PDA

View Full Version : FS-100 Post Workflow (60p) problems



matthewclevy
08-14-2011, 11:45 AM
Hey guys,

I am currently working on a project in which they are shooting with the new sony FS-100. They have shot various amounts of 60p footage mixed in with 23.97. I am editing in FCP 7 and trying to transcode in it as well via Log and Transfer but being that Final Cut Pro is a piece of....garbage and doesn't allow the transcoding of 60p footage I have been running through a third party program called Foxreal HD Video Converter, which is slow,unstable and quits out on me sporadically. It takes about three times the amount of time to transcode footage. I have been looking around for answers in regards to post workflows dealing with AVCHD transcoding of 60p footage but haven't had much luck. Does anyone on here know of anything I can do differently/have any suggestions. It seems a bit ridiculous that I can't seem to find a post workflow that is reliable in terms of working with AVCHD mixed frame rates..

P.S.- i am currently downloading a trial of Premiere Pro just to watch dailies but I don't want to result in editing with it.

Thanks so much in advance! :dankk2:

cuervo
08-14-2011, 01:17 PM
Hey guys,

I am currently working on a project in which they are shooting with the new sony FS-100. They have shot various amounts of 60p footage mixed in with 23.97. I am editing in FCP 7 and trying to transcode in it as well via Log and Transfer but being that Final Cut Pro is a piece of....garbage and doesn't allow the transcoding of 60p footage I have been running through a third party program called Foxreal HD Video Converter, which is slow,unstable and quits out on me sporadically. It takes about three times the amount of time to transcode footage. I have been looking around for answers in regards to post workflows dealing with AVCHD transcoding of 60p footage but haven't had much luck. Does anyone on here know of anything I can do differently/have any suggestions. It seems a bit ridiculous that I can't seem to find a post workflow that is reliable in terms of working with AVCHD mixed frame rates..

P.S.- i am currently downloading a trial of Premiere Pro just to watch dailies but I don't want to result in editing with it.

Thanks so much in advance! :dankk2:

I can suggest a couple of options. I have workflows that use either Cineform or DNxHD, depending on the level of CC/grading I need to do. My favorite method is to bring the AVCHD footage straight away into After Effects v5.5, where I can apply an LUT, CC via Synthetic AP, slomo, or stabilize. I output from AE straight to DNxHD progressive, usually 220x and then into Media Composer 5.5 for cutting. Using DNxHD I can "fast import" my DNxHD footage, very short waiting times. I have come, over the last 3 years, to rely heavily on Media Composer. Avid has never let me down, unlike my previous NLE, who shall remain nameless. Trust me, I don't work for Avid, but, I never have to make excuses to my clients...;)

eheath
08-14-2011, 04:05 PM
Use clipwrap to encode the .mts to prores 422. It will be 1080p60 so you can just drop it into your timeline and fcp will drop 36 frames for you. If you want it slow motion, then you need to encode that prores file again through mpeg stream clip THEN you can conform it to 24p with cinema tools. Annoy process, but it works.

DOSMedia
08-14-2011, 04:05 PM
FCP isnt crap because it doesnt recognize 1080p60. Its a new thing. Avid doesnt recognize it either (well maybe it does, but there is no 1080p60 timeline).

This is what I do with 1080p60...

First I use Clipwrap to transcode it to prores or Avid DNxHD (I edit with MC5.5 now, so I use DNxHD). Then you can either use that pro res shot wherever you need it (it will work in final cut 7, but you will need to render each shot in the timeline). If you want to mix it well with 24p, then you would want to conform it to 24p, making it slow mo.
Now its a bit weird and tricky since for some reason, Cinema Tools does not recognize the 1080p60 from clipwrap. So then, use mpeg streamclip to just transcode it again to prores and for some reason after you do that, Cinema Tools will recognize it. Then just conform to 24p and you have yourself a 24p clip that you can easily use.

Hope that helped.

maarek
08-14-2011, 04:20 PM
FCP isnt crap because it doesnt recognize 1080p60. Its a new thing.

Yes it is. FCP doesn't even do proper slowmotion to 50i/60i material. If you drop it to halfspeed, it will first deinterlace by throwing away one field and then drop the speed. Which results in 60 frames being dropped to 30. So a 50% speed reduction will only use 30 frames and looks very bad.

Premiere does it properly.

