24p with FX1000 at DVinfo.net

Jeff Harper · December 25th, 2008, 01:41 PM

When I use the 24p setting on my FX1000 the shutter speed is automatcally switched to 48. What is this about?

Additionally on pans it is very rough in 24p mode with default settings.

Motion is choppy as well. In scenes with a minimum of motion the look is nice, however.

William Ellwood · December 25th, 2008, 05:03 PM

I've never used progressive mode because of the strobing look in the viewfinder - though up to now I've only used a SD VX2100. My friend with a Z7, shoots in interlaced mode, then turns his movies progressive on the timeline.

I take it this is not a typical way to use an HDV cam?

Jeff Harper · December 26th, 2008, 04:01 AM

Don't know about other cams. The FX1000 has a specific 24pm setting, but you still have to do a coversion after capture with Cineform or some other way according to Chris B.

Rick Lutec · December 27th, 2008, 12:04 AM

Hello and Happy Holidays
If you search through some previous threads you'll discover postings on 24p and may discover some of the answers you seek. Such as: shutter speeds when shooting
24P, motion with 24p etc.
You may also want to read into some threads on the Canon HV20/30. Apparently (unless newer info has altered the previous info) the process is supposed to be similar to the way the FX1000 delivers 24P.

Jeff Harper · December 27th, 2008, 02:04 AM

Thanks Rick.

Jeff Harper · December 27th, 2008, 03:38 AM

Update: Chris B has been working with a couple of us in the Vegas forum on the 24p feature as it applies to this cam and Vegas, and in the process I have learned the choppiness I've experienced with the 24p setting turned on with the FX1000 is normal, apparently.

It would seem to not be practical for use in my business, save for possibly some corporate stuff. For weddings I can't see it, not with multiple cams. Certainly not worth the cost of Cineform which is required to convert the footage. When I have an extra $800 to spend maybe I'll purchase it, as the 24p will be a nice feature.

The 24p is a very interesting feature and overall does show lots of promise.

Conversley, I have found the Cinema tone settingare are quite nice and while I initially thought it brought a "darkness" to the footage, (which it does) it really does look great. That setting alone adds somewhat of a cinematic look to my footage that I will definitely be using from time to time.

William Ellwood · December 27th, 2008, 04:07 AM

Guys - is it possible to link a clip that was done in the 24p mode compared to a similar clip done in standard interlaced mode, so I can get a handle on this feature. I'm set on ordering a Z5, but at I've seen a Z7 using progressive mode, and through the viewfinder it looks aweful - so strobey.

Jeff Harper · December 27th, 2008, 04:19 AM

William, right click on the link and save. It is 140MB. This clip doesn't show the choppy portions of the video as it was edited to highlight the capabilities of the zoom and Cinema Tone Feature. It was shot in 24p, but does not appear as 24p because it has not been converted to progressive. Cineform is required to do that and I don't own it.

This clip is not what you're asking for, but something to look at as the footage will likely be similar to what your would get with Z5.

I have found the 24p setting is very strobie when panning too quickly. Scenes with fast motion also have the choppiness. As I mentioned before, I believe the 24p feature is of limited usefulness except in carefully thought out shooting scenarios.

http://jeffharpervideo.com/Videos/wmv/ChurchDemo.wmv

William Ellwood · December 27th, 2008, 04:22 AM

Thanks Jeff - I'll download it now.

Tim Akin · December 27th, 2008, 08:23 AM

You know, it's hard for me to believe that Sony would use a 24p pulldown in these camera's that there own NLE could not remove. Do they really want you to spend money on another company's software to do something that should be kept within a "SONY WORKFLOW"?

Jeff Harper · December 27th, 2008, 08:59 AM

DSE, who is familiar with the corporate aspects of Sony much more than most any of us will ever be, has said that the camera company and the software company are separate entities that do not communicate with each other.

I agree with you Tim, it seems stupid and makes no sense from where I sit either.

