actual 30. not 29.97 or whatever but actual 30. that being said i often do projects in 59.94 as my clients have projectors and video walls and the only common frame rate between them is 59.94. you could have gone into the why of those "weird" numbers of frames. i have yet to have it explained in a way i can actually wrap my head around. and just for funziez...why not resolve?
The real rule is to always use the frame rate of your age. And adjust your projects accordingly. So I only shoot in 47 frames per second this year. Next year will great.
For me, I think the problem with higher frame rates in cinema is that because it makes things feel more “real”, it highlights that the movie is fake. It makes the costumes and makeup look like costume and makeup.
For some types of projects with lots of slow panning and pushing in/zooming, drone footage in particular, 24 fps is not an option IMO. Due to the 3:2 pulldown enforced by all 60 fps displays, you end up with a 12 fps stuttering motion which is both highly noticeable and visually disturbing. There is no 'artistic Hollywood blur' in this case. The troube appears to be that these days most filmmakers and video editors are using high end 120 fps capable displays for their editing and preview, like those found on high end Macs of various sorts. Today those have 120 dps displays, which can do a - mathematically 'perfect' - 5:1 pulldown of 24 fps footage, IE. always showing each frame exactly 5 times. Which _does_ show the correct Hollywood blur to the editor/viewer, thus possibly fooling the creator into a false belief that all is well. Yet the moment the footage is played back on a 60 dps display, which Mark correctly states is still the vast majority of them, then everything falls apart. Bottom line: Gentlepeople, play back some test footage on a 60 fps display before deciding on a framerate for a project, especially if there is a lot of slow camera movements involved.
Mark, I really love your content and share your love for 24 fps, BUT what everyone, including you, is missing out on is the fact that 24 fps CANNOT be displayed natively on most computer and smartphone screens which operate at 60 Hz (most of them). It requires a 3:2 pulldown (just as you explained it for 24 p footage on a 60 p timeline). This might not be visible for many types of footage, but as soon as larger and even movement like pans, tilts etc. are involved, the image judders very noticeable (drone footage shows that most prominently due to the nature of its movement). And this judder has nothing to do with cinema, because cinema projectors can display 24 p without any kind of pull down. So I really don't understand why so many promote 24 fps for UA-cam. UA-cam is the classic example for content that is watched on 60 Hz screens, so you get the pulldown anyways, even on a 24 p timeline. Except you are one of those who have a 120 Hz screen, but that's the minority. I choose 29.97/30 fps for UA-cam for that exact reason, and I use 1/50 sec shutter speed and get the same motion blur as with 24 fps and 1/50 sec. I don't really see any visible difference between 24p & 1/50 sec and 30p & 1/50 sec, EXCEPT for 24p judder in some types of footage. It would be very interesting if a talented cinematographer like you would film a cinematic sequence with everything being equal (lighting etc.), one time 24 p & 1/50 sec and one time 30 p & 1/50 sec. Just to clarify, I come from a drone background, and here 24/25 p is HORRIBLE to look at because of the pulldown. With most other types of footage it is not that much of a problem, but I really think that 30 p would be the technical cleanest solution while still maintaining some kind of cinema look (with same shutter speed). The pure frame rate difference between 24 & 30 is not that big, but the 3:2 pulldown for 24 p footage on 60 Hz screens is not that beautiful (when the type of footage shows it). Thanks for sharing. PS: I have made a video on that topic as well: ua-cam.com/video/-nGi2ecupag/v-deo.html
Thanks so much for this comprehensive video with side by side visual comparisons and explanations 💚 exactly what I was looking for since I was trying find answers to this exact dilema regarding frame rates and timelines!
MARK IS A CRAFTSMAN AND A TECHNICAL WIZARD! WOW finally someone who is attached to 24p but is TOTALLY HONEST about 30p and 60p which are my preferred frame rates FOR MY NEEDS! I like the realism I guess. I have honestly tried 24p a few times and yes it has nice motion-blur but is way too choppy when panning fast. Too much motion and not enough frames to capture that. I always learn a lot when I watch his superlative videos though!! Right up there with Gerald! 👏👏👏
Mark man I am blown away by this, it contradicts what almost every creator has told me. But I now want to create a video and see how it works. I have been using 24fps on timelines and interpreting the other footage, I think I was doing it wrong. Thanks!
Even though we don't shoot on film, data storage is still a cost, and shooting 24 frames per second is less than half the cost of shooting 60 frames per second. Economically, it's the exact same argument to shoot 24 frames on film. Cheaper costs in a for-profit industry!
thanks for a great video...for davinci...does it apply the same? 60fps timeline...with 24fps clip...will get pulled to 60fps? o.o Im sort of trying to incorporate 60fps footage into a 24fps timeline so....the way around is slowing the 60fpls down to 24fps? complete new to film editing .... im trying to get the cinema look slow paced type of work but sometimes I would want some slow motion/reality shots of 60fps....
Please note EVERYONE , if you ever deliver footage for Broadcast TV with missing frames, like the 24fps footage in a 60fps timeline , it will get rejected real quick. It won't pass QC. Although almost no TV stations will ever ask for a 60fps video unless it's sports.
@@tremornz Yeah I see what you're saying. In NZ the power current is 50hz so all the led lights and most led screens, projectors, appliances are all 50hz. Screens can do both 25, 50 and 60hz so I run all mine at 50hz. Seems to work most the time for me to stop flicker.
Avatar 2 used varying frame rates to what I thought was a really great implementation. Then again, I was mesmerized by the 3D Imax experience I was having that it never jumped out at me that the framerate was changing.
Рік тому
HI, great content, i need your help, please. If i record everything in 60p and want to use a few moments for slow motion but all the other material in 30p... what i do? 30p time line and them what?
Would love to hear you talk about the difference between true 24 fps and 23.97 fps. I always shoot in 23.97. Shooting in 24 fps on my Canon 1DX MK2 requires me to turn on the 24 fps setting. So what's the difference? Why have two frame rates so similar to each other? Thanks!