Frame speed handling has always been unbelievably bad in FCP and I don't get how anyone can say it isn't crap. Having to transcode 60p material TWICE to get the ability to see it in realtime or slowmowed. Compared to just dropping the material in and using it in Premiere.

Kraut69
08-14-2011, 04:24 PM
I've tried dropping 60P into PP CS5.5, with LPCM audio, and get no audio. Only when I record with (lesser quality) Dolby Digital does 60P come into CS5.5 with sound.

matthewclevy
08-14-2011, 08:11 PM
I am having problems using Clipwrap. I convert my 60p footage but all that comes out when the conversion is finished is black footage. I read a few people are having similar problems but I can't seem to find a resolution for all of that.

I would rather not use Media Composer for this project.

It's absolutely ludicrous that there isn't any solution for this problem other than just using Adobe Premiere to edit with. I would rather not go this route but it seems as though it's the only one to take. Am I just missing something or is there really nothing at all to fix this problem?

eheath
08-14-2011, 08:26 PM
I am having problems using Clipwrap. I convert my 60p footage but all that comes out when the conversion is finished is black footage. I read a few people are having similar problems but I can't seem to find a resolution for all of that.

I would rather not use Media Composer for this project.

It's absolutely ludicrous that there isn't any solution for this problem other than just using Adobe Premiere to edit with. I would rather not go this route but it seems as though it's the only one to take. Am I just missing something or is there really nothing at all to fix this problem?

Clipwrap is super easy to use, you shouldn't be having any problems. it has produced great 1080p60 prores 422 for me.

Another option is 5DtoRGB. its a little slower, but it reads MTS and the exported prores 1080p60 is usable in cinema tools. You have to play with the settings a bunch too so that it doesn't fuck with you image. Im gonna probably stick with mts -> clip wrap -> mpeg

eheath
08-14-2011, 08:49 PM
Another option is 5DtoRGB. its a little slower, but it reads MTS and the exported prores 1080p60 is usable in cinema tools. You have to play with the settings a bunch too so that it doesn't poo poo with you image. Im gonna probably stick with mts -> clip wrap -> mpeg

I just tried for like 20 mins to make it so the program wouldn't alter my image, couldn't fix it, fuck that.

dustylense
08-14-2011, 11:24 PM
[QUOTE=maarek;2410734]Yes it is. FCP doesn't even do proper slowmotion to 50i/60i material. If you drop it to halfspeed, it will first deinterlace by throwing away one field and then drop the speed. Which results in 60 frames being dropped to 30. So a 50% speed reduction will only use 30 frames and looks very bad.

I'm afraid you don't understand 50/60i. Also, I edit 1080/60p in FCPX. FCP7 handles 60p for over crank just fine. Why would you over crank with 60i anyway?

matthewclevy
08-14-2011, 11:55 PM
Clipwrap is super easy to use, you shouldn't be having any problems. it has produced great 1080p60 prores 422 for me.

Another option is 5DtoRGB. its a little slower, but it reads MTS and the exported prores 1080p60 is usable in cinema tools. You have to play with the settings a bunch too so that it doesn't poo poo with you image. Im gonna probably stick with mts -> clip wrap -> mpeg

I just opened up 5DtoRGB to convert my AVCHD .mts footage. It's absolutely ridiculous that I got this message but and error box popped up saying it wouldn't export my sound included in the .mts video.....

It seems that the only solution really is using Adobe Premiere Pro for instant footage.

If anyone out there has a solution please post!!

DOSMedia
08-15-2011, 12:05 AM
You must not have the proper version of clipwrap.
When I first downloaded the trial, it didnt work and I had that same problem. People kept insisting to me that it did, so I pull the trigger and bought it for $50 and re-downloaded it. Ever since then I have not had any problem.

Try re-downloading it. Ive been told it does work with the trial as well.

Dont freak out because clipwrap does work and I use it all the time for this (I cant stand premier either).

morgan_moore
08-15-2011, 05:13 AM
Im working on an old mac and have to have the sound on the FS100 on Dolby for clipwrap to work

S

JMartin
08-15-2011, 03:31 PM
I just opened up 5DtoRGB to convert my AVCHD .mts footage. It's absolutely ridiculous that I got this message but and error box popped up saying it wouldn't export my sound included in the .mts video.....

It seems that the only solution really is using Adobe Premiere Pro for instant footage.

