24F Not Good Enough For Film Transfer?

D

Duct Tape Films

Well-known member
I was just perusing this....

http://www.dvfilm.com/fx1/index.htm#CF25

....and it seems that at least DVFilm says that 24F is not an ideal aquisition format for a film transfer, and recommends shooting 60i for the film transfer. Seeing as film transfers are becoming less and less necessary these days, it certainly doesn't put the kibosh on any of the 24F cameras for HD projection only or home distribtion purposes, but if this is true, why isn't this topic brought up in the many discussions involving the flame wars between HDV vs. The World? Has anyone done, or is anyone planning to do a film transfer from their XL-H1, XH-A1, or XH-G1? Is there any film transfer house that HAS found a way to utilize 24F HDV footage for a film transfer?

With the statement that 24F is just as good as 24P comes the assumption that all things you can do with 24P you can just as easily do with 24F. If this is not the case, and anyone planning to use say an XH-A1 for a film transfer would be better off shooting 60i, it probably makes sense to at least have this as public knowledge.


EDIT - thought I'd put this at the top, so people don't have to thumb through the comments to realize just how recent the DVFilm reccomendations are....here's the money quote....

"Suggested camera settings:

FX1 or XL-H1 Euro model: Shoot HDV-mode 50i (interlaced) 1/50th sec shutter speed.

FX1 or XL-H1 US Model: Shoot HDV-mode 60i (interlaced) 1/60th sec shutter speed.

Z1: Shoot HDV-mode 60i (interlaced) 1/60th sec shutter speed.

It's very important that you use the recommended shutter speeds for a successful conversion to 24 or 25 fps.
Do not use Auto Exposure where the camera sets the shutter speed. Also watch the white clipping using the Zebra stripe feature. Do not allow significant white clipping particularly in scenes with camera movement, as the white clip areas will appear to have stuttered motion.
Do not use CF25, 25F, CF24 or 24F modes. These modes result in reduced vertical sharpness vs. the interlaced modes (see examples at bottom of this page). Do not use CF30 mode, it cannot be converted to 24P."
 
Last edited:
that is an old document. canons "24f" is different from the 24f in general they mention.
they are referring to the old 24f used on some cameras that record half the vertical resolution of ordinary 60i. 24 half frames in a 60i signal.

canons "24f" is actually 24p recorded in a 60i signal. the same as the DVX. it's not "true 24p" because it's in a 60i signal but it's 24p none the less.
 
i thought that the A1 recorded 24 discreet frames to tape (no pulldown)? all of the raw m2t files i downloaded have been 23.976 with no pulldown whatsoever, so i just assumed that's how the camera records it. on top of that, i was under the impression that canon refers to it as 24f because it is not acquired via progressive scan CCDs.

also, i know for a fact that the dvx records 24p in 60i.
 
qazwsx said:
i thought that the A1 recorded 24 discreet frames to tape (no pulldown)? all of the raw m2t files i downloaded have been 23.976 with no pulldown whatsoever, so i just assumed that's how the camera records it. on top of that, i was under the impression that canon refers to it as 24f because it is not acquired via progressive scan CCDs.

also, i know for a fact that the dvx records 24p in 60i.
Click to expand...

Reading this that was my exact thought - what gives? I thought the 24F vs. 24P had been settled that there was no difference, but if it's not the same for film out situations, then that's a little unclear. Okay here's a more specific positive question - which tape to film transfer house(s) ARE accepting/preferring 24F origination (vs 60i)? Truth of the matter it really only effects approximately 1 out of 20 some odd fully funded feature films, if that, but still those are high odds to get to the end of the line, secure distribution, and then you can't really use what you shot before. I know there are accomidations made for footage all the time, but I think most people planning on shooting with A1, aren't planning that they may be sacrificing anything by using 24F, and if it's the industry-wide thing that 24F cannot be transfered to film, it should be made very clear. Anyone know about Duart and 24F or Digital Film Group and 24F?
 
Last edited:
jenningsp said:
that is an old document. canons "24f" is different from the 24f in general they mention.
they are referring to the old 24f used on some cameras that record half the vertical resolution of ordinary 60i. 24 half frames in a 60i signal.

canons "24f" is actually 24p recorded in a 60i signal. the same as the DVX. it's not "true 24p" because it's in a 60i signal but it's 24p none the less.
Click to expand...