If I'm not mistaken, the primary reason that you have reduced motion blur in the higher frame rates is due to the application of the 180 degree rule. If you would shoot 60fps with a shutter speed of 1/60, you would get more motion blur in each frame as opposed to shooting at 1/120... perhaps still not achieving that filmic look but achieving something that looks more natural than Gemini Man did...
So if you shoot at 60fps and put that in a 60fps timeline, can you still get slow motion out of that or do you now require 120fps. Like i know putting 60fps in a 24fps timeline gives you slow motion but not sure the other way around.
Stupid question and I have combed your video for the answer. Say I make a video sequence with 60fps becuase that is the highest and I also use 24 in that sequence or whatever. Do you export using the match source or are you exporting in 24? Also when and is it appropriate to interpret the footage say 60 as 24? Hope this question makes sense
@@markbone Thank you! This is the answer I needed confirmation on. I figured it would be 60fps for the export, but just wanted confo. I have more questions for you and planning to send you an email if I don't see that someone else has asked here already... reading through every comment! :)
I like to film arrow flight in slow motion. Not sure how it appears as a smoother video due to most computer screens only displaying in 60 frames max, but, I film slow motion in 1080p 120 frames. When I edit the video in my software and save the final version, I have saved it in both 120 frames and 60 frames and compared them visually. The 120 frames appears to be a smoother video, even though I understand, my computer screen only displays in 60. My camera will film at 4k 60 frames, and up to 1080p 240 frames. At higher resolution above 1080p and especially at the higher frame rate of 240, my computer seems to struggle with processing. I do have the option of filming at 720p and 240 frames (who does that?) but the lessor resolution is sub-standard for anything but close up video.
This is useful, and also confirmation I have my project set right.... Ignoring any high fps stuff I shot (to later use as slow mo), I had to shoot 25fps and 30fps as I'm UK based but also had to shoot some in the States
I prefer 50/60 as you can move the camera faster which suits my shooting and on social media, higher framerates reduce compression artifacts. Which is where my content ends up.
I want my footage to look like 24 but I shot it in 60 in case I wanted to slow anything down. But I don't want all of my footage slowed down, will anything be messed up if I put my 60 in a 24 without slowing it down?
Everything you said is true and I agree, except one thing. Theres no debate on wether or not we can see above 60fps. We litteraly can. A 60hz monitor and a 165hz monitor, you can FEEL the difference, its litteraly night and day.
I read somewhere that it is more like 72hz, and it very depend on angle from eye optical axe, as by evolution our periferal sght area very sensitive to fast motion (to faster react for unexpected predator jumpung on you for example). I sometime can see strobing light at periferal area and as soon as turn to it it stop flickering.
I start with is there anything that I can't control and use that as a basis for my frame rate. So I'll often use 60 or 30 since I'm using video game footage for the most part. Given that I live and collect footage in the UK, I often will end up with 50/25 aka PAL footage. (Reshoots aren't viable as most of the stuff to date is archive footage.)
Add it at exact multiples of the project framerate (5x to go from 120 to 24, for example). Keep the shutter speed to the framerate rather than 2x for a bit more motion blur.
Ok i have a client and please dont ask me why, they have recorded there 13 minute short film in two frame rates 24fps for two scenes at the beginning and the rest in 25fps. He has set the timeline at 24fps as this is industry standard for film however with me being the colour grader i am concerned about audio drift and external audio not syncing up properly. Will the 1frame per second be detrimental considering its juts 1 frame per second?
I definitely prefer the 24! We've found ourselves using less and less of 60. Slow motion definitely has it's time and place and we do use it.. but, man.. 24 is so pleasing
As someone who used to stream Rocket League for a few years, I was very pleasantly surprised to hear that you play! Right on! PS- Thank you for the great video here.. very informative!
Dude, you’re the goat! This is a great explanation of something so important. I wished my camera offered 24p on 6K Open Gate(only does 25p. Because then I would have used 24p. I have to say I’m not sure if it’s really noticeable, the difference between 24p and 25p. Doing 25p since forever, simply because it’s also practical here in Europe.
what about slow motion related to shot/timeline framerate ? i mean ibviously can't play a 24 at 50% with out "stuttering", will a 60 played at 50% will be smooth on a 60 timeline, i'm sure my question miss the point here, it's a bit confusing
These days I am creating personal project films in 15FPS as in Mediatek's ISP the RAW sensor capture is limited to 15FPS but fortunately it also helps me to save some extra space on SSD while shooting in CinemaDNG RAW on Android smartphone using MotionCam Pro App :D Editing & Rendering 15FPS RAW on my budget PC is also vert light weight hence profit :)
Thanks bro, you help me a lot, I didn't know which frame rate is best set on timeline that mixed 30fps and 60fps footage. There many people says use the lower footage fps to set timeline, but it's lost many frames for 60fps footage then looks wired. But set the highest fps of all the footage will be ok, 60 on 60 is fine, 30 on 60 is fine too.
No one has mentioned that higher frame rates are SOOOOO much easier to do chroma-key / green-screen. If you have ever tried to get a clean mask from some blurry edge mess, you’d only want higher frame rates for that reason alone.
I had lot of people come to me with mixed frame rate and always confused, giving them the technical information just confused them even more. I ended up just saying, put your timeline to the highest of your cams, you can always bring frames up, but never down.
I lke 24fps. However i still dont get why my camera gives me an option of 29.97 and 30. Or 59.94 and 60. Or 24 and 25. It doesnt give me a 29.98 though. Lol t drives me nuts.
Everyone, this is only when using 180 shutter angle played back in real time. You can approximate the same blur with different angles/rates played back in real time. Slow motion is very different as well.
