Frame Rate: why people fight to keep it low. and we get nowhere and "cinematic" ruins everything. that is is where we are at now, stuck in hell. we should be at 120fps by now and every screen support freesync, gsync or some kind of variable refresh rate. and for those who want, you can always go lower to 24, but interpolate to higher is not optimal. so higher must be the standard. and we have not got into the huge issue of motion blur and focur blur, when 80% of each frame is blurry what is the point......
I love this channel. So in depth, easy to understand. Well done man, really appreciate all the research and hard work you put into your videos. Keep it up!
2:59 In Germany, because early cameras used hand cranks and the cameraman would crank, or turn ("drehen") the film as it was called in German, when talking about shooting a film, in German you still say turn a film ("einen Film drehen").
I would love to see you do a video tackling motion smoothing in TVs, why is it so often turned on by default in modern TVs, why modern TV manufacturers still insist in motion smoothing, and how to stop that!
59.94/23.976 = 2.5; so there is frame doubling and tripling in this video! If you go frame by frame where Camon is talking you will see the frame will alternate updating between every 2 and 3 frames. You can go frame by frame by using the period and comma keys. I think this makes sense because normally it would update every two frames if it was shot at exactly half the project frame rate, but it is at 1/2.5 the project frame rate. I think this means, since you can't have half of a frame, the extra 0.5 just affects every other real frame in the project timeline.. It would be interesting to explore how this frame stuttering between 2 and 3 frame updates affects video vs perfect halving.
Yep! There's really no way around the problem of mixing framerates besides "don't." I did it in this video partially to demonstrate the problems it can create!
@@VideoTechExplained To be fair, most are watching this on a 59.94hz screen which automatically 2.5x each frame of an 23.97fps clip so this looks identical. Stuff like documentary work or gameplay videos, i think it's okay to export it at 59.94fps if theres a bunch of gameplay (generally 60fps or even 120 nowadays) or camcorder/phone footage (stuff like home-made video and old VHS that are 59.94i but converted into 59.94fps or 29.97fps depending on their desired de-interlaced way) but also modern day shots are cinematic 23.97fps. Seems to be the best of both worlds and don't have that terrible jitter when you drop 59.94fps into 23.97. You can also just put it on a 29.97 which does the 1.5x routine for 23.97 but also just removes half of 59.94 frames and still looks alright and smooth (but not ""too much""), Same goes for 120fps, you can drop it on a 59.94 and/or 29.97 since it removes 1/2 or 1/4 of it's frames but still looks acceptable without jitter (technically would also be possible with 23.97 but will still look too sharp if the minimun shutter speed is 1/120 and gameplay generally has no blur)
8:51 I actually hadn't thought about that how recent it is that movies were shown on TV. As someone who was born in 1992, to me that was normal. And now I have to think how people in Back to the Future would've reacted if Marty told them he had seen a movie on TV.
Tip for those who shoot and export 50/60fps, Use the 360 degree shutter, not 180, that way you will get natural motion blur and not that ultra sharp unrealistic one.
PAL or NTSC are color tv system and does not have any relation with framerate. Ok, commonly, NTSC it's 60hz and PAL it's 50Hz, but this it's not a rule. In Brazil, per example, the broadcast color TV system was PAL, but 60Hz know as PAL-M Broadcast System. On the other hand, Argentina and Germany had made experimental broadcasting at 50hz using the NTSC color system instead of PAL.
Additionally, at PAL-M, the frame rate is a real 30hz, and not the shenanigans of 29, 97 at NTSC-M. But, for maintaining compatibility, the PAL-M it's up to 29, 97 frames also.
Given that screens rarely run in PAL, what is your recommendation for mixing screen capture with cameras (like my GH4) that only has PAL or NTSC formats. It seems like a 0.1% mismatch isn't really noticeable to me, but I am sure there still has to be added frames right.
Your GH4 is actually a strange example to bring up here because it can record proper 24 fps. It can switch between PAL, NTSC and cinema mode. The latter offering true 24p. Unfortunately this like the video explains is quite rare.