Ken Ross · December 27th, 2008, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

I have found the 24p setting is very strobie when panning too quickly. Scenes with fast motion also have the choppiness. As I mentioned before, I believe the 24p feature is of limited usefulness except in carefully thought out shooting scenarios.

http://jeffharpervideo.com/Videos/wmv/ChurchDemo.wmv

Jeff, I thought this was a great example of 24p. It displayed almost no choppiness (even when zooming) and toward the end also demonstrated the great low light of the 1000. For audio, did you just go with the onboard mike?

Tom Hardwick · December 27th, 2008, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

When I use the 24p setting on my FX1000 on pans it is very rough in 24p mode with default settings.
Motion is choppy as well. In scenes with a minimum of motion the look is nice, however.

In 24p you're shooting 24 different stills per second. In 60i you're taking 60 different stills per second. There will be very obvious side-effects if you decide to use a frame rate invented generations ago. 24 fps was a film speed chosen at the time for cost and mechanical reasons, and because of the lowly frame rate the projectors were made to show each still twice in an effort to cut down on visible flicker, increasing image stutter yet again.

You've bought a car capable of 100 mph yet choose to run it in third gear at 50 mph. There is a price to be paid for this.

tom.

Ben Hogan · December 27th, 2008, 11:46 AM

Yeah I don't quite understand the whole 24p thing myself. If back when they had the technology we have today, I doubt they would be trying to use 24 fps. I bet they'd use the best fps to get the smoothest motion possible. They were trying to advance forward, we seem to be taking steps back, even though we have everything to move forward. Who sets these trends? haha...

Adam Gold · December 27th, 2008, 12:32 PM

Tom and Ben are right on the money. The choppiness is the whole *point* of 24p. In an effort to look like film, it merely replicates the worst aspects of the "film look." If you're not outputting to film there is no point to shooting in this mode, ever, unless you really like that look. And even if you do, 30p would be better; it still looks just as crappy but is easier for your editor to handle.

Remember, 24 fps became the film standard only because it was the slowest they could run the film through the camera and still get an almost-okay picture (although some claim it was because of in-camera optical or magnetic sound; this may be true but I'm not sure). There's nothing "good" about 24 fps; it wasn't chosen for any aesthetic or artistic reason.

Why do people insist on using tools they don't understand and then complain about the results?

December 25th, 2008, 01:41 PM	#1
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	24p with FX1000 When I use the 24p setting on my FX1000 the shutter speed is automatcally switched to 48. What is this about? Additionally on pans it is very rough in 24p mode with default settings. Motion is choppy as well. In scenes with a minimum of motion the look is nice, however. Last edited by Jeff Harper; December 25th, 2008 at 04:00 PM.

December 25th, 2008, 05:03 PM	#2
William Ellwood Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Consett UK Posts: 110	I've never used progressive mode because of the strobing look in the viewfinder - though up to now I've only used a SD VX2100. My friend with a Z7, shoots in interlaced mode, then turns his movies progressive on the timeline. I take it this is not a typical way to use an HDV cam? __________________ Billy Ellwood is on Vimeo. Film club www.newcastleaca.co.uk i7 7700k, Asus z270f, 32gb ram, Windows 10, Premiere CS6.

December 27th, 2008, 12:04 AM	#4
Rick Lutec Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Toronto Canada Posts: 39	24p with FX1000 Hello and Happy Holidays If you search through some previous threads you'll discover postings on 24p and may discover some of the answers you seek. Such as: shutter speeds when shooting 24P, motion with 24p etc. You may also want to read into some threads on the Canon HV20/30. Apparently (unless newer info has altered the previous info) the process is supposed to be similar to the way the FX1000 delivers 24P.

December 27th, 2008, 04:07 AM	#7
William Ellwood Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Consett UK Posts: 110	Guys - is it possible to link a clip that was done in the 24p mode compared to a similar clip done in standard interlaced mode, so I can get a handle on this feature. I'm set on ordering a Z5, but at I've seen a Z7 using progressive mode, and through the viewfinder it looks aweful - so strobey. __________________ Billy Ellwood is on Vimeo. Film club www.newcastleaca.co.uk i7 7700k, Asus z270f, 32gb ram, Windows 10, Premiere CS6.

