point so shooting at 24.000 rather than 23.976 is preferable.
Click to expand...

If shooting short films and doc work do most of you just keep it in 23.98?
 
Yeah, definitely the best DCP is going to be in 24.000 but they have an mpeg2 standard for 23.976 that works (however it will most likely be super lossy).

If you're going to festival route then 24.000 might be the way to go. Very easy to make a 23.976 for broadcast from a 24.000 if that becomes a thing.
 
Scott Lamoreaux said:
If shooting short films and doc work do most of you just keep it in 23.98?
Click to expand...

If you are shooting specifically for TV, 23.976 and 29.97 are the most common frame rates.

If you are shooting for theatrical distribution, 24fps is standard.

Shooting for web, you can do whatever you want.

Since it's so close, they are fairly interchangeable.
 
Gene Sung said:
If you are shooting specifically for TV, 23.976 and 29.97 are the most common frame rates.

If you are shooting for theatrical distribution, 24fps is standard.

Shooting for web, you can do whatever you want.

Since it's so close, they are fairly interchangeable.
Click to expand...

Well darn, Gene. You always have a way of summing it up so quickly and easily.
 
The only thing to be aware of is if you're using a b-cam that is not 24.000 capable - like a Canon C100, for example. Do you then make your whole project 24.000 and deal with the the conversion in your project or do you cater to the lowest common denominator and shoot everything at 23.976.
 
This discussion is always confounding to me because it seems just so simple to shoot at 24 if you are not going to broadcast. HOWEVER, every time I have visited this subject, it seems like the issues come up with a potential drift of sound if you shoot at 24 rather than 23.98. Every discussion - and I think there have been many here on REDuser - ends with the conclusion that it is just "safer" to shoot at 23.98.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top