I was thinking about frame rates lately. I, personally do prefer 24fps, but then I don't know if I'll miss something that needs to be slow down, then maybe better to shoot 30 or 60!? Then I've been thinking about all these huge hi-res TVs in stores, when they run movies which I watched before, like Marvel, and I thought they were shot as 24fps, but in stores they have some kind of 60fps version, so it means they shoot high rate and then add motion blur! So maybe that is a good solution? Does it make sense or should I embrace the limitation and shoot only the one predefined frame rate, unless I've planned for slow motion. Also, then another question, if such TV are being sold, then people buy them, and they probably watch movies in high frame rate? Then maybe the current consumer is more inclined to high frame rate, and it is going to be more popular and people who stick to 24fps are mostly filmmakers, critics, experts and such? I've actually believed I keep noticing more and more scenes in movies which I watch in cinema that some of the scenes doesn't look like 24fps, even if the rest of the film does look so. Does high fps creeps into movies more often than we realize? On the other hand, it makes sense as a lot of scenes are shoot on green screen and less motion blur make it easier to work with it. Maybe I'm way too picky and should pay more attention to the story rather than technical details of the movie))
Slow motion needs to be planned otherwise you will ruin your shots with off speed fps. Have a good idea for what shots you will need to be in slow motion and shoot those in slow motion.
What you're noticing is shutter speed differences. Action scenes can be shot in other than 1/48 or 180° shutter. I usually don't like some of those and question the need but there are reasons. Less motion blur is easier for green screen, sure, but good green screen can easily be pulled at 180 degree motion blur. It's not a very hard task for vfx artists. That's what's being done for most movies.
@@berkertaskiran that's my workflow. I shoot in 24 but for slow motion planned shots, shoot 60 and then slow the footage down in a 24 timeline. Does that sound about right?
This always eluded me, how multiple frame rates existed in the same piece of media, the biggest example is when a movie speed ramped in a 24fps movie (the film standard). So it went from 24 to 60ish to the slowed down shot most likely 24-30, and then back to 24. That always broke my brain
I just use Final Cut Pro, and always use a 25 fps timeline, looks great don't even think about it, I put 300fps clips from the red in there, not problem or 120fps at 25fps, no problem.
Why would someone be in a situation like this? Why would you want to put a 24, 30 or 60 together on the same timeline if slow-motion was not the consideration? Shouldn't the whole project be shot at the frame rate you desire? Does that make sense?
To wrap it back around to why we haven't broken from tradition of 24fps, I think it's just what looks the best. 24fps is disconnected from 60-100fps where it would look too realistic for our eyes. Even TV's that attempt the fake 30-60fps interpolation effect that show films in 30-60fps, most times loses all effect they originally had. It felt too real-life and made the movie experience feel lesser. 24fps also masks the nauseating nature of wild cinematography
We shoot and produce short wildlife and nature films. Have used 120fps - not “overused” like a lot of content in our genre - to display slow motion. Would you suggest this could be accomplished more effectively using 60 fps due to display limitations? To us, slowing down when something warrants it (like a bear chasing a salmon, pouncing on it and coming out of the water with the fish in its mouth) can be pretty dramatic. BTW love your videos - thank you for sharing your insight.
120fps is great for slow motion especially for wildlife, I think it's a great acquisition format but not that useful for real time playback, slow-motion it's awesome
@@markbone Thanks Mark - just saw the “120fps overused” video, which explained it perfectly! We are seriously considering diving into creating a wildlife documentary to submit to a film festival or two And will be looking hard at AOD in March. Like the style and content of your tutorials.
The 1000/1001 multiplier for NTSC video had to do with a conflict between the audio carrier and the choma subcarrier when color was added to the old EIA video standard in the 1950s. Hence the old vertical oscillator rate was slowed from 60 fields per second to 59.94005994005994, usually rounded to 59.94. There's no longer any reason for this, and the ATSC standard supports broadcasting at exactly 24, 30, or 60 images per second. This drives me nuts. Unless you're shooting for live broadcast, shoot at an integer field/frame rate (and in progressive, not interlaced). If it winds up being broadcast at 59.94 or whatever, that's just a matter of slowing it down by a factor of 1000/1001. When 24p fps movies are shown in PAL they're typically sped up from 24 fpr to 25 fps and nobody really notices. They're certainly not going to notice a far tinier slowdown from 24 fps to 23.976 for transfer to 60i video. The film frames are syncopated by 3:2 pulldown anyway. Yes, there will be a microscopic difference in running time but that's trivial to deal with.
I’d probably stay with 24fps if I could only pick one! I have 120fps and use it for only ver specific shots and haven’t done it as much with my a7siii honestly.
There is no debate in the scientific community about if we can tell the difference between 60 and 120. Studies have shown we can perceive even several hundred frames in a second. My TV is 120hz and I use it as a PC monitor. I can immediately tell the difference even just dragging a window around if you drop it to 60.
My eyes hurt if I play games in lower that 45-60 FPS. I mean, 35-40 FPS causes headache. Always. The most comfortable FPS value for a display around 32 inches which is not far from you is 90. Same for a 55 inch TV from a little further. The smaller the distance - the more noticeable are frame rate drops. The smaller the screen - the less FPS is needed. It's Ok for movies to be 24 fps, but, after getting used to at least 60 fps interpolation, 24 fps starts looking just very sad. But eyes don't hurt, because you don't need to concentrate on details as much as while playing
I agree that a movie in lower fps can give a smoother feeling. But i disagree when people try to tell me, we couldn't see 120 fps when it comes to gaming. There is a difference like night and day, comparing 60 fps with 120 fps. I would say the barrier is at about 180 fps, because from up above that, i don't feel an improvement in input lag anymore. Regarding your romantic less real feeling when watching a film, i would say it depends on the display. 30 fps dont look blurry on a 240 fps monitor, but they will look blurry but nice on an old tv still using a picture tube, or a video projector with 30 fps. On a modern display, it will look horrible, stuttery, not romantic at all, because lines get split up, frames literally missing during fast movement. Did you try high fps, using a blur filter yet ? So you have smooth movement, but a less sharper less realistic image ? A seethrough tape on the lens, creates a nice bloom light beam effect on light sources for example.