December 27th, 2008, 04:19 AM	#8
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	William, right click on the link and save. It is 140MB. This clip doesn't show the choppy portions of the video as it was edited to highlight the capabilities of the zoom and Cinema Tone Feature. It was shot in 24p, but does not appear as 24p because it has not been converted to progressive. Cineform is required to do that and I don't own it. This clip is not what you're asking for, but something to look at as the footage will likely be similar to what your would get with Z5. I have found the 24p setting is very strobie when panning too quickly. Scenes with fast motion also have the choppiness. As I mentioned before, I believe the 24p feature is of limited usefulness except in carefully thought out shooting scenarios. http://jeffharpervideo.com/Videos/wmv/ChurchDemo.wmv Last edited by Jeff Harper; December 27th, 2008 at 05:11 AM.

December 26th, 2008, 04:01 AM	#3
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Don't know about other cams. The FX1000 has a specific 24pm setting, but you still have to do a coversion after capture with Cineform or some other way according to Chris B.

December 27th, 2008, 02:04 AM	#5
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Thanks Rick.

December 27th, 2008, 03:38 AM	#6
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Update: Chris B has been working with a couple of us in the Vegas forum on the 24p feature as it applies to this cam and Vegas, and in the process I have learned the choppiness I've experienced with the 24p setting turned on with the FX1000 is normal, apparently. It would seem to not be practical for use in my business, save for possibly some corporate stuff. For weddings I can't see it, not with multiple cams. Certainly not worth the cost of Cineform which is required to convert the footage. When I have an extra $800 to spend maybe I'll purchase it, as the 24p will be a nice feature. The 24p is a very interesting feature and overall does show lots of promise. Conversley, I have found the Cinema tone settingare are quite nice and while I initially thought it brought a "darkness" to the footage, (which it does) it really does look great. That setting alone adds somewhat of a cinematic look to my footage that I will definitely be using from time to time.

December 27th, 2008, 04:22 AM	#9
William Ellwood Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Consett UK Posts: 110	Thanks Jeff - I'll download it now. __________________ Billy Ellwood is on Vimeo. Film club www.newcastleaca.co.uk i7 7700k, Asus z270f, 32gb ram, Windows 10, Premiere CS6.

December 27th, 2008, 08:23 AM	#10
Tim Akin Major Player Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Newbern, TN Posts: 414	You know, it's hard for me to believe that Sony would use a 24p pulldown in these camera's that there own NLE could not remove. Do they really want you to spend money on another company's software to do something that should be kept within a "SONY WORKFLOW"?

December 27th, 2008, 08:59 AM	#11
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	DSE, who is familiar with the corporate aspects of Sony much more than most any of us will ever be, has said that the camera company and the software company are separate entities that do not communicate with each other. I agree with you Tim, it seems stupid and makes no sense from where I sit either.

December 27th, 2008, 11:46 AM	#14
Ben Hogan Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Grapevine Texas Posts: 27	Yeah I don't quite understand the whole 24p thing myself. If back when they had the technology we have today, I doubt they would be trying to use 24 fps. I bet they'd use the best fps to get the smoothest motion possible. They were trying to advance forward, we seem to be taking steps back, even though we have everything to move forward. Who sets these trends? haha...

December 27th, 2008, 12:32 PM	#15
Adam Gold Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woodinville, WA USA Posts: 3,467	Tom and Ben are right on the money. The choppiness is the whole point of 24p. In an effort to look like film, it merely replicates the worst aspects of the "film look." If you're not outputting to film there is no point to shooting in this mode, ever, unless you really like that look. And even if you do, 30p would be better; it still looks just as crappy but is easier for your editor to handle. Remember, 24 fps became the film standard only because it was the slowest they could run the film through the camera and still get an almost-okay picture (although some claim it was because of in-camera optical or magnetic sound; this may be true but I'm not sure). There's nothing "good" about 24 fps; it wasn't chosen for any aesthetic or artistic reason. Why do people insist on using tools they don't understand and then complain about the results?