If anyone out there has a solution please post!!

Are you sure you're using the latest version (1.5.2b?)
I have the PAL version of the FS100 and 5DtoRGB 1.5.2b worked fine with PCM audio at 25p.
I'll test it with 50p soon and post back.

Thomas Worth
08-15-2011, 05:15 PM
I just opened up 5DtoRGB to convert my AVCHD .mts footage. It's absolutely ridiculous that I got this message but and error box popped up saying it wouldn't export my sound included in the .mts video.....

It seems that the only solution really is using Adobe Premiere Pro for instant footage.

If anyone out there has a solution please post!!

Download the latest version of 5DtoRGB, 1.5.2b. It will output sound with MTS files.

JMartin
08-15-2011, 07:01 PM
To follow up on my earlier post - I don't usually work with 1080p50, but here are my test results, FWIW:

Given a 50p MTS with PCM audio I can't get 5DtoRGB 1.5.2b to retain the audio in the output file. (I don't get any error message about audio).
Hopefully an update can resolve this because I like the conversion quality and control over colour matrix and gamma that this program provides. (Thanks Thomas!)

Clipwrap however does retain audio, and produces a 50p Pro Res file that I can drop onto a timeline in FCP (to test I used 50p preset at 1280x720 and accepted FCP's offer of sequence change to 1920x1080). Didn't need to render the timeline.

I exported the timeline from FCP and got a 1920x1080 50p Pro Res file that will reconform to 25p in Cinema Tools for slow motion (with audio at half speed).

Thomas Worth
08-15-2011, 08:45 PM
Yes it is. FCP doesn't even do proper slowmotion to 50i/60i material. If you drop it to halfspeed, it will first deinterlace by throwing away one field and then drop the speed. Which results in 60 frames being dropped to 30. So a 50% speed reduction will only use 30 frames and looks very bad.

I'm afraid you don't understand 50/60i. Also, I edit 1080/60p in FCPX. FCP7 handles 60p for over crank just fine. Why would you over crank with 60i anyway?
It used to be common to overcrank with 60i (yes, 60i, not 60p). You can get a similar result, motion-wise, to 60p albeit at half-res. I wrote an article on 60i -> 24p a long time ago.

And yes, most software does not perform a proper deinterlace to 60p from 60i. I'm not sure why. The correct way to deinterlace 60i is NOT to deinterlace to 30p (and discard information), but to deinterlace and up-res to 60p. Very few programs do this.

eheath
08-15-2011, 08:54 PM
It used to be common to overcrank with 60i (yes, 60i, not 60p). You can get a similar result, motion-wise, to 60p albeit at half-res. I wrote an article on 60i -> 24p a long time ago.

And yes, most software does not perform a proper deinterlace to 60p from 60i. I'm not sure why. The correct way to deinterlace 60i is NOT to deinterlace to 30p (and discard information), but to deinterlace and up-res to 60p. Very few programs do this.

I'm sorry, but when you de-interlace 60i it becomes 30p. If you go from 60i to 60p you're doing a much more complicated process than deinterlacing, you're taking each 1/2 frame and using the 1/2 frames from before and after to create a full frame. its 1/2 resolution and honestly it works but i dunno why you would ever shoot 60i when you can shoot 60p.

Thomas Worth
08-15-2011, 10:10 PM
I'm sorry, but when you de-interlace 60i it becomes 30p.
"De-interlace" just means to process the video in such a way so it is not interlaced. There are several ways to do it, most of which are incorrect in my opinion and discard picture information.

The 30p method, as you mention, is the most common (i.e. quick-and-dirty) method but it also throws away half of the temporal picture. The equivalent to this would be taking a 30 fps video and making it 15 fps.

60i video, just like 60p, holds 60 discrete images per second. The only difference between 60i and 60p is that 60i stores these images as fields at half the vertical resolution, whereas 60p stores them as full frames.


If you go from 60i to 60p you're doing a much more complicated process than deinterlacing, you're taking each 1/2 frame and using the 1/2 frames from before and after to create a full frame. its 1/2 resolution and honestly it works but i dunno why you would ever shoot 60i when you can shoot 60p.

You only need one field to create a full frame. So, you actually create TWO progressive frames from each interlaced frame. Since 60i is 30 "frames" per second, and you are splitting each "frame" into two new frames, you have 60 images per second, or 60p (at half-res, of course).

