-
Shooting in 24p, editing in 30p, easiest workflow?
-
[Charles House] “It looks like dogshit, as most shooters regard 30p native for looking, and I won’t be hired again, in favor of guys shooting 24p to 30p timelines.”
If I were the client and you delivered a product to me with 2:2:2:4 pulldown, I’d know that you were a hack and I would never hire you again.
Don’t use 2:2:2:4 pulldown. Even a partially blind person can see its atrocious motion effects. Using 2:2:2:4 pulldown really is unprofessional. If you drop native 24p footage into a 30p sequence in FCP, 2:2:2:4 pulldown is what you’ll get. Just don’t do it.
The problem is that 24p doesn’t nicely convert to 30p. 24p sits in 60i very nicely with 3:2 pulldown, but 3:2 pulldown isn’t possible in 30p. It’s possible in 60p, but that’s beyond the scope of this discussion.
Converting 24p into 30p (not 60i) necessitates either 2:2:2:4 pulldown (which really does look like dogshit) or frame blending in place of pulldown. Either solution is sub-optimal, and will look markedly worse than native 30p. It’s possible that by using Motion Estimation in Compressor that you could get an acceptable conversion result, but be prepared for very long render times. The irony with that solution is that by the time you get done using Compressor to convert 24p to 30p, the footage won’t even really be 24p anymore, it will be interpolated 30p, and you could have simply shot real 30p from the start.
I disagree that the difference between 24p and 30p is as pronounced as you make it out to be, or that there is anything inherently less “professional” about shooting 30p; it’s simply a different choice. I don’t know if you’re aware if this, but many television shows and commercials have been shot on film at 30fps. The temporal resolution of 24p vs 30p is much closer than that of 24p vs 60i or 60p. In my opinion, the artifacts of trying to shoehorn 24p into 30p are far more disagreeable that simply shooting native 30p.
Honestly, the best course of action would be to explain to your client the inherent problems of trying to put 24p into 30p, and show examples of why it’s a bad idea and why it looks extremely unprofessional. Show them samples of true native 24p and native 30p videos (not 24p in 30p) for the sake of comparison, and let them decide. Ideally, you could convince them to deliver native 24p video on the web. I’m baffled as to why they would feel that they have to deliver 30p on the web when it’s just as easy to deliver 24p. 24p will have better quality at the same bit rate (20% more bandwidth per frame), which should be additional incentive for them to deliver 24p over the web.
By using the proper workflow and demonstrating to your client that you can deliver a more professional looking product than what your competitors have been delivering, you will convince them that you’re worth hiring again because (A) you really know what you’re doing, and (B) you help them to present a more professional appearance. In other words, making them look good makes you look good. There is nothing wrong with gently educating a client when you are ultimately helping them present the best possible public image.
-
[Charles House] “So you mean if I start with a 29.97 timeline, 24p will import into that, no problems?”
Yes, it will import, but there will be problems. I think we discussed this exact problem on a different project a couple months ago.
Are you familiar with telecine pulldown? The Wikipedia article has a pretty good explanation.
When the DVX100 records 24p onto tape, it records 29.97i with a 2:3 pulldown. If you edit in a 29.97i timeline, this will lead to broken cadence. The pattern with which 24 film frames is played over 30 video frames (and the placement of the dirty frames) will vary from shot to shot in your edit(unless you manually edit in cadence), making it difficult to go back to true progressive, and leading to visible interlacing lines, reduced sharpness, or an irregular pattern of stutter, depending on how you go to 30p.
When the DVX100 records 24pA onto tape, it records 29.97i with a 2:3:3:2 pulldown, which groups the dirty frames together and allows FCP to cleanly remove them for a true 24p edit. You’ll still have a stutter issue from repeated frames if you try to take 24p to 30p, but at least it will be regular if you work in 24p throughout and deliver in 30p.
