Film Look (24P) Vs Video Look Samples?

S

seunosewa

Well-known member
Hello,

I've been reading various books in which there's frequent mention of the "film look" you get with 24p shooting and the "video look" you get with 60i shooting, but I really don't understand what the difference is at all.

Can you show me what the "film look" is like by showing me what a movie clip will look like in 24p film mode vs 60i mode, so I can appreciate the difference?

Thanks!
 
24p doesn't "look" like film, it moves like film in term of the motion that you see. Film look is a very subjective term that's a combination of different factors including gamma curves, depth of field, lighting etc.

If you're just talking about the motion of 24p vs. 60i, it's more subtle than you think. Professionals who worked with 24p for years can tell the difference but personally I think if you screen your 60i footage to your audience no one is going to say that doesn't move like film (assuming of course that you worked on the "film look.") I have a lot of trouble telling the difference and when I watch a film I judge it more by the colors, DOF and things like that rather than by the motion.

Here's a good example of footage that was shot on 60i, decides for yourself if it looks "video"

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=42291

As for 24p footage you can find a ton on this site.
 
jade8472 said:
24p doesn't "look" like film, it moves like film in term of the motion that you see. Film look is a very subjective term that's a combination of different factors including gamma curves, depth of field, lighting etc.

If you're just talking about the motion of 24p vs. 60i, it's more subtle than you think. Professionals who worked with 24p for years can tell the difference but personally I think if you screen your 60i footage to your audience no one is going to say that doesn't move like film (assuming of course that you worked on the "film look.") I have a lot of trouble telling the difference and when I watch a film I judge it more by the colors, DOF and things like that rather than by the motion.

Here's a good example of footage that was shot on 60i, decides for yourself if it looks "video"

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=42291

As for 24p footage you can find a ton on this site.
Click to expand...
You are incorrect 24p does look like film. Very much.
 
imageonepictures said:
You are incorrect 24p does look like film. Very much.
Click to expand...

no.. you are incorrect. 24p does not look like film.

Film looks like film... how much film have you shot?

24p moves the same as film... framerate does not a movie make.
 
I'd really like to see the difference. I'd like to understand this film look and what's so superior about it especially when videos have to be reinterlaced for broadcast.
 
There is a very noticeable difference. The frame rate makes a huge difference, but it does not in fact give the video a "film look" it basically just gives it "film motion".

Film look comes from art direction, sound, framing, music, acting, directing... all those things you have to spend time on to get good results.

This site is full of people trying to emulate the physical "look" of film. Which you can do.. but that doesn't make it a film. 24p just helps differentiate your project from say, broadcast television. (ie: the news, soap operas.. etc..)

"re-interlacing" a progressive signal still produces a better picture, or a perceivable difference in quality. There is the time difference between the fields you get from shooting interlaced, so you are still retaining the motion of how you shot, and the clarity.

Another thing is, most people on this site, aren't making films for broadcast. The DVX and it's 24p abilities are not really designed for a broadcast use, nothing is stopping of course, but that is also the reason the DVX can shoot 60i.

Another huge reason (although one seldom used by anyone) is that the 24p mode allows a direct frame correspondence to actual film stock, so you have a 1:1 ratio and don't need to do any temporal modification to your project to have it printed to film.

I think I have said enough.. sleep is calling.

peas.
 
Loki said:
There is a very noticeable difference. The frame rate makes a huge difference, but it does not in fact give the video a "film look" it basically just gives it "film motion".

Film look comes from art direction, sound, framing, music, acting, directing... all those things you have to spend time on to get good results.

This site is full of people trying to emulate the physical "look" of film. Which you can do.. but that doesn't make it a film. 24p just helps differentiate your project from say, broadcast television. (ie: the news, soap operas.. etc..)

"re-interlacing" a progressive signal still produces a better picture, or a perceivable difference in quality. There is the time difference between the fields you get from shooting interlaced, so you are still retaining the motion of how you shot, and the clarity.

Another thing is, most people on this site, aren't making films for broadcast. The DVX and it's 24p abilities are not really designed for a broadcast use, nothing is stopping of course, but that is also the reason the DVX can shoot 60i.

Another huge reason (although one seldom used by anyone) is that the 24p mode allows a direct frame correspondence to actual film stock, so you have a 1:1 ratio and don't need to do any temporal modification to your project to have it printed to film.

I think I have said enough.. sleep is calling.

peas.
Click to expand...
Hey dude!

If the DVX100 wasn't filmic (aka '24p') no one would even purchase it. They'd stick to plain old 60i DV.
 
imageonepictures said:
Hey dude!

If the DVX100 wasn't filmic (aka '24p') no one would even purchase it. They'd stick to plain old 60i DV.
Click to expand...

People that pick up a DVX solely based on '24p' making their project look 'filmic' are just being very ignorant towards what actually makes a film, a Film.

I am not arguing framerate here.
 
