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)

Jay Gladwell August 3rd, 2005 01:39 PM

It has to be captured from the camera.


Ash Greyson August 3rd, 2005 02:57 PM

Depends... 24P will work from anything, 24PA can be more picky...

ash =o)

Greg Boston August 3rd, 2005 04:33 PM

What comes off the tape during playback/capture is always the same, 720x480 60i. It will be necessary for your NLE to understand that there is a pulldown to apply and that the pixel aspect ratio needs to be changed to represent a 16:9 form factor.

Also, even though you should be able to play back the Canon tape in any deck, I've already had an issue with playback on my Panasonic 953 with a tape shot on the XL-2. The reverse scenario, however, is ok. 953 material played in the XL-2 w/o problem. I didn't try both XL-2 cameras as a source so it may be a problem with only one of the cameras.

Hope this helps,


Kevin Wild August 11th, 2005 05:11 PM

Scan Lines on CRT Monitor w XL2 at 24p?
I'm shooting an image from a computer screen soon. I thought I had read somewhere that when you're shooting progressive scan images, you don't need to worry about scan lines or using clear scan. Is this true? I did a quick test tonight and on my LCD monitor I didn't see scan lines in either 24p or 60i, I guess it's a progressive format. But, when I shot my wife's old iMac CRT monitor, it showed scan lines on both 24p and 60i.

I also didn't have the option to choose the clear scan mode in the menu. Anyone with experience with all this?



Richard Hunter August 11th, 2005 06:31 PM

Hi Kevin. It's the LCD vs. CRT that makes the difference. The image on an LCD panel does not fade away the same as on a CRT, so you can capture the whole screen within one frame. When you shoot a CRT, you will get a black band when the shutter speed is too fast, or a bright band when it is too slow. Clearscan lets you try to synchronise the shutter to the CRT refresh so you get the whole picture without dark or bright bands.

Regarding how to select clearscan, Im not sure, but I think it is greyed out in automatic exposure modes. Have you tried with the exposure set to Manual?


Patrick King August 11th, 2005 06:42 PM


Originally Posted by Richard Hunter
Regarding how to select clearscan, Im not sure, but I think it is greyed out in automatic exposure modes. Have you tried with the exposure set to Manual?


As Richard mentioned, the feature is not available except in the Manual (M) or Shutter Priority (Tv) modes. This is shown on page 73 of the XL2 User Manual as the only two mode sysmbols shown with dark symbols. The chart on page 57 also shows that Clear Scan is only available in M or Tv modes and not available in Tv if EXP LOCK is selected.

Kevin Wild August 11th, 2005 07:01 PM

Strange, because I was in full manual mode. I'll have to make sure it works.

What about using 24p? I thought you shouldn't need clear scan at all if working progressive. Is this not true?

Thx, guys.


Patrick King August 11th, 2005 08:45 PM


Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
Strange, because I was in full manual mode. I'll have to make sure it works.

What about using 24p? I thought you shouldn't need clear scan at all if working progressive. Is this not true?

Thx, guys.


Kevin, you have to select shutter speed to CS and then go into the menu to adjust the frequency.

Richard Hunter August 11th, 2005 11:36 PM


Originally Posted by Kevin Wild
What about using 24p? I thought you shouldn't need clear scan at all if working progressive. Is this not true?

Hi Kevin. No, it's not true. Even with progressive scan in the camera, what you actually capture in each frame depends on what the monitor is displaying during the time your shutter is open (sorry for stating the obvious!). If you don't use clearscan, the monitor will either display a partial frame (when your shutter is open for too short a time) or a full frame with a bright area that has been scanned twice (when your shutter is open for too long).


Samuel Orpilla August 16th, 2005 11:43 PM

24p motion blur?
I've recently purchased the XL2, and it seems every shot i capture at 24p has motion blurriness. If there's any significant movement, like swinging your head to fast, or sometimes just walking across the screen, there's quite a bit of distortion.

I've never shot in 24p before, so i'm not sure if this is normal. But if not, should i adjust my settings? Most of the shots have been with autofocus, but it seems even in manual I get this distortion. of course, here's less at 30p and none at 60i.

Let me know if you need any info from me.

Ash Greyson August 16th, 2005 11:49 PM

What shutter are you at? try 1/48 if you are at 1/24 What you are seeing is NORMAL. Despite what you read on this and other forums 24P is an EFFECT, not a way to make your images look better. Make sure it works with the project you are doing. 24P is best for slow cinematic moves, shallow DOF shots and for the EFFECT it creates. It is NOT for everything...

ash =o)

Samuel Orpilla August 17th, 2005 10:14 AM

Thanks for your help, Ash. I just wanted to make sure it was normal, and I will try changing the shutter speed.