That’s why 24p isn’t the best acquisition choice for a 30p deliverable — there’s no good way to get it to clean 30p. The frame rates simply don’t match, and the only way around it is by regularly or irregularly repeating frames. If that technical flaw (which some people find maddeningly distracting, and which others don’t notice at all) bothers you, shoot 30p. If not, shoot 24p, but be aware of the issues.
Personally, I’d try to discuss the workflow with my clients to bring these issues to their attention and try to help them improve their workflow and deliverables: either acquire, post, and deliver in 24p, or acquire, post and deliver in 30p.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
Your client asks for one thing, you being a renegade give them another because you think that what they asked for is wrong or you don’t agree aesthetically?
I don’t know, man, you might want to rethink that attitude.
If you want to shove the 24p down their throat, deliver a 24p file and walk away. There are plenty of awesome reasons to work in 24p we do it almost all the time.
The question is, did you shoot 24pA and capture with advance pulldown removal? If not, your media is 29.97 anyway.
Here, read up:
-
I’m not pushing anything down anyone’s throat or being a rebel. There sure is a lot of condescension here.
They want the FINAL OUTPUT FILE to be 30p. They also told me, in the same breath, “24p looks so much better, 24p looks great, a lot of out shooters shoot 24p because it looks better.” But they are receiving 30p FILES. No matter what the person is shooting at, the final output is 30p. And they’re saying they prefer the LOOK of 24p. So, I’d like to appease them, if possible. Mind you, these are also audio guys, not video guys, or they’d be shooting their own stuff.
-
I appreciate your input. As for you personal suggestion, this is a video company, they have hundreds of clients, some one-time guys, sometimes frequent customers. Either way, I get a little over $100 to go in, shoot a little bit of stuff, edit it together and turn it back in. It’s hardly worth my consideration to talk to each customer about what they want, and add to that, most of these customers won’t KNOW what they want, as they’re just cafe owners and dental hygienists who want a YouTube ad, and no matter what they want, the company wants the same thing for all the videos: 30p final output.
-
I agree that the end clients shouldn’t be weighing in on the technical considerations. I’d discuss the workflow with the video company producing these. They have a flawed workflow which is creating noticeable visual problems that they may not even be aware of.
Of course, at those prices, they might not care.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Charles House] “I’m not pushing anything down anyone’s throat or being a rebel. There sure is a lot of condescension here.”
Then you, being the pro, need to manage your clients expectations. If this is going on YouTube, there’s no reason for a 30p file. Really.
[Charles House] “They want the FINAL OUTPUT FILE to be 30p. They also told me, in the same breath, “24p looks so much better, 24p looks great, a lot of out shooters shoot 24p because it looks better.” “
Well, then, tell them you can deliver a 24p file and it will look better. See how easy that is?
[Charles House] “So, I’d like to appease them, if possible. Mind you, these are also audio guys, not video guys, or they’d be shooting their own stuff.”
Then you will have to make a 30p file from your 24p master in Compressor.
Jeremy
-
[Charles House] “They want the FINAL OUTPUT FILE to be 30p. They also told me, in the same breath, “24p looks so much better, 24p looks great, a lot of out shooters shoot 24p because it looks better.” “
I’ll bet you $100 that if you shoot in 30p and delver them a 30p file, they won’t even know the difference. The difference between 24p and 30p is incredibly subtle, and only a very perceptive client would be able to spot the difference. Any client with that level of visual sensitivity would already be delivering in 24p.
-
[Walter Soyka] “Of course, at those prices, they might not care.”
I think you nailed it. A client who really cares about its image will listen to reason from experts and understand that spending the time and money to do things right in order to make the best impression is ultimately worth the investment. That doesn’t necessarily mean spending a ton of money, but it does mean being open to expert advice.
-
[Charles House] ” Either way, I get a little over $100 to go in, shoot a little bit of stuff, edit it together and turn it back in.”
If there’s any condescension going on, it is with this statement right here.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up