Clearing up the 24 fps issue for those that don't understand why it is needed.

[aza77]

It seems like there is an extreme amount of confusion in regards to this issue.

I am going to try and explain why there are many professionals clamoring for 24 frame a second capability on the 5D2.

First off, understand that the 24 fps versus 30 fps has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with quality.

Those "extra" six frames do not give you a better image. It can not be correlated to megapixels.

The reason why working professionals would like this capability is two fold.

The first reason is that 24 fps gives you a much desired "theatrical" look as opposed to 30 fps. Have you ever wondered why soap operas and the nightly news look so different from the movies you've watched in the theatre or on dvd? It is not just because of the film versus video...it is mainly because of the frame rate.

In this particular case..."less" frames actually gives the fantasy or larger than life image that most people associate with higher production value motion pictures.

But the MAIN reason they are asking for this is because 99.9% of all Hollywood feature films from the Wizard of OZ, Casablanca, Star Wars, Braveheart, and the Dark Knight have ALL been shot at 24 fps.

In addition ALL theatrical projectors in ALL theatres (minus IMAX or specialty screens) project at 24 frames a second.

That means that if you want to shoot a movie to be transferred to film and then projected in these theatres....it HAS to be at 24 fps.

Examples of these types of movies are Star Wars Episode 2 and 3, Superman Returns, Collateral...these films or parts of them were shot at 24P HD "video" and then transferred to film so that they could be distributed.

The 5D2 could potentially be used for these applications. Either shooting parts of films, special miniature effects, background plates, or even the whole film. The availability and quality of Canon lenses could make this not only a cheaper way of shooting, but an extremely high quality way to go.

I have seen many still photographers ask "why are you asking for 24 when 30 is SOOO much better?"...the logic behind their statement is if you have six more frames in a second...that means you have six more frames to increase the quality.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Think about it this way and it may be easier to understand.

What would produce a more eye pleasing portrait...an eight megapixel 30D with the 50mm 1.4 lens or a 12 megapixel point and shoot with a slow lens?

Two completely different results right? Even though the numbers are higher in the point and shoot, it's not going to match the 30D.

This is KIND of similar to 24 versus 30. The info that you "don't" see in addition to the unique motion blur that you get actually gives a different "feeling" to the finished product.

If this was not so, then Sony would not have invested quite a bit to develop 24 frame a second HD video cameras for Star Wars when they already had 30 frame a second capable HD cameras already.

The look and the ability to transfer to film were the reason.

If the 5D2 gets this ability...it will open it up to the multitudes of motion picture production companies, special effects houses, music video companies, and independent film makers that are looking to create distributable products.

What the image looks like on your computer or your television has absolutely no bearing on the thousands upon thousands of film projectors that have been, are being and will be used for decades to come in the thousands upon thousands of theatres across the world.

For those than think that a DSLR should not take video...just remember that if Canon can sell more of these cameras and lenses...you will just keep getting better and better cameras in the long run.

The video functionality in no way impedes your ability to take a still picture...but it does open up the ability to whole new sector of people to create stunning HD video at a cheap rate with a small size factor and high quality Canon lenses.

Not having 24 fps is in my opinion one of the biggest blunders that Canon made when introducing this feature. If the rumors are true...they will be fixing this relatively soon and then most likely capture more market share.

My guess is that the 5D2's on Harry Potter and Iron Man probably have this function enabled but it just wasn't ready to be released to the public just yet.

Sorry for the long post but I hope this has cleared up some confusion.

 

[NumberOne]

Finally the right explanation!

Best regards,
Pedro

 

[DotCom Editor]

--
I coulda had a V8 -- but I bought a 1D Mark III instead

When I ask which Canon lenses are best,
people tell me to 'go to L.'

Waiter, hold the 1Ds Mark III; I'll have a 5D Mark II instead

 

[Lee Jay]

I have seen many still photographers ask "why are you asking for 24
when 30 is SOOO much better?"...the logic behind their statement is
if you have six more frames in a second...that means you have six
more frames to increase the quality.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Think about it this way and
it may be easier to understand.

What would produce a more eye pleasing portrait...an eight megapixel
30D with the 50mm 1.4 lens or a 12 megapixel point and shoot with a
slow lens?

Two completely different results right? Even though the numbers are
higher in the point and shoot, it's not going to match the 30D.

This is KIND of similar to 24 versus 30. The info that you "don't"
see in addition to the unique motion blur that you get actually gives
a different "feeling" to the finished product.