I don't really wanna get into a huge debate here, but I feel the urge to reply in a short form. Even without 24p a lot of people would still purchase the dvx100 as its a great standard def camera. And it seems to me that the disagreement here is over "technical" stuff. Some people think the "film look" refers to film like motion, hence 24p, whereas others view the film look to literally resembling something shot on film. And as been argued many many times before there are numerous amounts of differences between film and video. After all, if the dvx looked exactly like film, film probably would no longer be used as there would be so much money saved. I'm not saying that one can't use the dvx and create a look and feel of film, because as Loki said, "Film look comes from art direction, sound, framing, music, acting, directing... all those things you have to spend time on to get good results." But you can't just turn your scene file dial to f5/6, hit record and then expect to have a video closely resembling film.
 
Jade and Loki are right, 24p moves like film but doesn't look like film and never will. film is film and video, well video. But what can be done is get a look that is very "filmic" like. To do that, you can apply a film like curve, which basically means you crush the black a little. Also film is softer than video (which is very crisp), so by adding a light softening filter or by turning down your camera sharpness, you can get a bit closer. DOF is more challenging unless you have access to a 35mm adapter. But by adding DOF, you really get very, very close to film, so much so that sometime it's very hard to tell. Of course having a very good DP can help a lot, since by far, the most important part of the filmic experience is: beautiful photography.
 
Loki said:
People that pick up a DVX solely based on '24p' making their project look 'filmic' are just being very ignorant towards what actually makes a film, a Film.

I am not arguing framerate here.
Click to expand...
Oh really?
 
macintosh said:
I don't really wanna get into a huge debate here, but I feel the urge to reply in a short form. Even without 24p a lot of people would still purchase the dvx100 as its a great standard def camera. And it seems to me that the disagreement here is over "technical" stuff. Some people think the "film look" refers to film like motion, hence 24p, whereas others view the film look to literally resembling something shot on film. And as been argued many many times before there are numerous amounts of differences between film and video. After all, if the dvx looked exactly like film, film probably would no longer be used as there would be so much money saved. I'm not saying that one can't use the dvx and create a look and feel of film, because as Loki said, "Film look comes from art direction, sound, framing, music, acting, directing... all those things you have to spend time on to get good results." But you can't just turn your scene file dial to f5/6, hit record and then expect to have a video closely resembling film.
Click to expand...
IMO they wouldn't purchase with without the 24p capabilities. 24p is why this camcorder is selling. It sets it apart from all others. Idon't see why you are all debating this.
 
Loki said:
Film look comes from art direction, sound, framing, music, acting, directing... all those things you have to spend time on to get good results.
Click to expand...

Of course all this goes into the filmic look, and making it look like film, but if all that is done and its not in 24p, its distractingly home video-ic
 
Cynic821 said:
Of course all this goes into the filmic look, and making it look like film, but if all that is done and its not in 24p, its distractingly home video-ic
Click to expand...

right.. and I am not debating that.

framerate is only part of the package.

but ignorance is bliss I guess.
 
Cynic821 said:
Of course all this goes into the filmic look, and making it look like film, but if all that is done and its not in 24p, its distractingly home video-ic
Click to expand...

To us maybe who know what 24p looks like. But pick a normal person off the street and show them a sample of 24p and a sample of 60i that's both lit and shot the same way. Obviously they can tell that there's a motion difference but I doubt they'll be able to say which is the "proper" film motion.
 
Once again we get into the "film look" vs. the "movie look".

Lighting, staging, blocking, art direction, framing, and all that are, I humbly submit, absolutely irrelevant to the "film look", but they are all vital to the "movie look".

The "film look" should be solely about: does this look like it was shot on film? The "movie look" would be: "does this look like a movie?" And the two are somewhat tied, in that almost all movies (as shown in movie theaters) are shot on film, and thus inherently incorporate the "film look".

But there's plenty of film being shot that doesn't look anything like a "movie". Miles and miles of Super 8mm and Regular 8mm home movies that don't have any lighting, any art direction, any dolly moves or "production value" but they all look like film: because they ARE film.

So: "film look" = frame rate, highlight handling, dynamic range, and grain.

"movie look" = lighting, staging, blocking, camera moves, art direction, and all that other stuff.

In that context, frame rate is absolutely integral; there's simply no arguing the obvious fact that 24p looks a whole lot more filmlike than 60i does. The frame rate is probably the single most important differentiating factor between the film look and the video look. It does not in and of itself make footage look like it's from a "movie", no. But keeping all other things equal and just changing the frame rate from 60i to 24p can sometimes be enough to get the viewer to ask the question "what was this shot on? film?"
 
jade8472 said:
To us maybe who know what 24p looks like. But pick a normal person off the street and show them a sample of 24p and a sample of 60i that's both lit and shot the same way. Obviously they can tell that there's a motion difference but I doubt they'll be able to say which is the "proper" film motion.
Click to expand...
I'll bet that if you asked them "which one looks more like a movie" you'd get a high percentage of them pointing at the 24p footage though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top