I was at some Canon workshops this weekend, and Chuck Westfall from Canon was there the entire time. He was asked several times if 24/25p was imminent. He wouldn't confirm or deny, but he said that it took nine months for Canon to make the relatively simple firmware change for manual (and we all applauded) and that 24 or 25p would require more than just a firmware update. It sounded that it might even be a chip change. I for one am not hopeful.

We also worked with Vincent Laforet all day Sunday and when asked about 30 to 24p he said he works only with 30p with the 5DII since he has found no solution for conversion to 24p with the quality he wants. I asked him if he had tried Philip Bloom's method and he again told me that there is nothing out there that gives him the quality he's looking for.

Steve,
I am afraid you are correct.
unfortunately,

J

I have a method that works perfectly for converting 30p to 24p: slow the video to 80% of its original speed. :)

Actually, in Vegas I tried just that Jon. I slowed playback rate to 80%. I rendered that to 24p. Then I brought it on the time line, and had it play back 125%, and rendered that to 24p. Check it out on some moving stuff and see whether it might work for you.

I did this recently. Used Cinema Tools to conform the footage to 23.98. It's also called 30-for-24. The slight slow-mo effect is nice.

Actually, in Vegas I tried just that Jon. I slowed playback rate to 80%. I rendered that to 24p. Then I brought it on the time line, and had it play back 125%, and rendered that to 24p. Check it out on some moving stuff and see whether it might work for you.This is a Windows version of the FCP workflow first described by Denver Riddle & popularised by Philip Bloom's video tutorial. Philip described it as a 'perfect' conversion which it certainly is not. It's OK if there isn't too much movement.

Actually, in Vegas I tried just that Jon. I slowed playback rate to 80%. I rendered that to 24p. Then I brought it on the time line, and had it play back 125%, and rendered that to 24p. Check it out on some moving stuff and see whether it might work for you.I've looked at frame rate conversion in detail when making a Blu-ray Disc for an international standard. I plan to slow the footage in some projects, and stick with 30p in others (when I need real time).

The only reason I would want (real) 24p is for "the look". I'd rather run 30p at 1/80 for a bit more judder than have motion artifacts. After countless hours of looking at conversions in real time and frame by frame, I can see conversion motion artifacts in my sleep! :)

But if it looks good to you and your intended audience, go for it!

After countless hours of looking at conversions in real time and frame by frame, I can see conversion motion artifacts in my sleep! :)

That's when you sleep in 24p, 25p or 30p??? ;-DD

That's when you sleep in 24p, 25p or 30p??? ;-DD
It depends on what country I'm in at the time. ;)

I've been shooting 1/80 and then coveting to 24p right in quicktime and haven't run into a problem yet.

There's not a whole lot of motion in this vid, but I've shot moving cars with this method and it still holds up... maybe a little more jerky than true 24p, but no ghosting.

Jeff the Samurai 9000 on Vimeo (http://www.vimeo.com/5056173)

I've been shooting 1/80 and then coveting to 24p right in quicktime and haven't run into a problem yet.


Nice.
What's the workflow of converting to 24P right in Quicktime ?

Thanks,
J

Bryce, the dropped frames are very obvious in your clip. Going frame by frame you can see the skipped frames clearly, and played at normal speed all motion has a stutter effect.

Has everyone seen Philip Bloom's latest video? Cherry Blossom Girl: Canon 5dmkII 25p on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/5223767). He has updated the "Denver Workflow" and it looks pretty much perfect to me. Crisp 25p motion. Phil will be presenting his new workflow to the London FCPUG tomorrow and then sharing here: Philip Bloom Main Blog (http://philipbloom.co.uk/blog/).

This workflow will work for 24p and 25p.

Bryce, the dropped frames are very obvious in your clip. Going frame by frame you can see the skipped frames clearly, and played at normal speed all motion has a stutter effect.

Did you turn HD off? I'm not doubting that it could have dropped frames, but it skips like mad for me when HD is enabled even with 10mb Ethernet. Even the Cherry Blossom girl skips frames for me with it enabled... sometimes even without it. How do you do frame by frame in Vimeo BTW? I can only get it do second by second at best...

And yea, it does a have a little more studder than true 24p, but allot of people who seen the converted footage don't notice it, or think it's cool. I personally like a touch of extra studder, even with my xh-a1 I would bump the shutter speed to get the "hyper-motion" look. It could get annoying after 30 mins of it though, but I guess it's just personal taste in the end.

