DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Canon XL and GL Series DV Camcorders (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-gl-series-dv-camcorders/)
-   -   24p questions (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xl-gl-series-dv-camcorders/34265-24p-questions.html)

Justine Haupt December 25th, 2005 11:12 AM

Oh! You said you're in a 60i timeline... it should be the "NTSC DV 24p Widescreen (720x480, 23.976 fps)" template in the Project Properties.

Giuseppe Palumbo December 25th, 2005 11:21 AM

ohh, ok, well im glad i didnt start editing yet...BTW, still it looked interlaced when capturing...Anything big? or dont worry about it and just edit int he 23.976 timeline?

Chris Hurd December 25th, 2005 05:11 PM

The way 24fps works on a video camera, you do get an interlaced frame every four frames or so. Perfectly normal, that's how it works, nothing to be concerned about.

Matthew Nayman December 26th, 2005 03:10 PM

I am probably wrong here, but I will post anyway (cause I am a jerk).

I believe that the XL2 does not truly record 24p, but it is instead interlaced to fit on a DV tape. If you shoot 2:3:3:2 you can extract a true 24 fps from it, and put it on film or a 24p DVD. However, I believe that even the 2:3:3:2 is not truly progressive scan.

I have always been curious. Do the CCD's actually record the frame in progressive or is it all interlaced or does it take 4 progresssive frames and one interlace frame?

Could you bypass the interlacing by recording right onto a hard drive (i know you can bypass the mini DV compression).

Matt

Richard Hunter December 26th, 2005 06:31 PM

Hi Matt. The CCDs do capture a true progressive frame, but the data has to be split in order to fit onto the DV data stream which is interlaced. If your NLE knows how to handle it, the progressive frames will be recovered properly during the editing process.

Regarding bypassing the interlacing process by recording onto hard drive, this is not possible because it is the DV data stream that is recorded to the hard drive. Therefore the progressive frames still have to be interlaced in order to fit the DV format.

By the way, since it is the DV data that is recorded to hard drive, it is not possible to bypass the DV compression like you say. You could possibly capture the analogue S-Video signal uncompressed if you have an external capture device. This will probably give you a better colourspace compared to DV 4:1:1 (or 4:2:0) video, but the bandwidth will be lower due to filtering so overall I am not sure which would give better results.

Richard

Ash Greyson December 26th, 2005 11:47 PM

Oh boy... here we go... if you shoot in 2:3 24P you should edit in 29.97... if you shoot in 2:3:3:2 you should CAPTURE removing pulldown and edit in 23.98...

These settings will make your video look the best, many people break these rules and IMHO that is what causes many of the problems people talk about (interlacing, jittery moves, etc.)


ash =o)

Giuseppe Palumbo December 27th, 2005 12:24 PM

damn Ash, i need you on speed-dial...And by the way. Do you ever go on AIM cause you've been on my BL for awile and you've never been on...

Jeff McElroy December 27th, 2005 01:55 PM

Perhaps we should have a special permanent thread on acquisition and capture of 24p concerning each camera with each NLE? This issue seems to warrant such a thing, as I myself have asked similar questions along with countless others. Just an idea.

Ash Greyson December 27th, 2005 02:54 PM

I need to add you to my AIM list... There is lots of confusion over the 24P workflow, I personally find it best to edit and shoot in the format you plan on delivering. This will cause fewer problems with conversions and fewer problems in general.



ash =o)

A. J. deLange December 27th, 2005 03:55 PM

DV only records one format: 60i. When you shoot 24p with 2:3:3:2 pulldown the fields written are Aa Bb bC Cc Dd Ee, Ff, Fg, Gg, Hh ... with the large letter signifying one field of an image and the small letter the other. If you tell the NLE that you have shot 24p it will take the first pair of fields and put them together to make the full image frame Aa. It will do the same with the next 2 fields Bb. The third pair of fields, bC, it will throw away. It then keeps Cc, Dd, Ee and so on. Thus it reproduces the 24 frames from the sensor but throws away the mixed frames. If you look at the dv sequence on a progressive (computer) monitor you will see a split frame on the 3rd, 8th, 13th... frames.