IMAX visuals just flat crush those of a regular theater (which usually have terrible visuals to compound their terrible sound), and they are often shot at 48fps.

I don't buy that 24fps is what makes movies look like they do. I think it's the 180 degree shutter (1/48th). Fast shutter speeds is why soaps look the way the do IMHO.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 

[submagination]

I'll say this - having a tool as versatile as possible is always great. Especially if it can do all of the things you want it to do "really well" without any of its other functions suffering.

From that perspective, I can see why people would "want" this feature. The latest rumor (a la canonrumors) says that it's in the works.

But I still don't see why it's "needed".

I think lack of manual controls have hurt sales -- but I doubt that there's a huge impact from the lack of 24 fps. Mostly it seems that people buy it and just really wish it had it instead of not buying the camera because of the lack of this feature.

I get why you'd want it -- but I think that's a far cry from something being necessary.
--

Website: http://mikebrum.com/
Photoblog: http://submagination.com/
Filckr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikebrum/

 

[gpedder]

I have seen many still photographers ask "why are you asking for 24
when 30 is SOOO much better?"...the logic behind their statement is
if you have six more frames in a second...that means you have six
more frames to increase the quality.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Think about it this way and
it may be easier to understand.

What would produce a more eye pleasing portrait...an eight megapixel
30D with the 50mm 1.4 lens or a 12 megapixel point and shoot with a
slow lens?

Two completely different results right? Even though the numbers are
higher in the point and shoot, it's not going to match the 30D.

This is KIND of similar to 24 versus 30. The info that you "don't"
see in addition to the unique motion blur that you get actually gives
a different "feeling" to the finished product.

IMAX visuals just flat crush those of a regular theater (which
usually have terrible visuals to compound their terrible sound), and
they are often shot at 48fps.

I don't buy that 24fps is what makes movies look like they do. I
think it's the 180 degree shutter (1/48th). Fast shutter speeds is
why soaps look the way the do IMHO.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

Actually IMAX is always 24fps - there's only been one or two IMAX-HD films shot at 48fps.

The shutter has a lot to do with the look of film as you rightly point out. A shutter larger than 180 degrees is quite rare on film cameras (I think some can go to 210 or so), whereas electronic shutters are not limited to this and can produce smeary motion blur akin to the feel of video. daily TV soaps are more than likely shot interlaced - smooth motion 50i or 60i - totally unlike film.

24fps is a huge part of the 'theatrical look', but if you set your shutter angle above 180 degrees (1/48) you'll kill it ( as seen in some movies shot on HD cams - "one apon a time in mexico" is my favourite example, check the scene where johnny depp kills the chef)

--
Geoff pedder

 

[DaveWC]

Good explanation. Doesn't explain why a hobbyist that will make movies for him/herself should care. I can understand why you might care, or someone else who plans to sell their movies or hope to get them played somewhere might care, but for the vast majority of 5D2 owners this won't ever matter. The changes in the new firmware will have a much greater bang for the buck for the average camera owner IMO.

 

[gpedder]

It's an obvious thing to have - being that it's a camera that can take excellent lenses, has a sensor larger than a 35mm film negative, and records full HD. It's as close you can get to having a 35mm cine camera in your hand.

For me, working in visual effects, having a camera around that can be used to shoot elements for composite shots is invaluable, especially if it had 24fps.

--
Geoff pedder

 

[Pov2]

It seems more and more that most people don't know what they are talking about when they talk about frame rates. Is there anybody who actually touched (at least) a movie projector? I read it somewhere else before but here it is, from Wikipedia:

"Modern shutters are designed with a flicker-rate of two times (48 Hz) or even sometimes three times (72 Hz) the frame rate of the film, so as to reduce the perception of screen flickering."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movie_projector

 

[gpedder]

It seems more and more that most people don't know what they are talking about > when they talk about frame rates. Is there anybody who
actually touched (at least) a movie projector?

Ha!

actually, you are wrong. Frame rate and REFRESH RATE are not the same thing. You're talking about REFRESH RATE - not the frame rate. The frame rate of theatres is 24. The refresh rate of the projector is 48 or 72 - it only serves to reduce the flicker of the lamp coming on and off!

--
Geoff pedder

 

[Lee Jay]

Actually IMAX is always 24fps - there's only been one or two IMAX-HD
films shot at 48fps.

I'm very confused about this. One of my projects was going to be shot on IMAX to the point that the crew came on site to shoot it and then discovered the lighting was too poor. The camera man himself told me IMAX is always shot at 48fps except in special circumstances. But I've also read what you stated above. What the heck? How could the camera man not know the shooting rate of the camera he had with him?

