-
editing 24p, 24p adv, and 60i footage
-
Well a lot of info has crossed through this thread, leaving me somewhat clearer and somewhat more baffled.
I shot on 24p because I had indeed noticed an improved look in footage shot on 24p in other films, even when NOT output to film, and that look fit with the tone and content of my documentary project. I have tried to find out as much info as I can from varying sources (many of which offer conflicting advice) before shooting, and now, before editing. [By the way I’m not planning on editing the whole film, I’m just trying to log, capture and organize my footage before moving on to working with an editor.]
I apologize for being in the cow pasture if I should really be in the calf pasture,but I have read about and know personally many filmmakers who jump in before checking out the waters, so I’m trying my best to not make a huge mistake and sort through my options.
With the many issues and considerations that have been brought to my attention, I’m afraid that I’m still feeling a bit stuck, afraid to make the wrong choice in terms of working with a 23.98 timeline vs. a 29.97 timeline, ie bring in those four 24padv hours at 29.97 or bring in the 80 hours of standard 24p footage at 29.98. In either case I’m quite sure I’ll be making a master on Digibeta if that is still the broadcast standard (my last film was shot on a VX1000 and was broadcast on The Discovery Channel and National Geographic). I am swimming in images of fields and frames, cadences and failing broadcasters’ standards tests. Lots to digest and try to figure out, thank you for all the advice.
-
You are fine.
Convert the 24pA material to 24p mode material (actually 29.97) and edit without a care in the world for the 3.2 cadence.
AND — The bickering was for OUR behalf — not yours.
CaptM
-
thank you – i can EXHALE now!
in any case I am learning a lot, always a good thing.
-
[Shane Ross] “Wrong. Not if you are going to output back to SD tape. What would be the point? Tape runs at 29.97, so why would you capture and edit at 23.98, only to go back to 29.97? What is the possible benefit?”
Editing at 23.98 and THEN going back to 29.97 adds new pulldown with clean, continuous cadence. What’s the benefit you ask? Cutting in a 29.97 timeline will destroy the cadence at every single edit point unless all edits are made at the A frame. Depending on the speed and frequency of the edits, the results can be pretty bad on most consumer TV sets. Unlike our CRT broadcast monitors (which bad cadence is not detectable on), all digital displays (LCD, plasma, etc.) have to deinterlace everything first.
Some have expensive scalers to cover up our mistakes. There is a specific feature marketed as “Bad Edit Detection” seen in high-end consumer video processors like the DCDI. Google it. Those “bad edits” are the result of the editor’s workflow you just described. Yes, it is completely common and standard practice to still do this. I guess many people figure to leave it alone since everything will be HD soon enough. Too complicated to fix. But I have dealt with one QC person who checks for clean cadence and also makes sure the A frame is on 00.
[Shane Ross] “If you are going to shoot on DVCAM tape, and end up with a DVCAM master or other SD tape master (digibeta), then shoot and edit 29.97. Shoot 24P or 30P if you want the film look. I fail to see any benefit to shooting and editing 24PA for outputting to tape.”
Completely different topic. But on this I’m sorry you’re completely wrong. Even if you edit, master, and view the footage at 29.97, shooting it at 24fps still has a completely different look to it vs. shooting at 30fps. Maybe I’m just misunderstanding you, because I cannot fathom how you could disagree with that. Watch a film on TBS on a little 13″ TV. Then switch to a rerun of Married With Children. The difference is night and day. And I’m not talking about the color or the grain. I’m talking about the motion. It’s the difference between watching a movie, and watching the “Behind the Scenes” of the movie.
Same thing with HD even. Turn on HBO HD and watch a movie for a minute. Then switch to Discovery HD (which likely has a show on shot at 1080i 30fps on a 1st gen HDcam). Even though both are brodacast at 1080i60, one was shot at 24 and the other at 30. Completely different look.
Why do you think so many video cameras allow you to shoot in 24fps? Its not just for people going out to film or HD. It’s because of the look, which is blatently appearent even on a crappy old NTSC TV set.
-
[Sean ONeil] “Editing at 23.98 and THEN going back to 29.97 adds new pulldown with clean, continuous cadence. What’s the benefit you ask? Cutting in a 29.97 timeline will destroy the cadence at every single edit point unless all edits are made at the A frame.”
Well, I edited a TV series that was shot on Super 16mm, telecined to digibeta and dubbed to DVCAM for injesting into an old Avid 7.1 system. We digitized at 29.97 and edited the show without making sure that we cut on the A frame. If we had to do that, then pacing and reactions would all be off. We cut where we needed to cut, and then onlined the digibetas tape to tape…never had an issue.
[Sean ONeil] “Even if you edit, master, and view the footage at 29.97, shooting it at 24fps still has a completely different look to it vs. shooting at 30fps. Maybe I’m just misunderstanding you, because I cannot fathom how you could disagree with that. Watch a film on TBS on a little 13″ TV. Then switch to a rerun of Married With Children. The difference is night and day. And I’m not talking about the color or the grain. I’m talking about the motion.”
No, I agree with you here. I am not talking about 24fps film vs 30i video. I am talking about 24P video that shoots 24fps on a 30 frame tape. Performing a 3:2 pulldown on the tape. The tape runs at 29.97 fps but the footage was recorded at 24fps…thus you have the film look. BUT…you can capture and edit this footage at 29.97…just like we did with the TV series…and not have to worry about a-frame edits. It works fine. There is no need to convert to 23.98, edit, then output to 29.97. SURE, you can, but why? You are just, IMHO, adding a step that might lead to problems.
But…if this workflow works for you, fine. I mainly say “stay 29.97” to the people who are new to FCP and editing in general so that they don’t get stuck. I have been involved in helping two people who captured their footage at 24fps…TRUE 24fps…and now needed to output to tape and were stuck. They didn’t notice…don’t know why…that their 24fps footage was stuttering like mad. “Oh, I though that was normal.”
If you design a 29.97>23.98 workflow that works…run with it. I am more concerned with making sure that people don’t run into issues, especially if they are new, and adding that step might complicate matters.
Shane
Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up