In 2:3 pulldown the cadence is Aa Bb BC cD dD Ee Ff FG... Again Aa, Bb,Cc can be reconstructed from the individual fields but if viewed on a 60i TV you will now see split frames in nos 3 & 4, 7 & 8 etc. i.e. more frequently. So if you are going to go to film then use 24p without fear of these funny looking split frames. If you will be going back to dv you'll have the funny frames to deal with if viewing on a progressive monitor but fewer in 2:3:3:2 than 2:3.

Giuseppe Palumbo December 27th, 2005 05:59 PM

Ok, ive run into a problem...I've been Editing on the 23.976 for the past day and already completed alot of the video. I then read all the posts and converted it back to 29.97. Is that going to be a problem. And another thing, I noticed on some of the parts of the video, alot of the Reds are pixels. Big ones at that. Im working on 3 monitors and it looks the same on all 3 monitors. I also rendered the video as 24p and rendered it as 29.97. Could it be the graphics card? Its not my video i dont think because i tweaked the video via in camera to get it a little undersaturated and then in post i made it a little more undersaturated. Im not really sure what i could be doing wrong here though. I captured my video the normal way if that matters either. I shot using 24p and the normal pull down setting, also its 16:9. Im going to the studio now and ill grab some frames and should be posting them sometime tonight.

Matthew Nayman December 27th, 2005 06:29 PM

Now I have been using adobe premiere pro and an Xl2 for nearly a year now. I know all about the 24p stuff.

However, I ran into a snag that maybe Ash can help with. I have been shooting in 24p 2:3 (not advanced). However, I recently switched over to adobe premiere pro 1.5 and even when I don't start a 24p project, and the timeline is 60i, it still reads the 2:3 footage as 23.976 fps.

Odd?

Matt

Ash Greyson December 27th, 2005 06:32 PM

Do you have all the patches/upgrades? It sees my stuff as 29.97... maybe ask in the Premiere forum...



ash =o)

Ash Greyson December 27th, 2005 06:34 PM

Those reds are normal... that is a DV issue, not an XL2 issue. The XL2 is actually better than the DVX with reds. You can add some chroma blur to help cover it. It has something to do with interlace/deinterlace and the red channel. Check the NLE forums, as good as I am with the camera... I am just a hack editor =o)



ash =o)

Bill Binder December 31st, 2005 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. J. deLange
DV only records one format: 60i. When you shoot 24p with 2:3:3:2 pulldown the fields written are Aa Bb bC Cc Dd Ee, Ff, Fg, Gg, Hh ... with the large letter signifying one field of an image and the small letter the other. If you tell the NLE that you have shot 24p it will take the first pair of fields and put them together to make the full image frame Aa. It will do the same with the next 2 fields Bb. The third pair of fields, bC, it will throw away. It then keeps Cc, Dd, Ee and so on. Thus it reproduces the 24 frames from the sensor but throws away the mixed frames. If you look at the dv sequence on a progressive (computer) monitor you will see a split frame on the 3rd, 8th, 13th... frames.

In 2:3 pulldown the cadence is Aa Bb BC cD dD Ee Ff FG... Again Aa, Bb,Cc can be reconstructed from the individual fields but if viewed on a 60i TV you will now see split frames in nos 3 & 4, 7 & 8 etc. i.e. more frequently. So if you are going to go to film then use 24p without fear of these funny looking split frames. If you will be going back to dv you'll have the funny frames to deal with if viewing on a progressive monitor but fewer in 2:3:3:2 than 2:3.

deLange has nailed it, but here's some more...

The DVX100 and the XL2 both have progressive CCDs and can both record at 24 fps. Both cameras save this TRUE 24p to the MiniDV format at 60i by inserting pulldown. If you record to 2:3, then you will have to edit in a 60i timeline. IMHO, you'd be WAY BETTER off recording in advance mode (2332) so that your NLE can strip the 60i back down to true 24p, then you can edit in 24p in the timeline. From there, you have a bunch of options for rednering. Render out to 2-3 pulldown 60i if you need NTSC, or render out to 24p mpeg2 for DVD burn, or encode out to WMV or MOV or MP4 at 24p if your delivery is via the web.

