to all the 30p haters

B

booggerg2

Well-known member
I see nothing un-cinematic about the cadence in this 5D2 clip..

http://www.vimeo.com/2125645

Granted, the guys behind this video definitely lacks finesse and should have locked the exposure down. Nonetheless, the day you get your crappy DOF adapter + prosumer camera to shoot available light footage like this and the day they make prosumer cameras + DOF adapter combo as compact as the 5D2 + lens is, I'll shut up. 24P? many of us could care less if we can achieve results like this without too much hassle.
 
good for you booggerg2. very happy for you.

although, i wanted to ask... did you watch the video flash video or the file he uploaded? because despite the shooter's talent for composition, the full 720/30p file he uploaded looks less cinematic in terms of frame rate cadence than the vimeo conversion. the native file has that "soap opera-y/broadcast news feel" that i, personally, don't care for. i'd rather shoot with the Nikon D90 than this, given the choice.
 
Still looks great to me... I don't settle for the cinematic look simply based on cadence. It is the whole package. The overall look of the image matters more to me than the cadence difference between 30p and 24p.
 
understood. for me, it's the whole package as well. i just don't leave 24p out of that package. :)

it would be like someone trying to sell me a bicycle with three wheels. and when i finish scratching my head, and try to tell them its a tricycle, they insist "no, you want to buy a bicycle, and this is a bicycle with three wheels." and before i can say anything else, they show me a video and add "see, look how good it performs when Lance Armstrong rides it". that doesn't change the fact that fundamentally it is not bicycle.

likewise, the canon's video is missing a fundamental aspect of what has separated cinema from television for decades. i don't care if steven spielberg shoots a demo with it, it's still a tricycle, i mean, it still looks like broadcast video.
 
Frame rate is not a religion... you use the frame rate that best tells the story you want to tell. If I were doing online video of fast moving action and wanted to keep motion resolution but the full progressive quality to since it was going to be displayed on progressive monitors, I would consider 30p (as long as the encoder doesn't drop a "field" to make it 15fps). If I am doing dramatic narrative, I will go 24p. etc.

The rest is really in the way the image is composed, lit, and how the camera moves, etc. I have seen plenty of mediocre images shot with the RED from productions that confuse resolution with overall quality. There are many factors to making it right.

Michael
 
i come from pal land so my opinion probably doesn't matter but the op has a point. how have people become so damn obsessed with 24p?
a film doesn't remind me of a soapy unless it has bad acting, cheesy dialog and a crap plot. I've heard people go on about the psychological effect of 24p on how it evokes that story telling part in the mind and how it dates back to the flickering of the flames when people use to sit around campfires and tell tales. are you f*%king serious? people get of the cheeba! i haven't heard that much wank in all my life!
if film had always been shot on 28p, would we all be obsessed with that number? or 32p or 80p... etc.
I'd rather stare at a nicely shot picture that tells a story rather than the multitude of 24p dully shot, badly composed, films out there that tells none i'm remotely interested in.
By the way Zak, I really like your films and think I would still like them if they were shot in 15p at a resolution of 320 x 240 compared to watching alien vs predator on an imax screen.
 
bimdas: Remember, people here regard a few spliced together still life shots of grass and leafs as "cinema" or "filmlike", as long as it's 24P it's all good.
 
I would prefer to get very nice, production quality HD footage in 30fps and make it look more "filmic" .... than take some awful quality, filmic looking footage in 24fps, and try and make it production quality.

Not everyone is buying this camera to make films anyway... alot of my clients will happily sacrifice the film look (or wouldn't even notice) to get sharper images with more contrast.
 
educate a novice as to what the argument is.... 24p vs 30p what will the difference look like? The only vid editing I have done so far is with standard def, looking to jump into HD with a canon HG20 soon. I am gathering as much info as I can.

MY old standard def tape video camera had 2 settings.. on and off... so needless to say I have some learning to do..

Thanks all

PJ
 
jaybirch said:
I would prefer to get very nice, production quality HD footage in 30fps and make it look more "filmic" .... than take some awful quality, filmic looking footage in 24fps, and try and make it production quality.

Not everyone is buying this camera to make films anyway... alot of my clients will happily sacrifice the film look (or wouldn't even notice) to get sharper images with more contrast.
Click to expand...
neither the Nikon nor the Canon are production quality. neither would pass a QC report without noting "creative intent" on all the hits one would get.

we just have a difference of opinion, i suppose. my point of view is from that of an indie filmmaker. if the goal IS "filmic", the cadence of 24 frames per second is fundamental. the quality of the footage is very important, but secondary to the foundation. the Nikon's image quality sucks and the Canon looks like a cheap soap opera. The only reason I've opted for the Nikon is because i'm making a film on characters' inability to communicate effectively through social networking, video diaries, webcams, et cetera so the inherent flaws in the D90's image are tied to the content of the story. thus, appropriate. if I needed footage that was playing on a television and needed it to look unlike a motion picture, i'd use the Canon. I did that on HEART OF NOW -- a character had some video footage they shot, so I switched my HV20 over to 29.97 for that footage. use the right tool for the right job. I wouldn't use either of these DLSRs as my "go to" on any other projects. :)
 
It is a bit of an assumption to say the the canon cannot be considered production quality when so few people have properly worked with one. From what I have seen, I think many people will be making broadcast quality material with this cam.
 
Zak Forsman said:
use the right tool for the right job.
Click to expand...

that's why I said not everyone is buying this camera to make a film with.

Personally, I can see alot of music videos and adverts being done on this cam... basically stuff with quite a small amount of camera movement.
 
i haven't seen a music video shot natively in 29.97 (let alone 30p) since the 80's with the exception of a Stone Temple Pilots video made to look like it was shot in the era that gave birth to MTV. it;s a good one by the way. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqq08Ar5DRM :)

i'm not being too presumptuous on whether these cams are "broadcast quality". I have sent many projects in for professional QC reports. and the Canon and Nikon footage wouldn't pass without my say so. And my clients (Sony, Warner Bros, Paramount, Fox, etc) wouldn't accept either as an A-Cam. I could use them as a B-Cam with a specialized look, but that's it. the skew and wobble would set off red flags down the line.
 
you can't have seen too many dance music videos then. Alot of that crap is shot in 30fps and still gets onto the major music channels... you can argue whether that is broadcast quality, but it is being broadcast and paid for by someone.... and, I don't know about in the states, but in Europe the 80s trend is massive.... so expect plenty more terrible 80s style videos, if that comes across the pond.

Anyway, all I know is that I can make alot of cash out of that camera, so that is all that I needed to think about when ordering mine :)
 
I have a hvx200... i love the 24p look and feel of this cam...

I just don't think 30p is the make or break deal on the 5D camera.. which is what this thread originally talked about. This forum isn't JUST for film makers
 
jaybirch said:
you can't have seen too many dance music videos then. Alot of that crap is shot in 30fps and still gets onto the major music channels... you can argue whether that is broadcast quality, but it is being broadcast and paid for by someone.... and, I don't know about in the states, but in Europe the 80s trend is massive.... so expect plenty more terrible 80s style videos, if that comes across the pond.

Anyway, all I know is that I can make alot of cash out of that camera, so that is all that I needed to think about when ordering mine :)
Click to expand...

okay. i get it now. it's about making money and following trends. haha! just kidding, man... having some fun. enjoy your new camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top