@@fastihavet yeah but screen capturing a 60hz or 120hz monitor at 24fps is worse than using pal or ntsc. I use 29.97 (ntsc) with screen capture set to 60 and then use a 60fps timeline and like I said I don't notice but obviously it isn't perfect mathematically.
@@JimijaymesProductions Ah! Sorry i partly missunderstood your question. If your video contains primarily screen capture I would use a 60 fps timeline just like you. I personally would probably still use 24 fps and live with the fact that it isn't perfect since my ordinary workflow is always 24 fps and hope the viewers care more about the content than the missmatch... Even if I personally does the opposite :-) Your solution to use 29.97 is problably the best solution though unless you can and want to use 59.94(and conform it to 60). But with a GH4 you would have to use 1080P to achieve that framerate.
3:34 So why is it that early films often seem to move much faster than today? If you look at these films, people move unnaturally fast and hectic in a way nobody would move in real life. Like in this early commercial from 1912. ua-cam.com/video/ysopwa0lfws/v-deo.html There's a higer quality in this German documentary on the history of commercial ads, from minute 3:24 - 3:40.
Many of the early films were made before 24 fps was standard like you are on to. The problem is that many of those old films are projected at 24 fps despite it being wrong(unless they were actually 24 fps) and therefore the motion becomes very strange like you have noticed. Often speed up and stuttery
You forgot to mention that the highest fps the more light you need. So low light scenes can benefit from lower fps because each frame have more time for exposure
I work with 24p in 2D handdrawn animation and on 2s so it's 12 frames per sec, but it is interessting that even 8fps works in 2D animation. Does somebody think it has to do with the level of abstraction on how the brain processes it? Because it doesn't really work with real life footage. Little rant about some people that say 2D animation needs to be on 60p: I think it is funny(not really) that alot of people want 2D animation on 60p. I would say that these ppl don't understand the process/workflow. It took me 8 hours to get a basic 2sec sketch on 12fps. Now think about the work you need to get it to 60p. It would take a whole week to get the sketch to 60p and than another 2 weeks for cleanup and coloring. So you would have drawn 120 frames instead of 24. It would even take a whole day to fill out the dopesheet and when you think about it, you would have worked ~130 hours on a 2sec cut and that is when you work 100% productive all the time. Who in the world would pay you 130x17$=2.210$ for a 2sec cut. And who in the world has a budget of 1.657.500$ for a 25min episode only for the animation and now you need backgrounds, compositing, effects, soundfx, voiceactors, rec studio, a sound mix and so on that isn't acounted for in the 1.6m$ budget it took you to get ONE 25min episode worth of 2D animation on 60p. Who wants to pay 5 times the price for their series on blueray and a 12ep anime series already cost ~100$ on blueray. Now think you need to pay ~500$ to get it on 60p who wants to buy it? The midian us citizen would have worked 31hours just to buy him a stupid 12ep tv series on blueray.... And now thank you for your great video, you have one sub more!
OMG cry me a river with your 0.1% speed issues. In PAL countries, movies on TV (and up until the HD era on home video) are sped up by 4.167% because they chose to just speed up 24p movies "a tiny bit" to 25p PAL here. Most Europeans for the longest time didn't even know that their favorite movies actually were a few minutes longer than they thought they were. And yes, TV networks here still need to do that to comply with broadcast rules because everything has to be compatible with the lowest common denominator. And it gets even worse with gaming. Many games up to the PS2 era of games (especially everything in 2D, but also many 3D games) were programmed with a certain framerate in mind. So to even run on PAL machines they slowed down gameplay from 60 to 50 fps or even worse from 30 to 25 fps, which lead to me always wondering why Sonic was such a slow game.
This is the only channel that could explain to me all the difficult things about video. Even on the foreign for me language. Thank you.
Fantastic presentation, extremely well done. I wish you much success.
Great work as always! It's like the 44.1-vs-48khz issue but much harder to work around.
Best YT channel regarding video/photography... keep up, gonna be big, Camon!
Learned so much from your channel! Wishing you all the best, always looking forward to uploads
Frame Rate: why people fight to keep it low.
and we get nowhere and "cinematic" ruins everything.
that is is where we are at now, stuck in hell.
we should be at 120fps by now and every screen support freesync, gsync or some kind of variable refresh rate.
and for those who want, you can always go lower to 24, but interpolate to higher is not optimal. so higher must be the standard.
and we have not got into the huge issue of motion blur and focur blur, when 80% of each frame is blurry what is the point......