Keep in mind interlaced video is commonly referred to as "30 frames per second," but this is not accurate. There is no such thing as "frames" in interlaced video, only fields. A better way to describe the video is to say "60i." Example:

60i = 60 images per second, stored as fields (i)
60p = 60 images per second, stored as frames (p)

That's why we can get slow motion from 30 frame interlaced video. There are actually 60 images per second.

maarek
08-16-2011, 12:13 AM
I'm sorry, but when you de-interlace 60i it becomes 30p.

Why is this so difficult? Thomas actually explained it very well, thank you Thomas!

Is it because a lot of software makers have NO IDEA how interlacing works eventhough in the end it's quite simple? This thread is kinda proof of that.

A lot of cameras have the option to either do 1080p25 or 1080i50 here in Pal land. So why shoot 50i? Because it is smoother. Eventhough the beloved FCP can't handle it at all and could never handle it, even in SD world with 720x576 50i material. In the old days we converted material with Virtualdub or just in AE. Nowawadays we don't have to. Except FCP users who have to fool around in Cinematools.

You could actually spot shows that were edited with FCP in the old days as a lot of them had serious field issues. I've done a lot of repairing other peoples FCP projects who haven't looked at all how the interlacing works. Though this discussion would be better to move into the Post Production forums.

eheath
08-16-2011, 12:30 AM
The 30p method, as you mention, is the most common (i.e. quick-and-dirty) method but it also throws away half of the temporal picture. The equivalent to this would be taking a 30 fps video and making it 15 fps.

60i video, just like 60p, holds 60 discreet images per second. The only difference between 60i and 60p is that 60i stores these images as fields at half the vertical resolution, whereas 60p stores them as full frames.



You only need one field to create a full frame. So, you actually create TWO progressive frames from each interlaced frame. Since 60i is 30 "frames" per second, and you are splitting each "frame" into two new frames, you have 60 images per second, or 60p (at half-res, of course).

Keep in mind interlaced video is commonly referred to as "30 frames per second," but this is not accurate. There is no such thing as "frames" in interlaced video, only fields. A better way to describe the video is to say "60i." Example:

60i = 60 images per second, stored as fields (i)
60p = 60 images per second, stores as frames (p)

That's why we can get slow motion from 30 frame interlaced video. There are actually 60 images per second.

Grated, 60p at half resolution isn't exactly usable for HD, with SD it kinda works but when it comes to HD, 60i is not comparable and no one ever uses it, i think thats really the only point i was trying to make. I know how the process works to make 60i to 60p but again, no one does it because it looks terrible. 60i plays at the same speed as 30fps which is why its refered to that and for any online video (or 720p broadcast) this 60i is turned into 30p or 24p by combining the fields, aka de-interlacing.

Thomas Worth
08-16-2011, 03:10 AM
Grated, 60p at half resolution isn't exactly usable for HD, with SD it kinda works but when it comes to HD, 60i is not comparable and no one ever uses it, i think thats really the only point i was trying to make. I know how the process works to make 60i to 60p but again, no one does it because it looks terrible.

I wouldn't say "no one ever uses it," although I agree there are better alternatives. However, if this was the only camera you had and you wanted to do some decent-looking slow motion (temporally speaking), then it would be helpful to understand all of this. And I also wouldn't say it "looks terrible." I've done plenty of slow motion with interlaced cameras and have had very good results.


60i plays at the same speed as 30fps which is why its refered to that and for any online video (or 720p broadcast) this 60i is turned into 30p or 24p by combining the fields, aka de-interlacing.
Well, that would be true if 60i were frame-based, but it's not. Unfortunately, it's treated as such in NLEs. Technically, 60i runs at 60 Hz (actually 59.94 in NTSC). 30 fps doesn't run at 60 Hz unless it's 60i, which really demonstrates that it's not "frames" at all. If 30p is running at 60 Hz, frames are being duplicated every 1/60th of a sec (much like 120 Hz televisions that refresh the same frame twice).

I suspect all this confusion comes from the fact that so many editors have the word "frame" beat into their heads. Video was never frame-based, but the first NLEs (e.g. Premiere 1.0) were always frame-based editors. Using this nomenclature was a big mistake in my opinion, but that's history and I'm not going to cry about it. I guess it's not so much of a problem anymore since video has pretty much transitioned into progressive formats.

