24p is overrated
 

At work one of my friends there has shot a music video on the side where most of the footage is 24p, except something went wrong with the frame rate conversion so the motion is definitely off in Premiere Pro. If you were looking carefully, I'm sure any normal person could tell the difference. But... everyone who has seen it hasn't made a comment on the motion looking weird.

I don't think most people can tell the difference between 24p, 30p, 60i, and 24p gone wrong. I'm thinking it's a big waste of time/effort.

Hi Glenn!

What camera was used? What shutter speed? (1/48 etc...)

Most people say to get that look, use high production techniques in lighting, camera handling, etc, etc...

But really, if you shoot a home video with 24p, people should be able to tell a difference no matter how it was shot. Even in available light with an unsteady camera.

24p looks absolutely different from interlaced. I've shown the difference to people with no video/film experience at all and its imediately obvious just switching back and forth 60i and 24p. If you plan on doing a telecine from your video footage it's especially handy.

In my opinion, shooting NTSC video in 24 fps makes no sense if you're not planning to blow your work to film.
It's the "p" (as in 30p) that's important if you're looking for a more filmic motion. Each frame shot in progressive mode is clean and free from interlacing artifacts. That's all I need.
My vote for 30p!

Aren't certain shows done in 30p? It just ain't quite "right," to me. . .I think maybe Farscape is? Maybe some of the newer Highlander episodes that don't quite look so good? I think it's just been molded into us psychologically that 24p looks "classier" than 60i, even 30p, and I just can't knock it back out.

Norm-

Most sitcoms and television dramas are shot at 24p not 30p. I've never seen a sitcom in the theater so I suppose there IS a reason to use 24p even if you are not going to output to film.

"In my opinion, shooting NTSC video in 24 fps makes no sense if you're not planning to blow your work to film.
It's the "p" (as in 30p) that's important if you're looking for a more filmic motion. Each frame shot in progressive mode is clean and free from interlacing artifacts. That's all I need.
My vote for 30p"

That's true to a point, but not entirely (not to mention if not one then why the other?). To the experienced eye 24p is noticeably different then 30p as mentioned in Adam Wilt's review of the DVX100a. As for going to film? Well, of course that's the point of 24p. The 24p cameras were designed for film-making thus: 24p. It's that simple. There's no other reason for it but that's the intended market so it makes perfect sense (and it looks great).

PS 30p looks great too but it can't easily be transfered to film.

Hey Josh,

The look of 24p - Absolutely it's psychological.

This reminds me of something I learned in music history class. Follow me on this one.

The Gregorian monks originally sang only in modes. A mode is basically a scale (you musicians will know what I'm talking about). At one point in history, the major 3rd was completely absent from all music. In fact the major 3rd sounded harsh and ugly to the monks' ears.

Ugly!? Modern music wouldn't be what it is today if their preferences for the major 3rd hadn't changed. You can't make a major chord without the major 3rd! You can't have Mozart, The Beattles, and Britney without the major 3rd. But the fact that this scale degree, which we view now as being totally vital to music, was once frowned upon sheds some light onto how we can be "psychologically programmed."

Major 3rd: we used to hate it. Now we love it.
24p: we love it now. Maybe some day we'll hate it?

Maybe some day, a Gregorian monk will introduce a new framerate like 12.5 progresivelaced. Until then, I'm shooting 24p cause it creates a pleasant response in my brain. And 60i makes me ill.

<<To the experienced eye 24p is noticeably different then 30p>>

To this particular set of eyes, I can't say that I can always tell the difference, unless I see the same shot (with plenty of motion) done in both modes. I've shot in XL1 Frame mode (effectively 30p) for years and been very pleased with the results. Not to say I won't use the 24p mode on the XL2 when I get it. I just think that the visual difference between 24 and 30 is barely noticeable, especially when compared to 60. If it wasn't for the issues transferring to 24 fps film, I think I would probably stick to 30p.

«Most sitcoms and television dramas are shot at 24p not 30p.»
Where did you get that, Jesse?
I know E.R. for instance was shot on film (and still is?), that's why it's 24p.
And I think I remember seing film cameras on the set of Friends also...
Why would they shoot a TV show at 24fps in video, to edit and broadcast on a 60i NTSC network? That means torturing the footage through a 3:2 pulldown and some other complications, when, in fact, just deinterlacing the 30fps produces the film-like motion we're looking for.