@@markbone i did know about video games but I didn’t know that about movies, my camera set up only does 120fps but doesn’t record audio so I didn’t know
Useless? Ummm Not.. This goes against everything.. time line is always 24fps so when using higher frame rates you can confirm them for smoothest playback with slow mo..
It is interesting, in the gaming world they argue about this too. 144, 240, 360Hz, at what point is it just silly. Linus Tech Tips did a video where they determined that almost no one could see or tell the difference past 75Hz. There are a small few that can "feel" the difference, but it's not the norm.
Now that IG and TikTok rule the world, the general public is more likely to stop and watch content in 30fps or even 60fps because it feels more “authentic” whereas, when we post 24fps videos they tend to perform worse. Not that social media is all that matters. I’m just pointing out that distinction.
30 has been motion blur than 24 , 24 isn’t artistic it’s just blur and then the object is stationary. There’s no in between of catching up to the object and watching it slow without blur like irl. I think people are stuck in thier ways either 24 or 60. Everything has its place but to say one is more this or that is impossible becuse Art come in all types some might benefit from fast frames to not loose information some might need 24 to be cheap. Who cares as long as you don’t notice when your watch then it’s working. Unlike avatar 2, just don’t use different fps.
I shoot at 30fps because I want my videos to have the feel of a TV show. Easy to set up, easy to match all my little cameras. I like things to be easy.
In that case you should probably be shooting at 60 fps. In interlaced video the equivalent of a film frame is a video field. In interlaced video a "frame" is a simply a pair of video fields treated as a unit for purposes of maintaining field cadence (alternating upper and lower fields). The motion characteristics of classic video are essentially the same as film running 60 fps, at least in NTSC (and Brazil's PAL-M). In the rest of the world it's 50 fields per second. One exception: There's a convention for shooting fillmed commercials at 30 fps for transfer to NTSC video (and its digital counterparts).
@@mike-coles That's the frustrating part. The 1000/1001 multiplier for the vertical oscillator was indeed a product of 1950s analog broadcast technology. During the transition to digital broadcasting it was held over because analog signals were still being transmitted for compatibility with analog television receivers and then retained after analog broadcasting was switch off. It's still being used in cable systems as well. My contention is that even if broadcasters insist on retaining the old field/frame rate for some reason,, there's no reason people on the production side need to worry about it unless they're shooting for a network, in which case they obviously need to conform to what the network insists on. The rest of us should use 24/30/60 as appropriate and forget about 23.976/29.97/59.94 and drop-frame time code. This was never a problem in PAL/SECAM, by the way (except Brazil's PAL-M, which is NTSC with PAL color). To show a 24 fps movie you just sped it up to 25 fps.
You can only use one frame rate for the rest of your life. What is it?
24fps for life !
actual 30. not 29.97 or whatever but actual 30. that being said i often do projects in 59.94 as my clients have projectors and video walls and the only common frame rate between them is 59.94. you could have gone into the why of those "weird" numbers of frames. i have yet to have it explained in a way i can actually wrap my head around. and just for funziez...why not resolve?
23.976
25 frames
24 for sure. It just feels authentic. And the handheld look with it isn’t chaotic. But I shoot quite a bit of sports so 60 is tough to retire
The real rule is to always use the frame rate of your age. And adjust your projects accordingly. So I only shoot in 47 frames per second this year. Next year will great.
😂
😂😂😂
For me, I think the problem with higher frame rates in cinema is that because it makes things feel more “real”, it highlights that the movie is fake. It makes the costumes and makeup look like costume and makeup.
I concur
I agree with you 100%
It makes things look like a day time soap. The reverse of where cinema should take you.
and this is EXACTLY why I hated watching everything in Blueray lol
I love "Poirot" but some of the later episodes reflect this exact observation. Felt and looked like a soap opera period piece.
For some types of projects with lots of slow panning and pushing in/zooming, drone footage in particular, 24 fps is not an option IMO. Due to the 3:2 pulldown enforced by all 60 fps displays, you end up with a 12 fps stuttering motion which is both highly noticeable and visually disturbing. There is no 'artistic Hollywood blur' in this case.
The troube appears to be that these days most filmmakers and video editors are using high end 120 fps capable displays for their editing and preview, like those found on high end Macs of various sorts. Today those have 120 dps displays, which can do a - mathematically 'perfect' - 5:1 pulldown of 24 fps footage, IE. always showing each frame exactly 5 times. Which _does_ show the correct Hollywood blur to the editor/viewer, thus possibly fooling the creator into a false belief that all is well. Yet the moment the footage is played back on a 60 dps display, which Mark correctly states is still the vast majority of them, then everything falls apart.
Bottom line: Gentlepeople, play back some test footage on a 60 fps display before deciding on a framerate for a project, especially if there is a lot of slow camera movements involved.
Mark, I really love your content and share your love for 24 fps, BUT what everyone, including you, is missing out on is the fact that 24 fps CANNOT be displayed natively on most computer and smartphone screens which operate at 60 Hz (most of them). It requires a 3:2 pulldown (just as you explained it for 24 p footage on a 60 p timeline). This might not be visible for many types of footage, but as soon as larger and even movement like pans, tilts etc. are involved, the image judders very noticeable (drone footage shows that most prominently due to the nature of its movement). And this judder has nothing to do with cinema, because cinema projectors can display 24 p without any kind of pull down.
So I really don't understand why so many promote 24 fps for UA-cam. UA-cam is the classic example for content that is watched on 60 Hz screens, so you get the pulldown anyways, even on a 24 p timeline. Except you are one of those who have a 120 Hz screen, but that's the minority. I choose 29.97/30 fps for UA-cam for that exact reason, and I use 1/50 sec shutter speed and get the same motion blur as with 24 fps and 1/50 sec. I don't really see any visible difference between 24p & 1/50 sec and 30p & 1/50 sec, EXCEPT for 24p judder in some types of footage.