This is a beautiful review, now I actually know the difference... Thank you so much
Underrated
this channel is quite underrated ! of course not everyone is smart enough on youtube to appreciate such infos
Outstanding channel!
You are doing great job, thank you a lot!
I love this channel. So in depth, easy to understand. Well done man, really appreciate all the research and hard work you put into your videos. Keep it up!
You have such good content; you should have way more subs.
2:59 In Germany, because early cameras used hand cranks and the cameraman would crank, or turn ("drehen") the film as it was called in German, when talking about shooting a film, in German you still say turn a film ("einen Film drehen").
Excellent video about framerates! Earned a new sub :)
awesome content ty.☕🍪
I would love to see you do a video tackling motion smoothing in TVs, why is it so often turned on by default in modern TVs, why modern TV manufacturers still insist in motion smoothing, and how to stop that!
Ur underrated
59.94/23.976 = 2.5; so there is frame doubling and tripling in this video!
If you go frame by frame where Camon is talking you will see the frame will alternate updating between every 2 and 3 frames. You can go frame by frame by using the period and comma keys. I think this makes sense because normally it would update every two frames if it was shot at exactly half the project frame rate, but it is at 1/2.5 the project frame rate.
I think this means, since you can't have half of a frame, the extra 0.5 just affects every other real frame in the project timeline.. It would be interesting to explore how this frame stuttering between 2 and 3 frame updates affects video vs perfect halving.
Yep! There's really no way around the problem of mixing framerates besides "don't." I did it in this video partially to demonstrate the problems it can create!
@@VideoTechExplained To be fair, most are watching this on a 59.94hz screen which automatically 2.5x each frame of an 23.97fps clip so this looks identical.
Stuff like documentary work or gameplay videos, i think it's okay to export it at 59.94fps if theres a bunch of gameplay (generally 60fps or even 120 nowadays) or camcorder/phone footage (stuff like home-made video and old VHS that are 59.94i but converted into 59.94fps or 29.97fps depending on their desired de-interlaced way) but also modern day shots are cinematic 23.97fps. Seems to be the best of both worlds and don't have that terrible jitter when you drop 59.94fps into 23.97.
You can also just put it on a 29.97 which does the 1.5x routine for 23.97 but also just removes half of 59.94 frames and still looks alright and smooth (but not ""too much""), Same goes for 120fps, you can drop it on a 59.94 and/or 29.97 since it removes 1/2 or 1/4 of it's frames but still looks acceptable without jitter (technically would also be possible with 23.97 but will still look too sharp if the minimun shutter speed is 1/120 and gameplay generally has no blur)
8:51 I actually hadn't thought about that how recent it is that movies were shown on TV. As someone who was born in 1992, to me that was normal.
And now I have to think how people in Back to the Future would've reacted if Marty told them he had seen a movie on TV.
Tip for those who shoot and export 50/60fps, Use the 360 degree shutter, not 180, that way you will get natural motion blur and not that ultra sharp unrealistic one.
PAL or NTSC are color tv system and does not have any relation with framerate. Ok, commonly, NTSC it's 60hz and PAL it's 50Hz, but this it's not a rule.
In Brazil, per example, the broadcast color TV system was PAL, but 60Hz know as PAL-M Broadcast System.
On the other hand, Argentina and Germany had made experimental broadcasting at 50hz using the NTSC color system instead of PAL.
Additionally, at PAL-M, the frame rate is a real 30hz, and not the shenanigans of 29, 97 at NTSC-M. But, for maintaining compatibility, the PAL-M it's up to 29, 97 frames also.
When you are talking about non NTSC timing, is PAL one of them ?
This is why you should get a Blackmagic camera.
Interlaced is the most cursed one
Given that screens rarely run in PAL, what is your recommendation for mixing screen capture with cameras (like my GH4) that only has PAL or NTSC formats. It seems like a 0.1% mismatch isn't really noticeable to me, but I am sure there still has to be added frames right.