Basically, by using 2332 pulldown during acquisition, you can strip it back to 24p from 60i, and after that you can always render out back to 23 pulldown if needed later. Where with 23 pulldown, it's harder to get the true 24p back (you can still, but it's more of a pain in the arse), and usually you're stuck editing in 60i with weird bc frames and all. This keeps everything very clean through the entire workflow, and will also help keep any fx and titling you may be doing (you can do the credits/titles in 24p this way) very tight with no flicker and whatnot.

If you have any designs on editing your footage, I see no reason not to shoot with advance 2332 mode if you are going to shoot any 24p at all. And I think I would still say that even if some of the footage will end up mixed into a 60i timeline with other 60i footage, however, at times that might be another case where just shooting 23 might be warranted.

2332 is where it is at for sure if you are planning on editing...

Ash Greyson January 2nd, 2006 05:55 PM

Here goes the debate... like I said, I dont claim to be a great editor but 24P shot and edited natively in DV world is not as pleasing to the viewer. It tends to get more choppy and remember in almost ALL cases you are going to be showing it on an interlaced TV at 60i. Those extra frames are going to be there no matter what and I have found in DV world that it is best to do it in camera. The Varicam stuff I do, is all shot and edited in 24P and I think it looks great when output to 29.96 60i but that is a much different and more expensive format. I cant post a bunch of numbers to support my opinion but I have shot more DV than anyone I know and these are my observations...



ash =o)

Larry Huntington January 5th, 2006 04:59 PM

This thread is exactly what I needed for a studdering issue I am seeing on DVD. I shot the Iguazu Falls in South America in 24p (2:3) 16:9 and decided against 60i in favor of the film look.
All looks well in FCP5 on a 29.97 timeline and I do notice the interlacing every 5th frame or so and there is no studdering when played on the timeline. when I output to DVD using DVD Studio Pro I notice on some shots a studdering like every 5th of a second or so. When I moved the footage to a 23.98 timeline, all gets way jerky, so I deleated that sequence.

I captured the footage as I would 60i footage with settings for anamorphic (no pulldown etc.) I need some direct answers/techniques for this issue....do I record with 2:3 or 2:3:3:2 ?? I am not going to film (YET) and I want the progressive look. I am outputting to DVD only at this point. Maybe I should stick with 60i for nature footage from now on (but it looks awesome in my camera and timeline.) This whole scenario is very confusing for me. Where am I going wrong? Maybe it's a setting in DVD Studio Pro. Thanks, Larry

Ash Greyson January 5th, 2006 11:54 PM

If you shot it in 2:3 then I would leave everything in a 60i 29.97fps timeline. Do not author it as a progressive DVD...

Incidentally, 30p looks GREAT for DVD or streaming internet stuff... it CAN be an issue going to film and IS an issue going to PAL...



ash =o)

Jonathan Reynolds February 3rd, 2006 08:34 AM

Shooting 24p or 24pa and motion graphics
 
Hi guys I'm new here, I just recently purchased a canon xl2.

If this has been covered before, I apologize. The search function isn't finding any of my key words.

I am about to shoot my first 24p project and I am going to have to decide weather to shoot 24p or 24pa. The output media is DVD.

If I play it safe and shoot 24p, how will my 30p motion graphics look overlaid on the 24p with 3:2 pull down? Will it look strange?

Is there a way to add 3:2 pull down to 24p renders coming out of after effects?

Should I just go ahead and shoot 24pa, edit in 24p timeline and do all my graphics in 24p then out-put to a 24p DVD? This sounds the best, but I have never done it and this is a one time event (kind of. It would be not as ideal to do it some other time), and I don't want to end up with footage thatís jerky, strobey etc...


The shoot is this Saturday, please some one help me make sense of all this for me.

Joe Winchester February 3rd, 2006 09:41 AM

I create my motion graphics files in aftereffects at 24 fps to import into a finacut 24pa timeline. You get frame-for-frame accuracy that way and it looks spectacular. Definitely try to keep all of the sources the same fps if you can.

Joe Winchester February 3rd, 2006 09:44 AM

Oh, and...

When working in 24p (basic), you are actually editing in 29.97fps. Your 30p graphis should look fine in this timeline. You can output from aftereffects in 29.97 too, instead of 30fps, if you don't like the look.

Paul Cuoco February 3rd, 2006 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan Reynolds
Is there a way to add 3:2 pull down to 24p renders coming out of after effects?