It would be very interesting if a talented cinematographer like you would film a cinematic sequence with everything being equal (lighting etc.), one time 24 p & 1/50 sec and one time 30 p & 1/50 sec.
Just to clarify, I come from a drone background, and here 24/25 p is HORRIBLE to look at because of the pulldown. With most other types of footage it is not that much of a problem, but I really think that 30 p would be the technical cleanest solution while still maintaining some kind of cinema look (with same shutter speed). The pure frame rate difference between 24 & 30 is not that big, but the 3:2 pulldown for 24 p footage on 60 Hz screens is not that beautiful (when the type of footage shows it).
Thanks for sharing.
PS: I have made a video on that topic as well: ua-cam.com/video/-nGi2ecupag/v-deo.html
Thanks so much for this comprehensive video with side by side visual comparisons and explanations 💚 exactly what I was looking for since I was trying find answers to this exact dilema regarding frame rates and timelines!
Really awesome breakdown. Love the way you showed each frame rate in one timeline. Thank you again 🤘🏼
At 4:49, this dance is called The Bogle... a hilarious memory from the 90's in the Caribbean!
MARK IS A CRAFTSMAN AND A TECHNICAL WIZARD!
WOW finally someone who is attached to 24p but is TOTALLY HONEST about 30p and 60p which are my preferred frame rates FOR MY NEEDS! I like the realism I guess. I have honestly tried 24p a few times and yes it has nice motion-blur but is way too choppy when panning fast. Too much motion and not enough frames to capture that. I always learn a lot when I watch his superlative videos though!! Right up there with Gerald! 👏👏👏
Really helpful! Thank you.
I been doing this a long time, and still miss this sometimes. Thanks for making this vid Mark!
Hope it helped!
This video was a home run Mark! Always appreciate what you do sir.
🙏🏻
Great explanation and demonstration; thanks!
I went back and watched your first video on this and learned so much. Thanks Mark.
it's a classic ha!
very usefull explaination. Thanks :))
Mark man I am blown away by this, it contradicts what almost every creator has told me. But I now want to create a video and see how it works. I have been using 24fps on timelines and interpreting the other footage, I think I was doing it wrong. Thanks!
Great video !!
I only shoot 2000FPS on my phantom
You're living in the year 3000 well us 24fps peasants are still trying to learn how to Frame for 9x16
on your *Nikon
this finally cleared up why i always see that jittering in a lot of channels drone footage.
Even though we don't shoot on film, data storage is still a cost, and shooting 24 frames per second is less than half the cost of shooting 60 frames per second. Economically, it's the exact same argument to shoot 24 frames on film. Cheaper costs in a for-profit industry!
Mark, this video is salvation for me. It hits this crux issue with precision. Thanks brother incisive mind! And great video! 💛🙏🏽
I shoot alot of action sports content so I film alot in 50fps PAL. And mainly edit and export in 25 for the cinematic feel.
Jealous of his east the math is for our pal friends
@@markbone It's so easy when you mix frame rates for slow motion, it's just 50%, no pull down, no jitters, super easy
Great explanation and examples. Thanks for the great video man.
Glad it was helpful!
thanks for a great video...for davinci...does it apply the same? 60fps timeline...with 24fps clip...will get pulled to 60fps? o.o Im sort of trying to incorporate 60fps footage into a 24fps timeline so....the way around is slowing the 60fpls down to 24fps? complete new to film editing ....
im trying to get the cinema look slow paced type of work but sometimes I would want some slow motion/reality shots of 60fps....
Please note EVERYONE , if you ever deliver footage for Broadcast TV with missing frames, like the 24fps footage in a 60fps timeline , it will get rejected real quick. It won't pass QC.
Although almost no TV stations will ever ask for a 60fps video unless it's sports.
Hey Mark any chance you will be here for the showing of Okay at the Available Light Film Festival in Whitehorse tomorrow?
Excellent video Mark
What do I use if I want to take a piece of a clip and slow it down?
Been shooting in 24 for the longest time. Shoot in 25 now as the 180 shutter speed works better with our 50hz lights and screens over here in NZ.
What 50hz screens? You mean the TVs? Because I’m in NZ and 60hz is still the standard for monitors
@@tremornz Yeah I see what you're saying. In NZ the power current is 50hz so all the led lights and most led screens, projectors, appliances are all 50hz. Screens can do both 25, 50 and 60hz so I run all mine at 50hz. Seems to work most the time for me to stop flicker.
Avatar 2 used varying frame rates to what I thought was a really great implementation. Then again, I was mesmerized by the 3D Imax experience I was having that it never jumped out at me that the framerate was changing.
HI, great content, i need your help, please. If i record everything in 60p and want to use a few moments for slow motion but all the other material in 30p... what i do? 30p time line and them what?
Would love to hear you talk about the difference between true 24 fps and 23.97 fps. I always shoot in 23.97. Shooting in 24 fps on my Canon 1DX MK2 requires me to turn on the 24 fps setting. So what's the difference? Why have two frame rates so similar to each other? Thanks!
Thank you!
If I'm not mistaken, the primary reason that you have reduced motion blur in the higher frame rates is due to the application of the 180 degree rule. If you would shoot 60fps with a shutter speed of 1/60, you would get more motion blur in each frame as opposed to shooting at 1/120... perhaps still not achieving that filmic look but achieving something that looks more natural than Gemini Man did...
ua-cam.com/video/9tacNTkG0sw/v-deo.html
Gerald Undone totally agrees with you and has a great UA-cam video to that effect!!!
@@Pfagnan I’ll check it out!
Have you got any tips for slow motion and sharpest pause frames?