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

 

[I_am_Ben]

Hey thank you for your concise post.. Much appreciated. Im considering buying the 5dmkii for video, for a short film i'll be making..

But 30p can be a problem BUT i was thinking of using a compressor and changing it to 24p or 25p (im in Australia). What do you think of this workflow? Would this give you the same look as the raw footage actually shot at 24p ? Than how do studios convert for PAL 25p regions say for DVD.. wont they also use a compressor of some sort?

I would love to see an example of 30p vs 24p for the same given footage to see if infact there is this 'theatrical' look...

your help and knowledge is much appreciated..

 

[Ken W.]

Let's say you have 30 fps. In order to convert to 24 or 25 fps, you have to take out 5-6 frames per second of video and stretch out the play time to fit the full second. From where do you take the frames out? Let's say you take out every 5th frame. You end up with "gaps" in the playback of the video because the conversion wouldn't allow for interpolation of the scene captured between frames (that would not be possible). As a result, you wouldn't have a consistently smooth playing movie file.

Now let's say the scenes between frames CAN be interpolated. In order to have a smooth playing movie, a majority of the frames (out of the remaining 24 frames per second) would have to be interpolated. In fact, only every 6th frame would NOT be an interpolation of the scene. This would mean that most of the movie is now a computer generated version representing what the computer "thinks" the scenes would look like. You can imagine how awful that would look.
--
Ken W.
ARC - Architectural Photography
http://www.arc-photo.com
http://twitter.com/kenjwan

 

[Mark Forman]

24P became a standard established in 1927 as the slowest speed that optical sound could work with motion pictures.(silent pictures were approximately projected at 16 FPS)

By accident the 24P temporal resolution ( the time a single picture remains on the screen) was noticed to be very pleasing especially with dialog.
With fast motion 24P has numerous issues including judder and strobing.
Panning speed must be limiting or a sequence can be truly unwatchable.

30P does allow faster panning speed but is not free of some of these issues as well.

Shutter angle in a electronic camera is actually shutter speed. In a mechanical film camera the shutter is a spinning wheel with an opening that can be varied in degrees which equates to shutter speed as it turns in front of the film which is momentarily helld in place for each exposure at the selected frame rate.

Please got to the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) http://smpte.org to learn more about the standards of motion pictures and television.
An Associate membership is now also available if you want to join.

As stills, film and TV all meld together we all need to learn more about how things work and SMPTE which has been around 93 years is a good place to start.
--
Mark Forman
MarkForman Productions, Corp.
http://screeningroom.com

 

[gpedder]

Actually IMAX is always 24fps - there's only been one or two IMAX-HD
films shot at 48fps.

I'm very confused about this. One of my projects was going to be
shot on IMAX to the point that the crew came on site to shoot it and
then discovered the lighting was too poor. The camera man himself
told me IMAX is always shot at 48fps except in special circumstances.
But I've also read what you stated above. What the heck? How could
the camera man not know the shooting rate of the camera he had with
him?

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

If you can afford to shoot IMAX, you should be able to afford to get the lighting needed. The thought of an IMAX production, where they turn up and decide the lighting was too poor is a joke.

it's 24 frames per second, if you don't believe me, call IMAX.

--
Geoff pedder

 

[David_C]

I'll say this - having a tool as versatile as possible is always
great. Especially if it can do all of the things you want it to do
"really well" without any of its other functions suffering.

From that perspective, I can see why people would "want" this
feature. The latest rumor (a la canonrumors) says that it's in the
works.

But I still don't see why it's "needed".

This example is going to be a little over the top, but let's give it a try....

Let's say you have a wonderful story to tell in a series of 10 photos, and the story takes all 10 photo to tell the story properly, and you print each photo at 30"x30", and you are very proud of your work and everyone tells you it's fantastic in your studio, and because of the complexity of the project you have a considerable amount of time and money invested.

But now you realize you have no money, and well, your basically starving. So you decide to take your project commercial, and sell tickets to the general public, recover the cost of the project, make a profit and retire in the Hollywood Hills.

So you contract all 7000 theaters in the US asking if they would like to show your project, and they all say YES, we would love to show your project. So you take the very last money you have and at considerable expense make 7000 copies of each 30"x30" photo, package them-up and ship them off. And you feel great, the best in your whole life, and you dream of the great success you will have, and you are the "toast of the town" amongst your friends.

