Timebase : TV / Film

[kalari Jack]

Hey,

I realise that 25 is used for PAL Tv, but if I was to shoot in 25 would it mean that it would look less 'filmic'.

Thanks in advance,
K

 

[Erich Ocean]

I realise that 25 is used for PAL Tv, but if I was to shoot in 25 would it mean that it would look less 'filmic'.

Well, as always, test for yourself, but the short answer is "no". It's very difficult for people to detect a 4% slowdown; I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Decide what is your main screening format (if you are going both DCP/Film & TV)

While a 4% slowdown is hard to detect on single clips, I have experienced that the timings can become odd, when you slow down. Rather cut (at least) in the primary screening fps...

 

[John Marchant]

Obviously everyone is different, but I'm sure I can spot the difference between 24 and 25 every time. Not to say that your average viewer cares... 4% doesn't sound much, but try it on a sound clip alone and see how much the pitch shifts by - its a bigger difference than you think, but that's only my opinion. ( My wife still can't understand what the fuss is about HD, so who knows! )

 

[Erich Ocean]

Obviously everyone is different, but I'm sure I can spot the difference between 24 and 25 every time.

The OP asked if 25fps looks less "filmic" than 24fps. Are you saying that 25fps looks less filmic? Or are you just reporting that you can tell the difference between the two... :thumbsup:

 

[kalari Jack]

but I'm sure I can spot the difference between 24 and 25 every time

John, is this difference that its more Filmic? God I feel like such a tosser every time I saw the F word.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Often film for TV in the UK and Europe was shot at 25fps. It doesn't look any less filmic for doing so. When we grew up in the UK, the Flintstones sounded "normal" at 4% speedup. When watching it now, it seems slow...

Graeme

 

[kalari Jack]

Damn you Erich! you beat me to it! :emote_hippie:

 

[John Marchant]

Its no less filmic, definitely distinct though, with the audio a bigger giveaway. Graeme, I'm glad I'm not the only one who's noticed that!

 

[kalari Jack]

Thanks guys. So I guess it doesnt looks any less 'filmic'.. Good to know!

 

[Graeme Nattress]

I wouldn't say distinct. You'd probably have to A/B them to notice it, and then you'd probably pick up on the audio rather than the visuals. You might notice a 24p movie in PAL has slightly faster pacing, but that might be about it.

Graeme

 

[Erich Ocean]

you'd probably pick up on the audio rather than the visuals

If you're really concerned about that, use http://mega-nerd.com/SRC/ to re-time the audio (it won't change the pitch).

 

[Liam Hall]

then you'd probably pick up on the audio rather than the visuals.

Not if it's pitch shifted which is standard procedure here in the UK these days.


Also, what adds to the 'filmic' nature of 24fps is the amount of motion blur. If anyone can spot the difference in motion blur between a clip shot at 24fps with a 1/48th shutter and 25fps with a 1/50th shutter they very clever indeed...