24p is more pleasing to the eye, or my eye anyway, mainly for the reasons Jesse mentions: its what we're used to seeing, it's to what we equate the art of film. If you aspire to make film then it only stands to reason that 24fps should be your starting point. I don't think you'll see the film standard of 24fps going anywhere anytime soon, it's been with us for a while.

Norm,

I found this article listing 24p programs for the FALL 2002 line up.
That was two years ago. I wonder what the numbers are now.


http://news.sel.sony.com/pressrelease/print/2774

>>Episodic TV Producers Embrace 24P


The 24P-shot programs airing this fall on the six broadcast networks include:

"8 Simple Rules for Dating My Teenage Daughter," "According to Jim," "Less than Perfect," "Life with Bonnie," "MDs," "My Wife and Kids," "Push, Nevada," "That Was Then" and "The George Lopez Show" on ABC;

"Touched by an Angel" and "Yes, Dear" on CBS;

"Bernie Mac," "Septuplets," "Cedric the Entertainer," "The Grubbs" and "The Pitts" on FOX;

"InLaws" on NBC;

"Girlfriends," "Half and Half," "One on One" and "The Parkers" on UPN; and

"Do Over," "Family Affair," "Greetings from Tucson," "Reba" and "What I Like About You" on the WB.

In addition to the networks' regularly scheduled primetime comedies and dramas this fall, four mid-season replacements - "Letters From A Nut" on ABC, "Baby Bob" and "Queens Supreme" on CBS, and "Oliver Beene" on FOX - are also being shot in 24P, according to Sony's research. >>

I believe this is the list for shows captured to 24p VIDEO. There would be another list for shows captured in 35mm 24fps and then posted in HD 24p.

The camera used was the DVX100. I think 24p is one of those things people really don't pay attention to. It seems to me that the things people pay attention to are:
#1- content
#2- content
Technical:
#3- lighting. Makes a big difference in how professional something looks
#4- major technical flaws- shaky camerawork, bad sound (hard to ignore these things.)
#5- camerawork/nice camera moves.
#6- overall image quality. Color correction/grading and processing plays a role in this. Film naturally looks better.

Things people don't notice are:
- motion
- ?film grain
- chroma crawl on their TV set
- white balance on their TV
- stairstepping and other artifacts
- continuity errors (unless they're really bad errors). In Spiderman2, did you notice how spiderman's mask got better/fixed even though it got burned through during the train scene?
- boom pole shadows
- resolution. It seems to me people don't pay attention to this unless they have an A/B comparison, in which case it's really easy to tell differences in resolution.
- overblown highlights, washed out shadows (their TV set may blow out highlights and they won't notice)
- color accuracy. A lot of TVs have excessive contrast and saturation.
- excessive edge sharpening.
- Unrealistic sound. People are used to movie sound, not real life sounds. Recording of real life gunshots and car crashes sound wimpy without processing.

Regarding this "are TV shows shot on 24p" issue, every show that is shot on film is at 24 fps, not 30 fps as that wastes film unnecessarily. The only reason to go to 30 fps would be to execute a poor-man's sync with a TV set, a practice that has fallen out of favor on all but the cheapest programming (which isn't shot on film now anyway).

The number of TV shows shot on 24p HD has shifted around a bit since two years ago; less dramas and different sitcoms to replace the ones that have come and gone. I don't know of any that shoot at 30p.

Maybe at some point in the future 30p will become more standardized as a "filmlike" alternative. For now, a lot is being invested in 24p HD cameras, it's here to stay for a number of years.

Glenn,

I think you're selling the TV/Film audiences short (not to mention the cinematographers) if you really believe nobody would notice the things you mention above.

If someone has an old TV and that's all maybe they'd get used to seeing everyone with sickly green or bright pink faces. Few people would tolerate chroma crawling if it's excessive and i don't think there is anyone out there who would not rather watch the same show as it was meant to seen on a better TV. It's just easier on the eyes. Someone may not realize it if they don't particularly care about TV/Film either.

If you've seen a thousand movies (like me) the things you mention that people don't notice are unbearable and can ruin the whole experience and I think that goes for any regular movie-goer (except maybe boompole shadows).

Content is the most imortant thing. How do you get content across to the audience? With proper presentation.