So if you shoot at 60fps and put that in a 60fps timeline, can you still get slow motion out of that or do you now require 120fps. Like i know putting 60fps in a 24fps timeline gives you slow motion but not sure the other way around.
Stupid question and I have combed your video for the answer. Say I make a video sequence with 60fps becuase that is the highest and I also use 24 in that sequence or whatever. Do you export using the match source or are you exporting in 24? Also when and is it appropriate to interpret the footage say 60 as 24? Hope this question makes sense
export it as 60fps
@@markbone Thank you! This is the answer I needed confirmation on. I figured it would be 60fps for the export, but just wanted confo. I have more questions for you and planning to send you an email if I don't see that someone else has asked here already... reading through every comment! :)
I like to film arrow flight in slow motion. Not sure how it appears as a smoother video due to most computer screens only displaying in 60 frames max, but, I film slow motion in 1080p 120 frames. When I edit the video in my software and save the final version, I have saved it in both 120 frames and 60 frames and compared them visually. The 120 frames appears to be a smoother video, even though I understand, my computer screen only displays in 60. My camera will film at 4k 60 frames, and up to 1080p 240 frames. At higher resolution above 1080p and especially at the higher frame rate of 240, my computer seems to struggle with processing. I do have the option of filming at 720p and 240 frames (who does that?) but the lessor resolution is sub-standard for anything but close up video.
This is useful, and also confirmation I have my project set right.... Ignoring any high fps stuff I shot (to later use as slow mo), I had to shoot 25fps and 30fps as I'm UK based but also had to shoot some in the States
Mark what frame rate do you suggest filming salsa dancing which is usually in low light?
Depends the camera
I prefer 50/60 as you can move the camera faster which suits my shooting and on social media, higher framerates reduce compression artifacts. Which is where my content ends up.
I want my footage to look like 24 but I shot it in 60 in case I wanted to slow anything down. But I don't want all of my footage slowed down, will anything be messed up if I put my 60 in a 24 without slowing it down?
Everything you said is true and I agree, except one thing. Theres no debate on wether or not we can see above 60fps. We litteraly can. A 60hz monitor and a 165hz monitor, you can FEEL the difference, its litteraly night and day.
you can feel the difference but are you actually perceiving the individual frames? that's the question
I read somewhere that it is more like 72hz, and it very depend on angle from eye optical axe, as by evolution our periferal sght area very sensitive to fast motion (to faster react for unexpected predator jumpung on you for example). I sometime can see strobing light at periferal area and as soon as turn to it it stop flickering.
I know it’s been a while since you uploaded this, but what you mean when you say "future proofing " by shooting in 120fps?
What is the idea here?
Very nice intro to show everyone different frame rates.
Thank you!
I start with is there anything that I can't control and use that as a basis for my frame rate. So I'll often use 60 or 30 since I'm using video game footage for the most part. Given that I live and collect footage in the UK, I often will end up with 50/25 aka PAL footage. (Reshoots aren't viable as most of the stuff to date is archive footage.)
How you get the slow mo without the jittery effect?
Add it at exact multiples of the project framerate (5x to go from 120 to 24, for example). Keep the shutter speed to the framerate rather than 2x for a bit more motion blur.
Ok i have a client and please dont ask me why, they have recorded there 13 minute short film in two frame rates 24fps for two scenes at the beginning and the rest in 25fps. He has set the timeline at 24fps as this is industry standard for film however with me being the colour grader i am concerned about audio drift and external audio not syncing up properly. Will the 1frame per second be detrimental considering its juts 1 frame per second?
24 till death! Most natural and authentic looking for sure
I definitely prefer the 24! We've found ourselves using less and less of 60. Slow motion definitely has it's time and place and we do use it.. but, man.. 24 is so pleasing
As someone who used to stream Rocket League for a few years, I was very pleasantly surprised to hear that you play! Right on!
PS- Thank you for the great video here.. very informative!
Dude, you’re the goat! This is a great explanation of something so important. I wished my camera offered 24p on 6K Open Gate(only does 25p. Because then I would have used 24p. I have to say I’m not sure if it’s really noticeable, the difference between 24p and 25p. Doing 25p since forever, simply because it’s also practical here in Europe.
what about slow motion related to shot/timeline framerate ? i mean ibviously can't play a 24 at 50% with out "stuttering", will a 60 played at 50% will be smooth on a 60 timeline, i'm sure my question miss the point here, it's a bit confusing
Try his video on framerates with 1M views
These days I am creating personal project films in 15FPS as in Mediatek's ISP the RAW sensor capture is limited to 15FPS but fortunately it also helps me to save some extra space on SSD while shooting in CinemaDNG RAW on Android smartphone using MotionCam Pro App :D
Editing & Rendering 15FPS RAW on my budget PC is also vert light weight hence profit :)
LA!!! 10:06
Looking forward to sharing more stories this year! 🎥
(In 60fps hahah jkjkjk)
😂😂😂
Thanks bro, you help me a lot, I didn't know which frame rate is best set on timeline that mixed 30fps and 60fps footage. There many people says use the lower footage fps to set timeline, but it's lost many frames for 60fps footage then looks wired. But set the highest fps of all the footage will be ok, 60 on 60 is fine, 30 on 60 is fine too.
A question about the course. is it translated into spanish?
We have English subtitles currently
No one has mentioned that higher frame rates are SOOOOO much easier to do chroma-key / green-screen. If you have ever tried to get a clean mask from some blurry edge mess, you’d only want higher frame rates for that reason alone.
I had lot of people come to me with mixed frame rate and always confused, giving them the technical information just confused them even more. I ended up just saying, put your timeline to the highest of your cams, you can always bring frames up, but never down.
I love the term “romantic“ for a 24 frame look. I think you may have times that perfectly with Valentine’s Day, huh?
