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)

Matthew Nayman August 2nd, 2006 07:09 AM

Hey ash

Although I agree that the 24p is an excellent tool, and really does, if used properly, mimic the look of film, there are times when using a 1/48 shutter is not advantageous...

the 1/24 shutter is often used in hollywood films to help in lowlight. Although shot on a genesis cam, I saw a 1/24 shutter in "Scary Movie 4" at night, and a few others that I can't recall right now.

Also, the motion qualities of 24p still show through, even at shutterspeeds like 1/60 and 1/100, but anything above that, yes... the motion is somewhat comprosmised

Brendon Whateley August 2nd, 2006 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ash Greyson
If you using ANYTHING but a 1/48th shutter in 24P (1/60th in 60i) you are applying an IRREVERSIBLE effect.

Ash, isn't this just saying that the choice of shutter speed cannot be undone? In other words, if you want a shutter speed effect of any sort, you cannot change it once the footage is on tape. So if you want a TV look, you need to use shutter speeds like 1/60 and should NOT use 1/48. Etc.

So we should choose the shutter speed based on the look we want...

Ash Greyson August 2nd, 2006 09:59 AM

I have shot at 1/24th in low light, it causes more motion decay but you can get images that are too dark for 1/48th. In this case, you live with the effect because you are compromising in order to get ANY image.

I am not saying you cannot opt for or like the effect of a shutter other than 1/48, just emphasizing that this is an effect, not a light control.



ash =o)

Josh Bass August 2nd, 2006 11:03 AM

I have to say, I think that a fast shutter (like 1/210) on 24plooks different than it does at 60i. One way looks kind of action filmy, the other is like you're watching sports on TV.

Ash Greyson August 2nd, 2006 11:24 AM

They will look different because of the frame rate but you will not get the natural motion that a normal film camera with a 180 degree shutter will give.



ash =o)

Josh Bass August 2nd, 2006 12:03 PM

Right, just saying that the two frame rates still look different with the higher shutter speeds.

David Lach August 3rd, 2006 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josh Bass
I have to say, I think that a fast shutter (like 1/210) on 24plooks different than it does at 60i. One way looks kind of action filmy, the other is like you're watching sports on TV.

No matter which shutter speed used, one cam only has 24 image samplings per second to work with while NTSC video cams have 60, which gives it a more realistic look (if there's such a thing).

I think S. P. Ryan for example still looks like film even though it was shot with a high shutter value. All it means is there's less motion blur. The 24fps is what gives the film look (not only that of course) because our brain has to work harder to see motion (hence the dreamy look often described).

I find it funny that today we (amateurs and pros alike) resist the realistic look of video because we like the film look better, even though video is clearly a better technology sampling wise (not talking about interlacing, THAT is some crappy stuff, just refering to sampling frequency).

I'm including myself in there, everything else being equal and shooting conditions not too extreme, I usually like the 24p look better on my XL2. But to me it's just like saying I like B&W more than color. Both get you farther away from reality (what your eye sees), not closer.

OK now I'm just rambling so I'll stop.

Josh Bass August 3rd, 2006 10:34 AM

Um. . .not to get into a whole new thing here, but I don't know about video being a better technology, interlacing aside.

Film is still generally a higher resolution image (except maybe compared to the very highest quality "video" cameras, like the genesis, etc.), has more lattitude, and more color depth.

David Lach August 3rd, 2006 10:38 AM

Josh, re-read my post, I'm strictly talking about sampling frequency (24p vs 60p) when everything else is equal. I'm refering to the fact that in this very rare case, more isn't always perceived as better, which I find interesting.

Ash Greyson August 4th, 2006 12:12 AM

I am talking real world observations, not technical. 24P at 1/48th is the natural motion of film that you simply cannot get from 60i. 24P with a higher shutter, looks more like 60i with a higher shutter as the motion of both becomes disguised at a high shutter.




ash =o)

Dale Guthormsen August 5th, 2006 11:39 PM

I must be blind.

I recently shot some 1/48 24 p footage and then the same thing in 1/60 30 p footage. I just could not see that much difference.

It seems to me that faster shutter speeds are more of a problem in the 60 i mode. I have found slower speeds ( 1/48 or 1/60) always make for better images.


Please correct me if needed. maybe I have missed the point here.

Josh Bass August 6th, 2006 12:57 AM

Some people can't tell the difference between 30p and 24. Some people can't see the difference between 60i and 24p, for that matter.


As for 60i and fast shutter, 1/60 is the "proper" speed for 60i (30fps interlaced) footage. I would only shoot faster speeds if trying to capture action that blurs too much at 1/60.

Gregory Dillard August 20th, 2006 05:00 PM

24P 16:9 broadcast commercial question
 
Hello everyone. We produced a commercial and we shot it 24P (NOT ADVANCED) and 16:9. We edited the commercial in FCP 5 using the sequence settings for 24P with advanced pulldown. This commercial is going on braodcast so we had to take the timeline and drop it into an uncompressed 4:2:2 timeline (29.97). We have to print to tape with our SONY DSR 1500A with SDI using the DVCAM tapes, which will be converted to BETA SP. Question is do we keep the timeline at 23.98 and lay it back out to tape, or do we change it to 29.97? Thank everyone out there in DVi land that may respond.

Ash Greyson August 20th, 2006 10:56 PM

Actually, you should have edited in a 29.97 timeline if you did not do 2:3:3:2 (advanced). If you did not process your clips with Cinema Tools you probably have funky "c" frame artifacts or jerkiness. You can output from a 24P timeline, you just have to tell FCP how to output it... I assume you are using a Kona card or AJA box so you will have to have that set up as well.




ash =o)

Gregory Dillard August 21st, 2006 06:44 AM

I did not process it in Cinema Tools, but i did edit it on a 23.98 timeline. I can put it on a 29.97 timeframe. By the way, how do i process it in Cinema Tools as i have yet to use it.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:11 AM.

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