Yes it's one of the options in the render queue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonathan Reynolds
Should I just go ahead and shoot 24pa, edit in 24p timeline and do all my graphics in 24p then out-put to a 24p DVD? This sounds the best, but I have never done it and this is a one time event (kind of. It would be not as ideal to do it some other time), and I don't want to end up with footage thatís jerky, strobey etc...

24PA would be best as it keeps all your footage 24p and allows your DVD to add 3:2 pull down on output to standard TV. It also means you're working with 6 less frames per second which means faster renders.

If you don't want to use this project to learn about it, then I would say shoot standard 24P which lays 3:2 pull down with it to the tape, and do your graphics 24P and render with pull down, editing in a 29.97 timeline.

Or... shoot 30P and do your graphics in 30P, editing in a standard timeline. It'll look about the same with no need to interlace or add pull down.

Just my 2 cents.

Jonathan Reynolds February 6th, 2006 01:45 AM

Thanks for the advice guys, I went ahead and shot in 24pa. This camera is really neat. Although unfortunately I still have to adjust to the settings on the camera. I may have had the white balance off or something, the colors look off, too sturated or something, but its useable. The whole setup was rushed as the stage had to be used for an event. I used cine gamma, maybe cine colors too. Gain was at 0, and shutter was at 1/48. Iris was some where around F2ish.

Here is a screen capture:
http://www.geocities.com/unklejman/angieLaurye.jpg

Dave Morgan February 23rd, 2006 12:55 AM

XL2 24P VS 30P there is interlacing on 24p
 
how come when you capture video at 24p (either in 2:3 or 2:3:3:2) you see mass interlaceing crap, when you look at the raw video on your pc. but if you look at the 30p footage there is none, its clean


?

Ash Greyson February 23rd, 2006 01:28 AM

The 24p is still wrapped in the 60i stream... you need remove the pulldown frames when you capture 2:3:3:2. In 2:3 you will have the 24P inside the 60i. In 30P there are no extra frames, hence no interlace artifacts.



ash =o)

Eugene Weaver February 27th, 2006 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ash Greyson
The 24p is still wrapped in the 60i stream... you need remove the pulldown frames when you capture 2:3:3:2. In 2:3 you will have the 24P inside the 60i. In 30P there are no extra frames, hence no interlace artifacts.



ash =o)


so...is there a reason to use the 23:32 or 2:3 pulldown at all? Or should I just use the 30P? I don't quite understand the whole deal with 23:32 or 2:3 pulldown and what it does for me.

If I shoot in 2:3 Pulldown (which I have been doing for my last three features) then I edit the footage for output via idvd will there be a difference if I would instead shoot in 30P? What is the best option to get the best "film like" look?

Geoff Voorhees February 27th, 2006 03:38 PM

When you view raw footage on a monitor, you will get the interlacing look, but once you render it out and onto a DVD, it should be fine. You should also be able to test this by displaying the footage on a TV screen. Just make sure your timeline (24p, 30p )and size (4:3 or 16:9) is correct, anamorphic is checked for 16:9, 2:3:3:2 pulldown removal is checked (if used) during capture. My understanding is that it's best to use 2:3:3:2 removal, especially if you desire to eventually output to film. There have been posts in the past that cover 2:3:3:2 more in depth.

Jeff McElroy February 27th, 2006 03:48 PM

24p Advanced (2:3:3:2 pulldown) is more efficient for dvd-end applications as well, and really should be the preferred cadence if your NLE can handle it.

Ash Greyson February 27th, 2006 10:00 PM

Matter of preference but for DVD I prefer 30P. Smoother motion but still progressive.


ash =o)

Matthew Nayman February 28th, 2006 09:43 AM

The whole 24p thing has been the source of much disagreement.

in 24p 2:3 you get a 24p look that is useable in 60i timeline. Yes there are interlaced frames, but when viewed on a TV it plays back looking like 24p. Jsut don't pause!@ 24p 2:3:3:2 is if you are planning on exporting to a 24p DVD (progressive!!!) or back to film (a transfer to 16 or 35). The 2:3:3:2 cadence can be removed with your NLE to give a TRUE 24 fps. The 24p 2:3 cannot (wihtout some loss of frames). However, I usually shoot 2:3 cause I know I am not going back out to film or progressive DVD so the choice is yours. 30p looks too fake to me (videoish) and, if you did want to do out to film, you pretty much can't.

