Why are movies and music videos always in 24-30 fps?

[AkiraDaarkst]

Frame rates and shutter speeds can also be used to control the pace of the story, in movies, or to differentiate between different realities.  Rocket Jump's Video Game High School web series used HFR for when the characters were portrayed as being in the games they played and used regular frame rates when they were portrayed as being in reality.  Mad Max Fury Road is an example of a movie where different shutter speeds or angles other than the common 180 degree angle was used to emphasize action in some scenes.

 

Of course with modern digital cameras directors can choose to film everything in 48fps, 60fps or more and convert to 24, 25, 30fps in post.  It's up to the director to choose which frame rate to use.

 

James Cameron's Avatar uses more CGI than a movie like Spectre, so I think it's more appropriate for Avatar to be filmed in HFR.

[.spider.]

6 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

 

Of course with modern digital cameras directors can choose to film everything in 48fps, 60fps or more and convert to 24, 25, 30fps in post.  It's up to the director to choose which frame rate to use.

It's best to avoid frame rate conversion

[dalekphalm]

2 hours ago, .spider. said:

It's best to avoid frame rate conversion

It can still be done though, assuming that the recorded video is a multiple of the target frame rate.

 

Hell you can do non-standard conversion too, it just sucks (3:2 pulldown, this is how 24p content is displayed on a 60Hz screen).

[.spider.]

18 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

 

Hell you can do non-standard conversion too, it just sucks (3:2 pulldown, this is how 24p content is displayed on a 60Hz screen).

And it's best to avoid that or very time-consuming to do it properly

[dalekphalm]

5 minutes ago, .spider. said:

And it's best to avoid that or very time-consuming to do it properly

Eh it's not as difficult as you make it out to be. In the already fairly large Post Production process that most Hollywood movies go through, a framerate conversion wouldn't even be noticed among all the other work.

[AkiraDaarkst]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

Eh it's not as difficult as you make it out to be. In the already fairly large Post Production process that most Hollywood movies go through, a framerate conversion wouldn't even be noticed among all the other work.

While there can be issues and it can be time and budget consuming, it certainly can be done.  When Peter Jackson filmed The Hobbit at 48fps, not every distribution channel for the film was capable of supporting 48fps playback.  He knew that, so during filming he used a shutter angle that works with 48fps but can also reduce the risks of any problems popping up when converting to 24fps.  Also, even if the director decides to film at 48fps or 60 fps or 120fps, either the film studio, the production company or more likely the distribution company will decide the original format has to be converted to another format to be suitable for the distribution medium.

 

And Douglas Trumbull has shown that HFR filming can be down converted to a slower frame rate with minimum to without any issues.

 

[.spider.]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

Eh it's not as difficult as you make it out to be. In the already fairly large Post Production process that most Hollywood movies go through, a framerate conversion wouldn't even be noticed among all the other work.

This doesn't make any sense the visibility of a frame rate conversion is completely independent from other post production processes.

[dalekphalm]

16 minutes ago, .spider. said:

This doesn't make any sense the visibility of a frame rate conversion is completely independent from other post production processes.

I literally have no idea what you just said. The "visibility" of the frame rate conversion? What does that even mean?

 

What I'm saying is that the frame rate conversion, when compared to all the other post production done, will take a minuscule amount of time.

[dalekphalm]

18 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

While there can be issues and it can be time and budget consuming, it certainly can be done.  When Peter Jackson filmed The Hobbit at 48fps, not every distribution channel for the film was capable of supporting 48fps playback.  He knew that, so during filming he used a shutter angle that works with 48fps but can also reduce the risks of any problems popping up when converting to 24fps.  Also, even if the director decides to film at 48fps or 60 fps or 120fps, either the film studio, the production company or more likely the distribution company will decide the original format has to be converted to another format to be suitable for the distribution medium.

 

And Douglas Trumbull has shown that HFR filming can be down converted to a slower frame rate with minimum to without any issues.

 

Yep good points - The Hobbit was shown MOSTLY in 24p anyway, since only a tiny fraction of Cinemas have 48fps HFR projectors.

[.spider.]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

I literally have no idea what you just said. The "visibility" of the frame rate conversion? What does that even mean?