The combining fields thing does look terrible, and I don't know why any piece of software would sacrifice its dignity by allowing someone to do this. The proper way to deinterlace for the web would be the "bob" method, or taking the two fields and creating new frames out of them for a 60p result. That would look great on YouTube, but don't hold your breath. Even genuine 60p video is reduced to 30p on YouTube as far as I can tell. It doesn't have to be this way, but I guess Google decided the public would rather have the bandwidth savings than watch something at its intended frame rate.

eheath
08-16-2011, 10:48 AM
Even genuine 60p video is reduced to 30p on YouTube as far as I can tell. It doesn't have to be this way, but I guess Google decided the public would rather have the bandwidth savings than watch something at its intended frame rate.

Why would you ever want genuine 60p? 60p is for post production use, 24p or 30p should always be your final product, but you can use 60p to manipulate speed. I either edit in a 60p timeline and export it at 24p or use a 24p timeline and conform my 60p to 24p for slow motion. 60p looks fucking terrible, as does 60i, 24p is the only good looking frame rate IMO.

cuervo
08-16-2011, 11:04 AM
Why would you ever want genuine 60p? 60p is for post production use, 24p or 30p should always be your final product, but you can use 60p to manipulate speed. I either edit in a 60p timeline and export it at 24p or use a 24p timeline and conform my 60p to 24p for slow motion. 60p looks poo pooing terrible, as does 60i, 24p is the only good looking frame rate IMO.oh really? huh!:Drogar-Shock(DBG):

alaskacameradude
08-16-2011, 11:15 AM
Why would you ever want genuine 60p? 60p is for post production use, 24p or 30p should always be your final product, but you can use 60p to manipulate speed. I either edit in a 60p timeline and export it at 24p or use a 24p timeline and conform my 60p to 24p for slow motion. 60p looks poo pooing terrible, as does 60i, 24p is the only good looking frame rate IMO.

60P looks terrible? Are you serious? Wow. I can be there with you if you say 60i has some bad things about it, but 60P is pretty freakin good in my opinion.

eheath
08-16-2011, 04:36 PM
60P looks terrible? Are you serious? Wow. I can be there with you if you say 60i has some bad things about it, but 60P is pretty freakin good in my opinion.

Yes, true 60p motion is absolutely terrible, 60i is worse and 30p is ok but IMO if a video online isn't 24p (note: vimeo changes all frame rates to 24p when it encodes their videos) it looks terrible. Big sites like vimeo and youtube don't play 60p but ive seen some random video players, or raw quicktime players with 60p and the motion is so unnatural.

Kraut69
08-16-2011, 04:46 PM
I'm confused. I see other people on other forums gushing about how smooth 60P is. Buttery smooth is what they say. 24P is at the other end of the spectrum.

Thomas Worth
08-16-2011, 05:29 PM
Yes, true 60p motion is absolutely terrible, 60i is worse and 30p is ok but IMO if a video online isn't 24p (note: vimeo changes all frame rates to 24p when it encodes their videos) it looks terrible. Big sites like vimeo and youtube don't play 60p but ive seen some random video players, or raw quicktime players with 60p and the motion is so unnatural.
I'd like to hear your explanation as to why you think 60p motion is "absolutely terrible." Perhaps you mean "60p is inappropriate for dramatic storytelling." Would you say 60p is inappropriate for sports coverage? If so, networks in the U.S. would certainly disagree since they have standardized on either 1080i/60 or 720p/60.

Vimeo doesn't change all frame rates to 24p. If they did this, all non-24p videos would lose audio sync. They are encoded at their native frame rates, except for 50p and 60p videos which are converted to 25p and 30p, respectively. I'm not sure how Vimeo deals with odd rates like 15 or 12.444, etc. but I suspect they aren't converted due to the audio sync issue.

cuervo
08-16-2011, 05:52 PM
I find it curiously antithetical to eHeath's contention that 60p is terrible, that ESPN is investing in a megadollar facility that will specialize in 60p media.

alaskacameradude
08-16-2011, 06:30 PM
Yes, true 60p motion is absolutely terrible, 60i is worse and 30p is ok but IMO if a video online isn't 24p (note: vimeo changes all frame rates to 24p when it encodes their videos) it looks terrible. Big sites like vimeo and youtube don't play 60p but ive seen some random video players, or raw quicktime players with 60p and the motion is so unnatural.