Greg Boston August 17th, 2005 11:17 AM

Also, be aware that the autofocus system does not function in 24p mode because of the slower scan rate of the ccd's which can't update fast enough to lock in on the subject. That's the dis-advantage of using a through the lens autofocus system.

You have to adjust your camera technique for 24p. As you noted, fast motion has a lot of blur. This is normal and you can't pan the camera too fast, or have rapid motion in the frame. Standard shutter speed for 24p is 1/48 which corresponds to a 180 degree shutter on a film camera.

There are lots of things to consider when you shoot at 24p. Unfortunately, it's not a turn on and shoot kind of image aquisition.



Javier Urena August 17th, 2005 05:06 PM

This is a matter of shutter speed, not frame rate. Any still photographer will tell you that it's difficult to get a good static shot at 1/48 second, let alone one involving movement.

For example, if a still photographer shoots a car race, he'll use a shutter speed of 1/500 or faster, or pan like the best panner in the world.

So Samuel, I suggest you play around with different shutter speeds and panning techniques before ditching 24P for your project.

Robert Luke August 17th, 2005 10:08 PM

so are we talking like jsut a regular blur when something moves (like shutter speed) or are we talking about crazy pixelation like what you see on HDTVs when the camera moves a lot (mostly visible in liveish shows like Jay Leno and sports shows)

Samuel Orpilla August 18th, 2005 05:11 PM

We're talking good old motion blur, due to the shutter speed

Richard Hunter August 18th, 2005 06:26 PM

The motion blur is easy to get rid of - just increase the shutter speed. However, then you are left with the judder and strobing inherent in the slow 24p frame rate, and that takes a lot more care to work with.


Arlie Nava August 20th, 2005 02:17 PM

set both your capture and sequence settings to 23.98 advance pulldown removal. I use sony trv 17. no problem.

Lars Barlow August 27th, 2005 10:50 PM

Um, I would recommend that you do not try to "convert" any of your footage into HD. The only thing that can possibly do that is some super algabraic software that has yet to be invented. You really can't make a higher resolution picture with a lower resolution and expect any raise in quality.

However, a TV expert told me that most of the new HDTVs are rather sophisticated in that they have a chip that detects the resolution of the video stream and compensates for it. I have seen this with a wedding video I did and some nature stuff. Basically they way it works is the TV projects a lower resolution picture that matches the source of video. You get a good quality picture without pixels showing.

They way he explained it to me this is in most new (probably last year and a half) HDTVs. Just nobody knows about it. If the chip is not working Cable television will look terrible.

Your final decision for your progressive or interlaced footage should not rest on the TV because it will most likely project both the way the camera shoots it. So decide on what you want to shoot on based on how YOU want it to look.

Mathieu Ghekiere August 28th, 2005 05:49 AM

Bill, choosing 24p or 60i is an artistic choice. If you have a camera that has true progressive scan (which the XL2 has) you just have to choose if you want a 'filmlook' or a 'reality' look. But it hasn't got anything to do with resolution.

Pete Bauer August 28th, 2005 06:26 AM

Hi Bill,

I'm guessing that your final product will be a DVD? If so, it really is entirely an artistic choice, since the DVD will yield an NTSC standard signal and the TV will be able to play it. People like 24p for its film-like appearance (if it is done properly, of course) AND it allows about 20% more material to fit on a DVD. Using 60i tends to give more the fast-action video look -- great for your kid's ball games, etc.

On DVD, 60i is simple...29.97 frames/second, each of two fields. In 24p, flags are added to tell the DVD player what fields to repeat to reconstruct a 60i NTSC signal with the ol' 2:3 pull-down scheme to give the film-look. This Vegas document describes the DVD workflow (which will be similar in other editing and authoring apps for any camera using Panasonic's 24pA scheme, which includes the XL2) starting on page 7:


It is a quick read and well worth it for anyone doing 24fps work with just about any software or DV camera.

Laurence Kingston August 29th, 2005 04:41 PM

Remember that each format has it's advantages and disadvantages:

24P: Better resolution on each frame. Not as good for fast motion, quick pans or zooms though and hand held camera shake looks jarring. Also, autofocus takes about 4 times longer to focus. Footage can't be slowed down for slow motion effect (though you can temporarily go back to 60i for shots you know are going to be slowed down). Really the best choice if you are doing movie style camera work with lights, tripods, dolly shots and good looking talent.