 

 

Bad frame rate conversion will be visible as stuttering or artifacts

[dalekphalm]

5 minutes ago, .spider. said:

Bad frame rate conversion will be visible as stuttering or artifacts

And? So they don't do a bad one. That's like saying "If they use shitty lenses, the movie will look bad". Yeah no shit.

[AkiraDaarkst]

3 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

And? So they don't do a bad one. That's like saying "If they use shitty lenses, the movie will look bad". Yeah no shit.

I was just about to say, it looks like he's missing the point.  It's not about whether people do a good or bad job at converting, we're talking about whether it can be done or not.  And if the director or who ever is responsible for making technical decisions of the camera setup for filming knows that the conversion has to be done at one point of the post production process, they will make technical decisions for the camera that takes into consideration of that conversion step.

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I was just about to say, it looks like he's missing the point.  It's not about whether people do a good or bad job at converting, we're talking about whether it can be done or not.

lol yeah nobody intends to do a bad job. Obviously the process takes some skill, and refinement, but we KNOW it can be done, because it HAS been done, with the Hobbit Trilogy. And they look great at 24p.

[.spider.]

5 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

And? So they don't do a bad one. That's like saying "If they use shitty lenses, the movie will look bad". Yeah no shit.

No you just don't do framerate conversions in the first place.

[.spider.]

2 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

lol yeah nobody intends to do a bad job. Obviously the process takes some skill, and refinement, but we KNOW it can be done, because it HAS been done, with the Hobbit Trilogy. And they look great at 24p.

48p to 24p doesn't take any skill so it's a bad example

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, .spider. said:

No you just don't do framerate conversions in the first place.

Says who? We've done them before with The Hobbit.

Just now, .spider. said:

48p to 24p doesn't take any skill so it's a bad example

Annnnd your point is lost again. It's not a bad example. It's a great example, because it's the perfect example.

 

Doing 60fps to 24p on the other hand, is certainly more challenging, because you'll need to use some variation of 3:2 pulldown (24p to 60p, which happens all the time, btw).

 

Your point seems to boil down to "we shouldn't do it because it's hard... because reasons".

[AkiraDaarkst]

12 minutes ago, .spider. said:

No you just don't do framerate conversions in the first place.

Well first of all, sometimes it cannot be avoided.  I may decide to film using 48fps or 60fps or other frame rates that work as the frame rate for my movie, but the distribution channels I use might force me to do the conversion as not even channel supports the frame rate I used.  Otherwise I'll won't be able to make money via those channels. 

9 minutes ago, .spider. said:

48p to 24p doesn't take any skill so it's a bad example

Directors are pretty much intelligent people who have knowledge and experience with film making, I'll trust them to choose to film at a frame rate that can make the conversion process easier.  It's not like they will reach into thin air and randomly choose to film at a certain frame rate that makes life difficult.  Or the directors will be working with assistants and partners who know what they are doing, and are there to support the director.

[.spider.]

2 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

 

Annnnd your point is lost again. It's not a bad example. It's a great example, because it's the perfect example.

 

 

What are you even talking about? 

[.spider.]

2 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

 It's not like they will reach into thin air and randomly choose to film at a certain frame rate that makes life difficult.

And that's the reason why they are trying to avoid framerate conversions

[AkiraDaarkst]

2 minutes ago, .spider. said:

And that's the reason why they are trying to avoid framerate conversions

By your logic, every film should only be filmed at 24fps because that's the frame rate that is a 100% guarantee that will work with every distribution channel and every can watch anywhere.  Directors like James Cameron or Peter Jackson shouldn't ever film with HFR at all.

 

If you look at the video I posted earlier on Douglas Trumbull and Showscan, you'll see that he's proven that filming at 120fps can be converted to 60fps and 24fps without issues.  My point is directors aren't going to randomly choose to film with a frame rate like 55fps or 83fps which makes life harder for the people who have to convert the film.  They will choose frame rates that make life easy, such as 48fps or 120fps.

[.spider.]

9 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

By your logic, every film should only be filmed at 24fps because that's the frame rate that is a 100% guarantee that will work with every distribution channel and every can watch anywhere.

 

 

What? 24p is the best frame rate? Are you joking? 100% guarantee? wut?