Hmmm....why does every network who does sports use 60i or 60p do you think? Because the motion is MUCH smoother than 24p, no judder. 60p gives you the smooth motion without the interlace tearing and stairstepping of 60i. And by the way, I have PLENTY of stuff on both vimeo and youtube that is NOT 24p and there is nothing wrong with it. Just another tool, like anything else (shallow depth of field maybe?) Not everything should be shot with a shallow depth of field, and not everything should be shot 24p. Some film school guys went to work for our governor's office putting together a 'news program' (with a political bias of course, but they were supposed to make it look like a news show). They shot it at 24p, because they thought EVERYTHING looked better in 24p. It didn't, the end.

Dermot
08-16-2011, 08:02 PM
To work with 60P in a 23.98 timeline i;
1) link to the orignal
2) select the portion i want in the source viewer
3) hold down the "F" key and insert the shot or drag to the timeline

Done, and done that quickly and easily.

It seems the issues are more FCP related than they are issues with the ablity to work with 60P directly in a 23.98 timeline, it works fine if you have the right tools at hand.

d

eheath
08-16-2011, 08:03 PM
Hmmm....why does every network who does sports use 60i or 60p do you think? Because the motion is MUCH smoother than 24p, no judder. 60p gives you the smooth motion without the interlace tearing and stairstepping of 60i. And by the way, I have PLENTY of stuff on both vimeo and youtube that is NOT 24p and there is nothing wrong with it. Just another tool, like anything else (shallow depth of field maybe?) Not everything should be shot with a shallow depth of field, and not everything should be shot 24p. Some film school guys went to work for our governor's office putting together a 'news program' (with a political bias of course, but they were supposed to make it look like a news show). They shot it at 24p, because they thought EVERYTHING looked better in 24p. It didn't, the end.

I could care less what a network shoots in, that goes to all three of you talking about it. Soap oprahs look terrible to me, 60i makes me want to vomit. I believe networks use 1080i60 because its a 1080 image but at a lower bit rate than 30p correct? Either way, i don't like the "smooth" look of 60i or 60p, at all, the 24p look is what i prefer, film. Sports can easily be filmed in 24p, i do it all the time, you just have to know how to film. I shoot in 60p more often than 24p, but thats mainly for slow motion, ill end up dropping my 60p into a 24p timeline so it drops the extra 36 frames and conforming the stuff i wanted slowed down.


As for vimeo, i heard they convert everything to 24p, ive heard it from many sources. There wouldn't be an audio sync problem because they create an entire new video file for flash video, they encode/compress your video into a new file, its not the same as your original upload video.

thxdave
08-16-2011, 08:30 PM
I'm not sure how oprah fits into all this.
;-)

alaskacameradude
08-16-2011, 11:45 PM
I could care less what a network shoots in, that goes to all three of you talking about it. Soap oprahs look terrible to me, 60i makes me want to vomit. I believe networks use 1080i60 because its a 1080 image but at a lower bit rate than 30p correct? Either way, i don't like the "smooth" look of 60i or 60p, at all, the 24p look is what i prefer, film. Sports can easily be filmed in 24p, i do it all the time, you just have to know how to film. I shoot in 60p more often than 24p, but thats mainly for slow motion, ill end up dropping my 60p into a 24p timeline so it drops the extra 36 frames and conforming the stuff i wanted slowed down.


As for vimeo, i heard they convert everything to 24p, ive heard it from many sources. There wouldn't be an audio sync problem because they create an entire new video file for flash video, they encode/compress your video into a new file, its not the same as your original upload video.

Well, there is a REASON the networks film sports at 60p instead of 24p. Yeah, you can shoot sports in 24p, but you could shoot a movie in 60p or 60i as well. Doesn't mean it's the
right choice for that particular type of shoot. You may prefer the 'look' of 24p for everything, but that is not the case for many (dare I say most) of us. Sports looks better
with a smoother frame rate, and that's not just my opinion, but the opinion of those who make these decisions at a 'big' level. Not all sports is shot 1080 60i, many are shot 720 60p.
Many others are now looking at going 1080 60p. Again, I get the 60i objections, but 60p is another thing altogether.

eheath
08-17-2011, 12:33 AM
Well, there is a REASON the networks film sports at 60p instead of 24p. Yeah, you can shoot sports in 24p, but you could shoot a movie in 60p or 60i as well. Doesn't mean it's the
right choice for that particular type of shoot. You may prefer the 'look' of 24p for everything, but that is not the case for many (dare I say most) of us. Sports looks better
with a smoother frame rate, and that's not just my opinion, but the opinion of those who make these decisions at a 'big' level. Not all sports is shot 1080 60i, many are shot 720 60p.
Many others are now looking at going 1080 60p. Again, I get the 60i objections, but 60p is another thing altogether.