And a week goes by and you hear nothing, and then the second week goes by and nothing, and then at the beginning of the third week you start getting the packages back of your project stamped "return to sender". And your going what the h$ll......and by the 2nd day of the 3rd week, 4000 of the packages have been returned to you.....and your going nuts......so you start calling the theaters asking why, what happened.

At first, upon hearing your name, the theaters would just hang-up, but after 100's of hang-ups, you finally get a theater to talk to you, but first they just laugh and laugh, finally they say "you idiot, don't you know a theater only has the equipment to show 24"x24" prints and you sent us 30"x30" prints, everyone knows this".

And then you realized you were so caught-up in making your project you completely forgot to make the project in the proper format so it could be distributed and shown in all the theaters, and you end up working at McDonalds for the rest of your life.

Those filmmakers who want to have their work shown in movie theaters, want 24P so they can shoot in the format in which the final project will be shown, but shooting digital is a big big time saver vs actually using film stock, and then the filmmaker just completes the 24p digital master, has it copied to 24 frame film stock and it can be shown in thousands of movie theaters.

Those who don't understand why 24p is so important aren't expecting their work to be shown at a traditional movie theater.

And that is why 24p is so important.

Dave

 

[Taikonaut]

When it was trialed at Iron Man2 and Harry Potter it probably did have 24fps firmware but it is still possible that it may not. Films can be shot at 30fps and can be resampled to play at 24fps during post production and editing with equipment we dont have or some of us do have. Newer Sony Bravia TV has a built in processor chip that can turn the 5DMk2 30fps to 24fps.

I think the reason why Canon went for 30fps was because the LCD refresh rate was also 30fps but marketing decision also played its parts.

 

[Taikonaut]

Let's say you have 30 fps. In order to convert to 24 or 25 fps, you
have to take out 5-6 frames per second of video and stretch out the
play time to fit the full second. From where do you take the frames
out? Let's say you take out every 5th frame. You end up with "gaps"
in the playback of the video because the conversion wouldn't allow
for interpolation of the scene captured between frames (that would
not be possible). As a result, you wouldn't have a consistently
smooth playing movie file.

Now let's say the scenes between frames CAN be interpolated. In order
to have a smooth playing movie, a majority of the frames (out of the
remaining 24 frames per second) would have to be interpolated. In
fact, only every 6th frame would NOT be an interpolation of the
scene. This would mean that most of the movie is now a computer
generated version representing what the computer "thinks" the scenes
would look like. You can imagine how awful that would look.
--
Ken W.
ARC - Architectural Photography
http://www.arc-photo.com
http://twitter.com/kenjwan

It is not as radical as you put it. You are not dealing with films but digital and they just simply resample 30fps to 24fps.

 

[JonAngelo]

There is several components to the alluded 'film look' and in opinion they are somewhat in this order of importance:

1) Good Director of Photography.
Nothing trumps the combination of artistic vision and technical skills.
This includes lightning, framing, lens and film stock choices etc.

2) Dynamic range
Video tends to have poor DR and nasty sharp clipping in highlights.

4) Good colorista
Colorgrading, colorgrading and colorgrading. The colorista is GOLD.
And often needs the DR of previous point to have correction latitude.

5) 35 mm sensor/stock
For dof and crop feel. Plus larger sensor often has better DR.

6) 24 fps.

7) Organinc grain
opposed to digital noise. Which can be added in post before transfer.

8) 180° shutter

To me 24 and 25 fps is important, very important. But not primarily to achieve the film look.

A) 24/25 fps is needed to output to the right fps
24 fps for cinema or 25 fps tv broadcast (25 fps in Europe)

It is no problem over or under cranking between 24/25 since it is
only an 4% speed difference.

Overcranking between 30 and 24/25 is to much of an difference in speed.

Unless that is the artistic look that is choosen. It rarely is. If overcranking is
Used to create an expression it is in my experiece mostly much larger
difference in speed that is used (say 60, 120 or 1000 fps)

B) Workflow
It is very inconvenient to work in many different
frame rates for the same project.

Retiming footage in acceptable quality is computational and work heavy.
Often several rotos is needed to mask out foreground and background.
Optical flow analysis and warping takes alot of gHz hours on hd footage.

Retiming slows the entire workflow down and can create bottlenecks.

Did this make sense?

--
Jon Angelo Gjetting
Website: http://www.gjetting.com/

 

[JonAngelo]

30 to 24 It is an drastic step. In particular if you are quality minded.

24/25 to 30 is much more easy and common.

--
Jon Angelo Gjetting
Website: http://www.gjetting.com/