Your GH4 is actually a strange example to bring up here because it can record proper 24 fps. It can switch between PAL, NTSC and cinema mode. The latter offering true 24p. Unfortunately this like the video explains is quite rare.
@@fastihavet yeah but screen capturing a 60hz or 120hz monitor at 24fps is worse than using pal or ntsc. I use 29.97 (ntsc) with screen capture set to 60 and then use a 60fps timeline and like I said I don't notice but obviously it isn't perfect mathematically.
@@JimijaymesProductions Ah! Sorry i partly missunderstood your question. If your video contains primarily screen capture I would use a 60 fps timeline just like you. I personally would probably still use 24 fps and live with the fact that it isn't perfect since my ordinary workflow is always 24 fps and hope the viewers care more about the content than the missmatch... Even if I personally does the opposite :-)
Your solution to use 29.97 is problably the best solution though unless you can and want to use 59.94(and conform it to 60). But with a GH4 you would have to use 1080P to achieve that framerate.
i’m expecting this to be 👍
ah so 30 fps interlaced was made to keep the 60 hz refresh rate
3:34 So why is it that early films often seem to move much faster than today? If you look at these films, people move unnaturally fast and hectic in a way nobody would move in real life.
Like in this early commercial from 1912.
ua-cam.com/video/ysopwa0lfws/v-deo.html
There's a higer quality in this German documentary on the history of commercial ads, from minute 3:24 - 3:40.
Many of the early films were made before 24 fps was standard like you are on to. The problem is that many of those old films are projected at 24 fps despite it being wrong(unless they were actually 24 fps) and therefore the motion becomes very strange like you have noticed. Often speed up and stuttery
@@fastihavet Oooh I see. Thank you for the information! :)
I'm so glad to live in a 50hz country 😂
You forgot to mention that the highest fps the more light you need. So low light scenes can benefit from lower fps because each frame have more time for exposure
No. The exposure triangle exists.
I work with 24p in 2D handdrawn animation and on 2s so it's 12 frames per sec, but it is interessting that even 8fps works in 2D animation. Does somebody think it has to do with the level of abstraction on how the brain processes it? Because it doesn't really work with real life footage.
Little rant about some people that say 2D animation needs to be on 60p:
I think it is funny(not really) that alot of people want 2D animation on 60p. I would say that these ppl don't understand the process/workflow. It took me 8 hours to get a basic 2sec sketch on 12fps. Now think about the work you need to get it to 60p. It would take a whole week to get the sketch to 60p and than another 2 weeks for cleanup and coloring. So you would have drawn 120 frames instead of 24. It would even take a whole day to fill out the dopesheet and when you think about it, you would have worked ~130 hours on a 2sec cut and that is when you work 100% productive all the time. Who in the world would pay you 130x17$=2.210$ for a 2sec cut. And who in the world has a budget of 1.657.500$ for a 25min episode only for the animation and now you need backgrounds, compositing, effects, soundfx, voiceactors, rec studio, a sound mix and so on that isn't acounted for in the 1.6m$ budget it took you to get ONE 25min episode worth of 2D animation on 60p. Who wants to pay 5 times the price for their series on blueray and a 12ep anime series already cost ~100$ on blueray. Now think you need to pay ~500$ to get it on 60p who wants to buy it? The midian us citizen would have worked 31hours just to buy him a stupid 12ep tv series on blueray....
And now thank you for your great video, you have one sub more!
lol the sigh ))
I shoot at 24p because of the slight advantage in low light
OMG cry me a river with your 0.1% speed issues. In PAL countries, movies on TV (and up until the HD era on home video) are sped up by 4.167% because they chose to just speed up 24p movies "a tiny bit" to 25p PAL here. Most Europeans for the longest time didn't even know that their favorite movies actually were a few minutes longer than they thought they were. And yes, TV networks here still need to do that to comply with broadcast rules because everything has to be compatible with the lowest common denominator. And it gets even worse with gaming. Many games up to the PS2 era of games (especially everything in 2D, but also many 3D games) were programmed with a certain framerate in mind. So to even run on PAL machines they slowed down gameplay from 60 to 50 fps or even worse from 30 to 25 fps, which lead to me always wondering why Sonic was such a slow game.