❤️💕💖
I lke 24fps. However i still dont get why my camera gives me an option of 29.97 and 30. Or 59.94 and 60. Or 24 and 25. It doesnt give me a 29.98 though. Lol t drives me nuts.
I prefer 24. Considering it is less frames per second, does it also benefit data size/quality/processing compared to higher frame rates like 60fps.
💯
Is this gonna work the same way in Davinci resolve?
Yes
@@markbone thank you🙏🏻
Hey Mark, I can barely hear you on my laptop speakers on full volume.
your speakers are broken then?
Everyone, this is only when using 180 shutter angle played back in real time. You can approximate the same blur with different angles/rates played back in real time. Slow motion is very different as well.
ua-cam.com/video/9tacNTkG0sw/v-deo.html
I was thinking about frame rates lately. I, personally do prefer 24fps, but then I don't know if I'll miss something that needs to be slow down, then maybe better to shoot 30 or 60!? Then I've been thinking about all these huge hi-res TVs in stores, when they run movies which I watched before, like Marvel, and I thought they were shot as 24fps, but in stores they have some kind of 60fps version, so it means they shoot high rate and then add motion blur! So maybe that is a good solution? Does it make sense or should I embrace the limitation and shoot only the one predefined frame rate, unless I've planned for slow motion. Also, then another question, if such TV are being sold, then people buy them, and they probably watch movies in high frame rate? Then maybe the current consumer is more inclined to high frame rate, and it is going to be more popular and people who stick to 24fps are mostly filmmakers, critics, experts and such? I've actually believed I keep noticing more and more scenes in movies which I watch in cinema that some of the scenes doesn't look like 24fps, even if the rest of the film does look so. Does high fps creeps into movies more often than we realize? On the other hand, it makes sense as a lot of scenes are shoot on green screen and less motion blur make it easier to work with it. Maybe I'm way too picky and should pay more attention to the story rather than technical details of the movie))
Slow motion needs to be planned otherwise you will ruin your shots with off speed fps. Have a good idea for what shots you will need to be in slow motion and shoot those in slow motion.
What you're noticing is shutter speed differences. Action scenes can be shot in other than 1/48 or 180° shutter. I usually don't like some of those and question the need but there are reasons.
Less motion blur is easier for green screen, sure, but good green screen can easily be pulled at 180 degree motion blur. It's not a very hard task for vfx artists. That's what's being done for most movies.
@@berkertaskiran that's my workflow. I shoot in 24 but for slow motion planned shots, shoot 60 and then slow the footage down in a 24 timeline. Does that sound about right?
@@erikpreston2393 Sure. It's just 60 is not much of a slow motion. I would recommend 120 or higher.
This always eluded me, how multiple frame rates existed in the same piece of media, the biggest example is when a movie speed ramped in a 24fps movie (the film standard). So it went from 24 to 60ish to the slowed down shot most likely 24-30, and then back to 24. That always broke my brain
Rocket League player here and photographer!!! Subbed!!!!! Love the content. Learning allot
Love it!! Haha. I’m with ya on 24! Films like the hobbit are so disorienting to me lol
24 gang
I just use Final Cut Pro, and always use a 25 fps timeline, looks great don't even think about it, I put 300fps clips from the red in there, not problem or 120fps at 25fps, no problem.
Why would someone be in a situation like this? Why would you want to put a 24, 30 or 60 together on the same timeline if slow-motion was not the consideration? Shouldn't the whole project be shot at the frame rate you desire? Does that make sense?
Documentaries often have different frame rates when you didn’t shoot all the footage yourself
To wrap it back around to why we haven't broken from tradition of 24fps, I think it's just what looks the best. 24fps is disconnected from 60-100fps where it would look too realistic for our eyes. Even TV's that attempt the fake 30-60fps interpolation effect that show films in 30-60fps, most times loses all effect they originally had. It felt too real-life and made the movie experience feel lesser. 24fps also masks the nauseating nature of wild cinematography
A minute in and I already liked it because I could tell that... I WAS GONNA LEARN TODAY.
💯💯💯💯
We shoot and produce short wildlife and nature films. Have used 120fps - not “overused” like a lot of content in our genre - to display slow motion. Would you suggest this could be accomplished more effectively using 60 fps due to display limitations? To us, slowing down when something warrants it (like a bear chasing a salmon, pouncing on it and coming out of the water with the fish in its mouth) can be pretty dramatic. BTW love your videos - thank you for sharing your insight.
120fps is great for slow motion especially for wildlife, I think it's a great acquisition format but not that useful for real time playback, slow-motion it's awesome
@@markbone Thanks Mark - just saw the “120fps overused” video, which explained it perfectly! We are seriously considering diving into creating a wildlife documentary to submit to a film festival or two And will be looking hard at AOD in March. Like the style and content of your tutorials.
The 1000/1001 multiplier for NTSC video had to do with a conflict between the audio carrier and the choma subcarrier when color was added to the old EIA video standard in the 1950s. Hence the old vertical oscillator rate was slowed from 60 fields per second to 59.94005994005994, usually rounded to 59.94. There's no longer any reason for this, and the ATSC standard supports broadcasting at exactly 24, 30, or 60 images per second.
This drives me nuts. Unless you're shooting for live broadcast, shoot at an integer field/frame rate (and in progressive, not interlaced). If it winds up being broadcast at 59.94 or whatever, that's just a matter of slowing it down by a factor of 1000/1001.
When 24p fps movies are shown in PAL they're typically sped up from 24 fpr to 25 fps and nobody really notices. They're certainly not going to notice a far tinier slowdown from 24 fps to 23.976 for transfer to 60i video. The film frames are syncopated by 3:2 pulldown anyway. Yes, there will be a microscopic difference in running time but that's trivial to deal with.
I’d probably stay with 24fps if I could only pick one! I have 120fps and use it for only ver specific shots and haven’t done it as much with my a7siii honestly.