Quote

If you look at the video I posted earlier on Douglas Trumbull and Showscan, you'll see that he's proven that filming at 120fps can be converted to 60fps and 24fps without issues.  My point is directors aren't going to randomly choose to film with a frame rate like 55fps or 83fps which makes life harder for the people who have to convert the film.  They will choose frame rates that make life easy, such as 48fps or 120fps.

Do you even know what you are talking about or is you whole knowledge from Youtube videos? 

55fps in comparison to 48fps are not making it harder, they are making it easier if your target is 60fps

 

[dalekphalm]

13 minutes ago, .spider. said:

What? 24p is the best frame rate? Are you joking? 100% guarantee? wut?

Do you even know what you are talking about or is you whole knowledge from Youtube videos? 

55fps in comparison to 48fps are not making it harder, they are making it easier if your target is 60fps

 

You don't seem to know what you're talking about anymore than @AkiraDaarkst, so please, let's try and keep this civil on both sides.

 

24p is a good framerate for conversion purposes, because we already have a conversion process for 24p to 60p (3:2 pulldown, it's literally how every movie on Broadcast TV is played). I wouldn't say it's perfect though.

 

120 FPS is probably the perfect framerate for conversions, because you can down convert to 24p AND 60p without issues (Since 120 is divisible by both numbers without fractions).

 

The biggest challenge with 120 FPS is simply dealing with a Sensor that can record such footage in good quality, and storage that can keep up. Both are technical issues that are easily surmountable.

[AkiraDaarkst]

9 minutes ago, .spider. said:

What? 24p is the best frame rate? Are you joking? 100% guarantee? wut?

Do you even know what you are talking about or is you whole knowledge from Youtube videos? 

55fps in comparison to 48fps are not making it harder, they are making it easier if your target is 60fps

 

I'm fairly certain now you're not on the same page as us.  If I film a movie in a frame rate such as 60fps for example, I will not be able to distribute it using every kind of distribution channel out there because not all of them play back at 60fps.  And when I say distribution channel, I am talking about movie theaters, blu-ray, DVDs, tv broadcasts, etc.  This means some portion of the market will be out of my reach.  So while, for the sake of creative expression I may film my movies at 60fps, I will also need to convert them to formats suitable or supported by each distribution channel I want to use.

 

Who converts 48fps footage to 60fps?  If I want to make sure my films play back at 60fps, I'll film using 60fps from the start or use 120fps.  120fps, because it is a multiple of 24, 30 and 60fps, I can down covert to those formats easily.

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I'm fairly certain now you're not on the same page as us.  If I film a movie in a frame rate such as 60fps for example, I will not be able to distribute it using every kind of distribution channel out there because not all of them play back at 60fps.  And when I say distribution channel, I am talking about movie theaters, blu-ray, DVDs, tv broadcasts, etc.  This means some portion of the market will be out of my reach.  So while, for the sake of creative expression I may film my movies at 60fps, I will also need to convert them to formats suitable or supported by each distribution channel I want to use.

 

Who converts 48fps footage to 60fps?  If I want to make sure my films play back at 60fps, I'll film using 60fps from the start or use 120fps.  120fps, because it is a multiple of 24, 30 and 60fps, I can down covert to those formats easily.

That is one of the reasons that makes a "120Hz" HDTV desirable, is the ability to play 24p Blu-Ray movies without doing 3:2 pulldown.

 

Filming in 120 FPS would be the ideal frame rate, from a conversion point.

[AkiraDaarkst]

6 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

You don't seem to know what you're talking about anymore than @AkiraDaarkst, so please, let's try and keep this civil on both sides.

 

24p is a good framerate for conversion purposes, because we already have a conversion process for 24p to 60p (3:2 pulldown, it's literally how every movie on Broadcast TV is played). I wouldn't say it's perfect though.

 

120 FPS is probably the perfect framerate for conversions, because you can down convert to 24p AND 60p without issues (Since 120 is divisible by both numbers without fractions).

 

The biggest challenge with 120 FPS is simply dealing with a Sensor that can record such footage in good quality, and storage that can keep up. Both are technical issues that are easily surmountable.

I'm not talking about 3:2 pull down or converting up from a lower frame rate to a higher one.  I'm talking about filming at one frame rate and down converting to a lower frame rate for the sake of some reason or another.  The 3:2 pulldown used by broadcast TV to show 24fps film on 60hz screens is something I don't really consider part of the post production process in film making.  This is something done by the TV channel.