I do shoot sports 95% of the time i shoot and i use 60p in most occasions, ive shots a bunch in 24p too. But, what my main point is that 60p as a final product looks way too smooth and exporting your 60p as 24p looks better, in my opinion of course. Feel free to look at any video on my vimeo page, they were all shot at 720p60 (minus a couple random 24p edits in there i did with my redrock) and then eventually came out as 24p as the final product.

There is definitely a big difference between independent filmers and network/broadcast based filmers and i think thats the crossroads we find ourselves at now.

alaskacameradude
08-17-2011, 01:18 AM
I like shooting 60p for slo mo as well, it looks REALLY good. All I was saying was that different frame rates for different things, even if it is just for the person paying the bills.
I usually ask the client (unless I am doing a local TV spot in which case they just ask me to 'make something cool')

I shot some stuff for Toyota last week.....1080 24p is what they wanted. I did some stuff for a documentary guy that flew up from LA. He had me shoot some 1080 60i and some 1080 30p.
(I'm guessing to match with what he had already shot??)
I shot a high school football game, the coach wanted 60p for slo mo if needed. And finally, some freelance news, they wanted 1080 60i. I like being able to choose frame rates,
based on what I am shooting, it keeps the clients happy :-) In general, I default to 1080 24p, but I will change if the client (or me) think the shoot warrants it.

eheath
08-17-2011, 01:39 AM
I like shooting 60p for slo mo as well, it looks REALLY good. All I was saying was that different frame rates for different things, even if it is just for the person paying the bills.
I usually ask the client (unless I am doing a local TV spot in which case they just ask me to 'make something cool')

I shot some stuff for Toyota last week.....1080 24p is what they wanted. I did some stuff for a documentary guy that flew up from LA. He had me shoot some 1080 60i and some 1080 30p.
(I'm guessing to match with what he had already shot??)
I shot a high school football game, the coach wanted 60p for slo mo if needed. And finally, some freelance news, they wanted 1080 60i. I like being able to choose frame rates,
based on what I am shooting, it keeps the clients happy :-) In general, I default to 1080 24p, but I will change if the client (or me) think the shoot warrants it.

Well yes, you have to shoot what the cilent wants or else you'd be the boss. :)

alaskacameradude
08-17-2011, 01:56 AM
I like being the boss....until something gets screwed up and I have to blame the dimwit who is the boss.....

3dit0r
08-19-2011, 02:37 AM
Does the US variant of the FS100 have 1/50 or 1/100 shutter, etc. while shooting 24p to cope with flicker under lights while working in the UK or EU under 50Hz mains supply?

Thomas Worth
08-19-2011, 05:46 PM
As for vimeo, i heard they convert everything to 24p, ive heard it from many sources. There wouldn't be an audio sync problem because they create an entire new video file for flash video, they encode/compress your video into a new file, its not the same as your original upload video.
I can confirm that Vimeo absolutely does not convert all video to 24p. Videos retain their native rates with the exception of 50p and 60p (I have yet to confirm lower rates like 15 or 12). 50p and 60p rates are decimated by a factor of 2, which does not affect audio sync. I suspect YouTube works the same way.

You can test this yourself by using one of the video download extensions for FireFox or Chrome to download a video from Vimeo and then checking the file's frame rate.

AndyInBuffalo
08-23-2011, 03:47 PM
I've started to shoot interviews for a documentary meant for potential TV release. Am I handcuffing myself or creating more work down the line ? I'm thinking more and more TVs will be progressive in the next few years.

3dit0r
08-23-2011, 03:52 PM
Does the US variant of the FS100 have 1/50 or 1/100 shutter, etc. while shooting 24p to cope with flicker under lights while working in the UK or EU under 50Hz mains supply? Bump. Anyone? Please? I really need to know!

bkmvincent
08-23-2011, 04:07 PM
Bump. Anyone? Please? I really need to know!

Yes