24... 7
What do you achieve with it ? Like what is the use of it
@@bonjoetomisaiah2462 would you mind elaborating your question further? Not sure what you exactly mean.
120’s good for slow-mo. Outside of that, I see no use for it.
23.976 and 25fps is the goal !
There is no debate in the scientific community about if we can tell the difference between 60 and 120. Studies have shown we can perceive even several hundred frames in a second. My TV is 120hz and I use it as a PC monitor. I can immediately tell the difference even just dragging a window around if you drop it to 60.
we miss you Mark!
we missed you also
My eyes hurt if I play games in lower that 45-60 FPS. I mean, 35-40 FPS causes headache. Always. The most comfortable FPS value for a display around 32 inches which is not far from you is 90. Same for a 55 inch TV from a little further. The smaller the distance - the more noticeable are frame rate drops. The smaller the screen - the less FPS is needed.
It's Ok for movies to be 24 fps, but, after getting used to at least 60 fps interpolation, 24 fps starts looking just very sad. But eyes don't hurt, because you don't need to concentrate on details as much as while playing
Question: why US doesn’t move to true 24P?
That’s a whole other video 😂
@@markbone Ok, I can wait. ☕️
I agree that a movie in lower fps can give a smoother feeling.
But i disagree when people try to tell me, we couldn't see 120 fps when it comes to gaming.
There is a difference like night and day, comparing 60 fps with 120 fps.
I would say the barrier is at about 180 fps, because from up above that, i don't feel an improvement in input lag anymore.
Regarding your romantic less real feeling when watching a film, i would say it depends on the display.
30 fps dont look blurry on a 240 fps monitor, but they will look blurry but nice on an old tv still using a picture tube, or a video projector with 30 fps.
On a modern display, it will look horrible, stuttery, not romantic at all, because lines get split up, frames literally missing during fast movement.
Did you try high fps, using a blur filter yet ? So you have smooth movement, but a less sharper less realistic image ?
A seethrough tape on the lens, creates a nice bloom light beam effect on light sources for example.
I was always under the impression that 120fps is only used for slow motion
Nope. Some films and games are presented at this rate
@@markbone i did know about video games but I didn’t know that about movies, my camera set up only does 120fps but doesn’t record audio so I didn’t know
ill say, i enjoy 60 for animation, but live action, i much prefer 24
60+ is life
Useless? Ummm Not.. This goes against everything.. time line is always 24fps so when using higher frame rates you can confirm them for smoothest playback with slow mo..
I only like 120fps for very slow motion action. or rocket league
It is interesting, in the gaming world they argue about this too. 144, 240, 360Hz, at what point is it just silly. Linus Tech Tips did a video where they determined that almost no one could see or tell the difference past 75Hz. There are a small few that can "feel" the difference, but it's not the norm.
Yeah I think it’s pedantic to believe we need much more than 75hz
Now that IG and TikTok rule the world, the general public is more likely to stop and watch content in 30fps or even 60fps because it feels more “authentic” whereas, when we post 24fps videos they tend to perform worse. Not that social media is all that matters. I’m just pointing out that distinction.
IG also sucks at handling 24fps unless you do a pull-down ahead of time
I think I saw your arms getting bigger from so many pull-ups. Or maybe that’s just my brain playing tricks from all the different frame rates? 😜🤓
😂
24 looks real
🤘
24fps baby! Fast frame rates only for slowmo.
💯
If we are using 120 fps footage for slow mo, we can keep the frame rate of the timeline at the next lower fps right, like 60 or something
30 has been motion blur than 24 , 24 isn’t artistic it’s just blur and then the object is stationary. There’s no in between of catching up to the object and watching it slow without blur like irl. I think people are stuck in thier ways either 24 or 60. Everything has its place but to say one is more this or that is impossible becuse Art come in all types some might benefit from fast frames to not loose information some might need 24 to be cheap. Who cares as long as you don’t notice when your watch then it’s working. Unlike avatar 2, just don’t use different fps.
I shoot at 30fps because I want my videos to have the feel of a TV show. Easy to set up, easy to match all my little cameras. I like things to be easy.
In that case you should probably be shooting at 60 fps. In interlaced video the equivalent of a film frame is a video field. In interlaced video a "frame" is a simply a pair of video fields treated as a unit for purposes of maintaining field cadence (alternating upper and lower fields). The motion characteristics of classic video are essentially the same as film running 60 fps, at least in NTSC (and Brazil's PAL-M). In the rest of the world it's 50 fields per second.
One exception: There's a convention for shooting fillmed commercials at 30 fps for transfer to NTSC video (and its digital counterparts).
@@DGaryGrady interesting. But isn’t that more to do with the old CRT television systems? Is it still the case when things are digital?
@@mike-coles That's the frustrating part. The 1000/1001 multiplier for the vertical oscillator was indeed a product of 1950s analog broadcast technology. During the transition to digital broadcasting it was held over because analog signals were still being transmitted for compatibility with analog television receivers and then retained after analog broadcasting was switch off. It's still being used in cable systems as well.
My contention is that even if broadcasters insist on retaining the old field/frame rate for some reason,, there's no reason people on the production side need to worry about it unless they're shooting for a network, in which case they obviously need to conform to what the network insists on. The rest of us should use 24/30/60 as appropriate and forget about 23.976/29.97/59.94 and drop-frame time code. This was never a problem in PAL/SECAM, by the way (except Brazil's PAL-M, which is NTSC with PAL color). To show a 24 fps movie you just sped it up to 25 fps.
24fps all the time!
I like 48 🤷🏽♂️😂
I prefer 24fps when watching anything that isn't sports. If it's sports or gaming then I prefer 60+fps for the hyper realism and extra clarity.
I agree, and the news.
30 FPS is the correct frame rate ⁽ʳᵘⁿˢ ᵃʷᵃʸ⁾
🤢
23.98 is so sweet
I have strong feelings for 24fps
Not using davinci resolve?? OMGGG
😂