It specifcies at the top of the page, as this is not just about Sony's camera, that the XL-H1 should be delivered (and originated) in 60i. Has Canon changed their 24F since the first implementation in the XL-H1, as I thought it was identical to the XH-A1's 24F? If it's dated, why is it still listed as current policy - Marcus is usually the first to adopt being able to do something, he was one of the first to allow the DVX's 24Pa, while other houses were still requesting 60i.

This is copied directly from the top of the DVFilm page in question.....



"Suggested camera settings:

FX1 or XL-H1 Euro model: Shoot HDV-mode 50i (interlaced) 1/50th sec shutter speed.

FX1 or XL-H1 US Model: Shoot HDV-mode 60i (interlaced) 1/60th sec shutter speed.

Z1: Shoot HDV-mode 60i (interlaced) 1/60th sec shutter speed.

It's very important that you use the recommended shutter speeds for a successful conversion to 24 or 25 fps.
Do not use Auto Exposure where the camera sets the shutter speed. Also watch the white clipping using the Zebra stripe feature. Do not allow significant white clipping particularly in scenes with camera movement, as the white clip areas will appear to have stuttered motion.
Do not use CF25, 25F, CF24 or 24F modes. These modes result in reduced vertical sharpness vs. the interlaced modes (see examples at bottom of this page). Do not use CF30 mode, it cannot be converted to 24P."
 
woops my mistake. i only read the FX1 bit. it's interesting. maybe their hardware can't do 24f yet. i'd just convert everything to dvcpro that should solve it.
 
jenningsp said:
woops my mistake. i only read the FX1 bit. it's interesting. maybe their hardware can't do 24f yet. i'd just convert everything to dvcpro that should solve it.
Click to expand...


They're not talking about delivery, they're talking about origination. If origination in 24F is a no go for transfer houses, there needs to be a why, because as the argument has been settled not only here, but at DVinfo, is that 24P, 24F, tomato, tomahtoe. If that's not the case when it comes to film transfers, this should be a wider known issue, and explanations as why need to be made known, it could influence some buyers to think about whether Canon's 24F products are going to be right for them and their purposes, like some of these folks going through the trouble of adding 35mm lenses for instance. For the most part this is a non-starter issue really, simply because of the lack of necessity for the most part for film transfers, but for some, it could be a major deciding factor.
 
Last edited:
It's also interesting that there is another thread RE: uncompressed, which if you add these two issues together, perhaps the best way to a film out from the A1 is via the component out, and THAT would be the way to actually use 24F for film out.
 
i think dvfilm recommends originating in 60i and having their software deinterlace it for you because it results in a sharper image than if you were to go straight to 24f. however, IIRC from res charts and screen grabs comparing the A1 in 24f to the HVX200, they prove to have very close, nearly identical resolving power.

basically, i don't think they're saying there is an inherent issue with 24f's rendering of motion or 'progressiveness', but they claim you'll get a sharper image using their software. maybe someone with a copy of dvfilm maker can do a resolution test comparing 24f with deinterlaced 60i?
 
qazwsx said:
i think dvfilm recommends originating in 60i and having their software deinterlace it for you because it results in a sharper image than if you were to go straight to 24f. however, IIRC from res charts and screen grabs comparing the A1 in 24f to the HVX200, they prove to have very close, nearly identical resolving power.

basically, i don't think they're saying there is an inherent issue with 24f's rendering of motion or 'progressiveness', but they claim you'll get a sharper image using their software. maybe someone with a copy of dvfilm maker can do a resolution test comparing 24f with deinterlaced 60i?
Click to expand...

"Do not use CF25, 25F, CF24 or 24F modes. These modes result in reduced vertical sharpness vs. the interlaced modes (see examples at bottom of this page)."

Somehow I doubt that, as the internal processing of the camera is going to be logically smoother than 24P deducted from 60i under nearly every circumstance, it's seeing the information directly from the CCD's, whereas the software most certainly will not be. The question remains - is anyone accepting/requesting/prefering 24F originated footage, or is 60i prefered across the board?
 
I know of at least 2 very successful Canon HDV 24F film transfers. It's fine for film outs.