Ash Greyson February 28th, 2006 01:23 PM

Matter of taste, 30p for action is recommended by myself and others. 30P does limit a film out and a Pal conversion. IMHO the film out thing comes up WAY too often for something that is, at best, a gigantic longshot.



ash =o)

Jason Varner March 3rd, 2006 12:46 AM

Delusions of Grandeur
 
It's funny how much time people waste worrying about filmout. How many shorts or features shot on the XLs have ever been transferred to film? I know of 2. It's like the buzz surrounding HDV. I mean it's great that the sub 10G market is heading that direction but right now what's the deliverable? HDCam? Film? HDDVD will probably answer these questions but those jerks are still fighting over media/codecs. And another thing........Oh sorry about that I'm ranting. I like 30p it's nice. To me its looks more like film than 24p because of it's smoother cadence. The first time I saw 24p (on the canon) it looked like I was capturing. Once you get used to it it disappears but you never never get a second chance to make a first impression. Good Luck, Jason.

Dave Morgan March 6th, 2006 10:38 PM

ill just stick with 30p


im used to it from my gl2, and its not like it looks bad.

Matthew Nayman March 7th, 2006 06:55 AM

If you shoot a few things in 24p 2:3 (not 2:3:3:2) and burn them to a DVD and watch them on a TV (not a 24p DVD, just regualr 29.97 DVD), you will see how great 24p looks. On a moniter (expecially LCD) it can look strobey and boring, but on a CRT it looks great.

Eric Powell April 6th, 2006 01:53 PM

Recording 24p footage of a TV screen
 
To All:

I'm shooting a short film this weekend and there are a few shots that require me to point the camera at a TV playing video. I'm shooting the rest of the film 24p w/ a 1/48 shutter - will this cause flickering on the screen?

Please offer suggestions.

Thanks,

Eric

Joshua Provost April 6th, 2006 02:20 PM

Eric,

The TV will be refreshing every 1/60th, so you could probably shoot with the shutter at 1/60 or a multiple thereof. Even so, the refresh may vary just a fraction, which could give you a slow-rolling flicker. Some cameras have a "SynchroScan" feature that allows you precisely tweak the shutter around 1/60 to match what you are shooting.

If it doesn't work out, is there another way to get the shots? Have the TV off and overlay an image in post? If it's a closeup of just the TV image, could you fake the TV look in post (add fake scanlines, and otherwise mess with the image in some way)?

Josh

Matthew Nayman April 6th, 2006 02:25 PM

You could shoot an LCD or Plasma HD tv. they don't flicker.

Eniola Akintoye April 6th, 2006 05:21 PM

Clear Scan

The Clear Scan feature allows you to record a computer CRT screen or similar equipment without displaying a black band or flicker on the screen. The XL2 can adjust shutter speeds from 60 Hz to 202.5 Hz, allowing you to perfectly match the CRT's scan rate.


http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/con...4#subsection10


Hope that helps

Gregory Dillard April 14th, 2006 07:54 PM

Shooting 24P on XL2 and editing with FCP 5
 
I believe this topic has been covered before, but i am bit muffed at locating the info so i will explain what we are doing. We are shooting 24P & 30P and we want to know if we have to bring it into Cinema Tools, then back to FCP, or do we just edit it in FCP? Also what are the correct settings that we should be using in FCP? Thank you and this is my first post so please don't beat me up too bad. LOL!

Javier Urena April 14th, 2006 08:35 PM

30p is treated just like regular video, though you may want to let FCP know the footage is progressive in the capture and sequence settings.

Did you shoot 24p or 24p advanced? If you shot 24p, then you treat it the same way as 30p. You will set your sequence settings to 29.97 fps.(same as any other video)

24p advanced is different. You will have to tell FCP to remove pulldown and make sure the sequence is set to 23.98 fps.

If you want to mix this footage with the 30p, you have to add pulldown and edit at 29.97 fps. I don't know how to do this, so I hope you shot regular 24p.

Hope that helps.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:47 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2021 The Digital Video Information Network