Personally I've used the Riddle/Bloom method. Yes, if you look at it frame by frame, you can easily see the glitches. As a whole though even on my 108" HD projector, it isn't that noticeable to me especially if there isn't that much movement. I'm sure most of the people (family and friends) who might see my stuff would hardly notice. And plain ole conformed 24p from the 30p looks real nice as long as there is no live sound. After I had asked Vincent about conversion I wanted to ask if he had TRIED the method, but I think I got all I was going to get from him on that subject. And for the types of projects he's doing these days, he probably has a point.

Bruce, I downloaded the original file using the link on the Vimeo page. Playing that in Quicktime enabled be to view the video frame by frame. High shutter speed can look very cool in certain situation, but I'm not so sure about missing frames...

As to Philip Bloom's video's using the "Denver Workflow," the first that I saw - Sofia's People - had noticeable frame interpolation artifacts. The most recent - Cherry Blossom Girl - had none that I could see. I looked carefully at the baby's arms as it flailed away and it just looked crisp. No signs of skipped or interpolated frames. Someone please correct me if my eyes are deceiving me!

The most recent - Cherry Blossom Girl - had none that I could see. I looked carefully at the baby's arms as it flailed away and it just looked crisp. No signs of skipped or interpolated frames. Someone please correct me if my eyes are deceiving me!Crisp is not the word that I would use. Because of the extremely shallow DOF the baby's arms are out of focus half the time. It's a very nice video but cannot be held up as a demonstration of a 'perfect' 30p>24p workflow. It's a series of static tableaux with very little movement. Each shot is beautifully framed & would make a great still photograph but the DOF is very shallow so half the screen at least is blurred. He doesn't even pull focus in any of the shots. The sort of shots that any frame-rate conversion struggles with are not present e.g. if the baby & background had been all in focus & there were a lamp post or similar behind.

I am curious how those who can detect dropped frame feel about this conversion:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachments/canon-eos-5d-mk-ii-hd/12787d1245387808-motion-perfect-if-we-dont-get-24p-will-program-work-convertedto24p2stepmethod.wmv

Chris, there is definitely no feel of dropped frames. But this conversion has the opposite problem: many or most frames look like blended frames. Played full speed, movements don't look so much blurred as lost, blended with the background. It doesn't look real.

Having said that, the video looks as good as anything I've been able to achieve in 24p with the 30p 5D2 footage.

Nigel makes a great point about the shallow DOF in the Cherry Blossom video, but I'd love for him to look this time at the pottery wheel shot. Looks like a pretty high shutter speed and to me every frame looks like a real frame, not an interpolated one. Nigel, is there something specific in this shot you could point to that is a giveaway that it's 30p footage?

The reason I asked the question is this. I think shutter speed is an issue in the conversion process. That film was shot at 30 fps, and then rendered to this 24p version by a two step process similar to the one Phil Bloom described, only in Vegas. Now this may be an extreme example, it seems to me that motion blur is good to have in a 30p to 24p conversion. Maybe shutter speed no higher that 1/50th should be used.

Nigel makes a great point about the shallow DOF in the Cherry Blossom video, but I'd love for him to look this time at the pottery wheel shot. Looks like a pretty high shutter speed and to me every frame looks like a real frame, not an interpolated one. Nigel, is there something specific in this shot you could point to that is a giveaway that it's 30p footage?No, it looks fine. My point is that none of this footage will show up problems with the 30p>25p conversion.

From my own experiments & those of others I know the sort of shot that causes problems with a 30p>24/25p conversion it is when something like an arm or leg moves fast in front of another object like a lamp post or another person when both are in focus. One or other object will get distorted. There are no shots like that in Philip's film.

Chris, there is definitely no feel of dropped frames. But this conversion has the opposite problem: many or most frames look like blended frames. Played full speed, movements don't look so much blurred as lost, blended with the background. It doesn't look real.There is no stuttering or other symptoms of dropped frames but I see extreme motion blur in this clip. I agree, it doesn't look real.

...it seems to me that motion blur is good to have in a 30p to 24p conversion.This depends on the technique. If you are shooting a waterfall, you can use a long shutter and convert with frame blending. On the other hand, some of the most advanced algorithms do well on hard edges, but poorly on motion blur. There's no one answer. It really depends on the conversion technique used.

Also, if you use lots of motion blur (say 1/40 or 1/30), then the end result won't have a normal 24p 180 degree look.

I think 1/50 is good for when using frame blending. Frame drop is simply problematic. Advanced algorithms might be best at 1/80 - unless that puts you in a flicker situation.