I doubt a 60i transfer would be much better. I've never seen perfect, consistent 24p motion cadence from 60i "smart deinterlacing". There are almost always hiccups in the motion at some point.

50i would certainly work better, but I doubt it would be worth the trouble over simply shooting 24 or 25F.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure what Canon does now, but their first 24 fps (xl1) solution was to remove a field to get 24... Which basically meant that each frame was half resolution. I know it's not the case anymore, their new 24F is much better, but not as good as true 24fps. Thus many company , such as the Hermitage prefer that you shoot interlaced, so that you can keep a superior res.
 
Elton said:
I know of at least 2 very successful Canon HDV 24F film transfers. It's fine for film outs.

I doubt a 60i transfer would be much better. I've never seen perfect, consistent 24p motion cadence from 60i "smart deinterlacing". There are almost always hiccups in the motion at some point.

50i would certainly work better, but I doubt it would be worth the trouble over simply shooting 24 or 25F.
Click to expand...

THAT'S exactly what I wanted to hear, simply because of my predisposition against 60i converted to 24P as well - that one frame is always a "splatter" to me, and I've never seen it done where I didn't detect it. Elton, do you know which house did the transfers? This is very good news....
 
Duct Tape Films said:
Elton, do you know which house did the transfers? This is very good news....
Click to expand...

EFilm in Hollywood...from 24F edited and mastered in DVCPRO HD QT, no less. Looked like a really good S16 blow-up according to the filmmaker.
 
You have to remember that this is DV FILM MAKER here. Remember what they do people, this is a site that sells software to deinterlace 60i to 24P, of course they are going to say that their way of doing things is better. Trust me, 24F has more than enough resolution to go to film, in fact the canon 24f has more lines of resolvable resolution than both the HVX and HD100, so if 24F isn't good enough that means that 24P from any other camera in this class wouldn't be either.
I think what they are trying to say on the website is that they feel the best way to go is to shoot 60i and let their software handle the conversion, however what they feel is better and what may actually be better are two different things.

Now I don't have anything against DV film maker whatsoever, I think they are a great company and make great products, I just don't happen to agree with this one statement.
 
scharky said:
You have to remember that this is DV FILM MAKER here. Remember what they do people, this is a site that sells software to deinterlace 60i to 24P, of course they are going to say that their way of doing things is better. Trust me, 24F has more than enough resolution to go to film, in fact the canon 24f has more lines of resolvable resolution than both the HVX and HD100, so if 24F isn't good enough that means that 24P from any other camera in this class wouldn't be either.
I think what they are trying to say on the website is that they feel the best way to go is to shoot 60i and let their software handle the conversion, however what they feel is better and what may actually be better are two different things.

Now I don't have anything against DV film maker whatsoever, I think they are a great company and make great products, I just don't happen to agree with this one statement.
Click to expand...

Tried asking around over at DVinfo same question, too, but that one devolved somewhat problematically to the point of a locked thread. Agreed on DVFilm, I suppose it's okay to disagree with someone you really really respect, but still I am curious to reason for the distinction between 24F and 24P - is it just "recommendation" or in his own opinion, is it really not good for film outs?

Am glad this thread got this far without flaming out, to the point that H1, A1, G1 users who want their 24F material, and can afford it somehow, know one place to go to get it transfered to film. It's worth knowing, even if it's just for the lucky few....:dankk2:
 
Last edited:
Yeah they are just simply saying that you loss vertical resolution if you shoot 24f. 24f might be better than there method but it is still new and they might have not tested it yet so they are sticking to what they know.
 
Just ask Marcus to come over here and offer his clarifications. He participates in this forum, his userid is "mvb". He probably wrote that recommendation and could tell you exactly the reasoning.

If I was shooting something on a Canon for film transfer, I'd shoot 24F as well. It may be a little softer, but I'd take that in exchange for the variabilities of a 60i->24P conversion. I'd also rather conduct my edit in 24 progressive frames rather than use a 60i source any day.
 
Yesterday I tried 50i and 25f, zoomed in on the grabs and saw no distinguishable difference. On some part of the frame the 50i was marginally sharper, but on other parts the 25f was marginally sharper. When the light changed a bit I saw more difference in sharpness than I could see between 50i-25f.
So be smart, don't lose any sleep over using the f-modes. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top