cinematography In what frame-rate to shoot for final in multiple standards?

J

Joshua_1

I'm about to shoot a documentary.
It will be presented to HD TV stations in both Europe and USA and also to film festivals.

AFAIK, conversion from any standard to any other one can be made in post production. Thus, the end movie will be copied in few formats (1080p30, 1080p25, 1080p24). My question is what's the best frame rate to shoot in, so that format conversions will degrade the least the technical quality?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
ItDonnedOnMe said:
And yet this exact process is done for hundreds (actually probably thousands) of films a year that are shot at 24p and broadcast on PAL networks or released on PAL DVDs. Or, the reverse, for PAL originated shows that are broadcast in NTSC countries. It's not like I'm suggesting some obscure trick to make things work across different standards - this is the way it's done, and it's the way it's been done for decades.
Click to expand...

It is done that way because there is no alternative if a 24fps feature film is to be broadcast in PAL and the re-versioning is done by audio post pros who know the pitfall/issues of these conversions. But, just because it often has to be done that way out of necessity does not necessarily mean it's the best way if you have a choice of frame rates to start with! This is not how feature films were made for example in the days of 35mm film and video based picture editing, even in PAL countries theatrical films were usually edited (and audio post produced) at 29.97fps because the conversion is easier (just 0.1% speed increase/decrease using 2:3 pull up/down, rather than 4%). So in fact under certain circumstances 30p (29.97fps) could be the best acquisition format and 25p could be the worst. Again, there is more to consider in distributable/broadcastable filmmaking than only image quality! I've got the the point of going round in circles now, so I'll leave this thread and hope the OP takes my advice and hopefully avoids the conversion problems which could seriously damage the chances of his efforts being broadcast.

G
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
AudioPostExpert said:
It is done that way because there is no alternative if a 24fps feature film is to be broadcast in PAL and the re-versioning is done by audio post pros who know the pitfall/issues of these conversions.
Click to expand...

Post production experts are highly experienced and skilled in conversions between 24 and 25 frame-rates, especially in Europe and other PAL countries (like Israel).

The conversion to the various standards will be done by the post experts.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
AudioPostExpert said:
It is done that way because there is no alternative if a 24fps feature film is to be broadcast in PAL and the re-versioning is done by audio post pros who know the pitfall/issues of these conversions. But, just because it often has to be done that way out of necessity does not necessarily mean it's the best way if you have a choice of frame rates to start with!
Click to expand...

I feel like you're missing the fact that we're talking about converting between formats, not which format is best for a given region. If you want to deliver to both PAL & NTSC, and DCP or other theatrical, there is no alternative but to convert. Converting between 24/25 is a common, industry standard process.

This is not how feature films were made for example in the days of 35mm film and video based picture editing, even in PAL countries theatrical films were usually edited (and audio post produced) at 29.97fps because the conversion is easier (just 0.1% speed increase/decrease using 2:3 pull up/down, rather than 4%). So in fact under certain circumstances 30p (29.97fps) could be the best acquisition format and 25p could be the worst.
Click to expand...

You seem to have conveniently skipped the most important (and relevant to this discussion) part of the process you've described - getting from the 29.97/60i edited master to something that would actually be suitable for PAL distribution. That involves another less-than-desirable frame rate/field blending conversion - or, more likely for a feature film would be to pull the edge codes from the 29.97 video master, hand them off to a negative cutter, get back a true 24p film print, and speed it and the audio up to 25fps before telecine to a PAL master.

But it's also not particularly relevant to the current discussion - because it's a remnant of tape-based editing when interlaced tape formats were essentially all most people had available for video-based editing, and it would be possibly the worst workflow you could choose now that we have true progressive options.

In fact the most common mistake I've encountered with low/no budget indie filmmakers is shooting 24p in a 60i wrapper and then editing at 29.97/60i - the modern equivalent of the workflow you've described. I actually just ran into an old friend who's last film can't get distribution in the itunes store because he did this, and unfortunately he's not the only person I know with that problem. Once you edit footage that already has a 3:2 pulldown you cannot do a reverse 3:2 pulldown to extract a progressive file without essentially disassembling the entire film and processing it on a shot-by-shot basis. It's unfortunate because if I'd run into him a year or so earlier a quick five minute discussion of frame rates could have saved a lot of headache later.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
AudioPostExpert said:
…
This is not how feature films were made for example in the days of 35mm film and video based picture editing, even in PAL countries theatrical films were usually edited (and audio post produced) at 29.97fps because the conversion is easier (just 0.1% speed increase/decrease using 2:3 pull up/down, rather than 4%).
Click to expand...

Are you referring to 35mm film shot and/or post produced in USA, or Europe, or both?
Are you referring to editing and post producing at 29.97fps and than converting to 24fps, or 25fps, or both?

AudioPostExpert said:
So in fact under certain circumstances 30p (29.97fps) could be the best acquisition format and 25p could be the worst.
Click to expand...

What are those circumstances?

AudioPostExpert said:
Again, there is more to consider in distributable/broadcastable filmmaking than only image quality! I've got the the point of going round in circles now, so I'll leave this thread and hope the OP takes my advice and hopefully avoids the conversion problems which could seriously damage the chances of his efforts being broadcast.
Click to expand...

What conversion problems are you referring to and how do you suggest to avoid them?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top