60i: Half the resolution on each frame, but twice as many of them. Still the best thing for run and gun work. Fast pans and zooms look smoother and handheld camera work isn't nearly as jarring. Brighter image in low light. A much more forgiving format. Not as pretty though.

Marlon Torres August 30th, 2005 11:19 PM

Mixing 60i with 24p
Is it to okay to mix up 60i footage with 24p footage on premiere pro? basically i want to shoot footage that will be in slow mo in 60i because it has more frames but non-slow mo footage will be 24p

Pete Bauer August 31st, 2005 12:36 AM

Kind of surprising, but from the lack of response to a very similar question the other day in the Premiere forum, there seems to be not a lot of experience with that:


Since your question is so similar to Marc's, let's use that existing thread to continue the discussion, and hopefully we can compile more info on this subject in the near future.

Ryan Graham August 31st, 2005 09:13 AM

I've been inserting 24p footage into 60i sequences lately, and Premiere seems to handle that fine. I used the default 60i NTSC preset for the project. It appears to add some sort pulldown to the 24p footage, so you end up having to render the 24p footage to preview it properly on an NTSC monitor. But other than that, I haven't seen any problems.

I haven't tried it the other way around, however (inserting 60i footage into a 24p sequence). I'd assume in that case that Premiere would automatically try to convert the 60i footage to 24p, dropping frames in the process. Converting 60i footage to 24p in order to do slow motion is something that would best be done by Twixtor in After Effects. I use Magic Bullet to do a film-look conversion from 60i to 24p (non slo-mo), and I know for a fact that there is nothing in Premiere that can do anything like that.

For what it's worth, I've been mixing footage in order to trim down a feature length film I'm working on. I have scenes that have been edited in Premiere and then color corrected and converted to 24p in After Effects. Unfortunately, my film is too long right now (over 2 hours) and I need to chop stuff out. And since there is no way to "refresh" a project in After Effects (i.e., when something changes in the Premiere project, it also changes in the associated After Effects project), I just have to cut down the final renders in Premiere.

So I'll stick a 24P render back into its original 60i timeline, on an upper Video track, and then trim all tracks at once when cutting out shots or sections of a scene. After that, I export the audio to Sonar via Automatic Duck's new PPro Export (a great plugin which I beta tested for, and that I probably couldn't live without now) for final audio mixing, mastering, and export to a wav file.

After all of that, I create a new 24p project, and just copy and paste the re-edited 24p tracks from the 60i sequences into the 24p timeline. I then add the mastered wav files in, line them up with the start of each scene, and then export out the whole thing to a 24p mpeg2 for DVD authoring.

It seems complicated, but it works out pretty well. I wish After Effects would pick up on changes made in imported Premiere sequences, though. That would make things much easier.


Eric Brown August 31st, 2005 10:35 AM

Okay, found it in another thread


Eric Brown August 31st, 2005 10:36 AM

Ooops. Sorry if I'm cross-posting, Chris.

Eric Brown August 31st, 2005 04:06 PM

Little late coming into this...I use my first gen' Optura for capture, basically a mini DV deck. My XL2 never gets hooked up to my computer as I have no need.
I've been using the same brand tapes in both, Panasonic AY-DVM63MQ, and haven't had an ounce of trouble from either camera or Final Cut Pro.

Jimmy McKenzie August 31st, 2005 08:03 PM

Hi Cory, I hope the above has helped. I don't want to hijack your thread, but my original related post went unanswered and perhaps these kind gents above might be able to assist:


Thanks to any who might have a chance to inspect the above.

A. J. deLange September 1st, 2005 01:01 PM

There are two issues here: crossplay and pulldown. "Crossplay" is the ability to play a tape on any machine which adheres to the same standard (in this case DV) as the machine on which it was recorded. Unfortunately I have seen several reports of inability to play back tapes recorded on XL cameras on other DV machines. If it's any solace decks, as opposed to cameras, seem to be able to tolerate more latitude.

Independent of crossplay is pulldown. This is not a problem between machines as long as crossplay is working OK. It has already been mentioned that the camera video output is 60i irrespective of the mode of recording. In 24p the camera records 24 frames in a second. Call these A, B, C, D and so on. For recording these frames are separated into interlaced fields i.e. A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2, D1, D2 and so on with A1 being the first field of the first frame, A2 the second field of the first frame, B1 the second field of the second frame ... These are written to tape at 60 fields (30 frames) per second thus: A1A2, B1B2, B2C1, C1C2, D1D2. Thus four out of every 5 frames contain fields from the same camera frames but the one in the middle contains fields from two camera frames. The results of this are that frames A and B which were taken 1/24th of a second apart are shown 1/30th of a second apart and B and C, also taken 1/24th of a second apart, are displayed 1/15th of a second apart with a mix of B and C shown in between. This results in a somewhat jerky playback particularly in the mixed frame if there was motion between B and C (an object and its "ghost" may be seen simultaneously). On average, though, 24 frames per second are displayed. Because of this jerkiness there is little reason to use 24p unless you need to get eventually to a 24p medium i.e. film. When you do that you need capture hardware/software that takes the first and second frames off the tape, throws away the third frame, then captures the fourth and fifth frames and repeats this pattern. Such a system captures A1A2, B1B2, C1C2,D1D2,E1E2... i.e. the frames taken by the camera. (Note: actual frame rates are 30/1.001 and 24/1.001. Also note that I don't know which fields are used in the mixed frame so I guessed B2C1 which seems reasonable but I don't know that it's not actually B1C2 or even C2B1 for that matter.)

Marlon Torres September 8th, 2005 10:39 PM

my 24p doesnt look right
24p is supposed to look like film right? well i shot some 24p footage today and i dont know about you but this doesnt look like 24p to me... it looks like its doubling frames or something...any suggestions?


Rob Lohman September 9th, 2005 01:35 AM

It looks okay to me. Keep in mind that 24 fps (especially progressive) footage
is inherently more "skippy". Especially compares to 30 fps interlaced. At what
shutter speed where you shooting? 1/48th is a good number to use with 24 fps.

You carefully need to think about motion in 24p. Especially pans and things
like that. Another reason to compose "elegant" moves. If you are going to
shoot high speed action it may be wise to move to 30p or 30i and then slow
that down (go to 24p)for example (better with 30i).

Ash Greyson September 9th, 2005 01:39 AM

Were you in 24P or 24PA? Looks more like 2:3:3:2 pulldown or 24PA. Either way, your footage is perfectly normal. 24P exhibits similar motion as film but in no other way makes video look like film. 24P IS AN EFFECT, it is NOT I repeat NOT a way to make your video look like film. I have this fight over and over with people and I shoot 24P quite a bit but it must be MOTIVATED like any other effect.

You can argue all day about the technical aspect but 24P video does not look to the eye the same as 24P film when both are pulled down to 60i. Most the differences come from the way the source is shot. DP's on film know the limitations of 24P and how fast they can make moves, etc. IMHO, 24P video is best for slow cinematic moves or environments were you will have a shallow DOF. It CAN help you achieve a film like look but it does not in any way shape or form make up for inferior operation or production values.

ash =o)

Richard Hunter September 9th, 2005 03:10 AM

Hi Marlon. You can play around with the shutter speed to trade off motion blur against strobing, but basically, 24p is like this. If you don't like the effect you either have to avoid this type of action and movement, as Ash mentions, or else capture more images per second i.e. shoot 30p or 60i.


Bruce S. Yarock September 9th, 2005 05:15 AM

You mention "30p and 30i". I thought that there is only one '30" setting on the xl2.
Bruce Yarock

Jay Gladwell September 9th, 2005 05:58 AM

He probably meant 60i.


Marlon Torres September 9th, 2005 05:58 AM

is it just me? 24p vs magic bullet
it seems using magic bullet makes 30 or 60i footage look more like film than just shooting 24p.

Chris Hurd September 9th, 2005 06:04 AM

Hi Marlon,

There's a lot more to the "film look" than just the frame rate. We have an entire forum dedicated to it, so you might want to research the various discussions there. The link is:


Matthew Nayman September 9th, 2005 08:27 AM

I am getting tired of people saying that 24p look jumpy..

Go watch a feature film in your local theater. THAT'S WHAT 24 FPS looks like! Less Frames per second=more gaps in motion.

I love the XL2 24p

You should too!

Ash Greyson September 9th, 2005 09:54 AM

24P absolutely looks jumpy, you dont notice it as much at the theater because the screen is huge, it is being SHOWN at 24P with no pulldown and it is being filmed by DPs who know how to make up for the limitations. You state it yourself, "more gaps in motion" means less smooth.

ash =o)

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:02 PM.

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