NO 24p in PAL HVX200

Barry_Green said:
This is not remotely close to being true.

There is only one HDV camera that can record PAL and NTSC; the Sony Z1.

The Sony FX1 cannot, the Sony HC1 cannot, the Sony A1 cannot, the JVC HD1 cannot, the HD10 cannot, the HD100 cannot. The HD100 can shoot 24p and 25p and 30p in high-def, but the US version cannot do PAL, and the European version cannot do NTSC.

The XLH1 could do both if you paid a $500 upgrade, but it's the only camera besides a Z1 that could.
Click to expand...



Barry, are you saying the JVC does 24p in a the Pal 50hz camera? Than How difficult should this be to implement on the VARIABLE frame rate HVX? No excuses here...

As for the other hdv cameras, it was a misconception of mine. Many appologies.

EDIT- Anyway, there's no point arguing this. If all Europeans who wanted this feature united and FLOODED Panasonic Broadcast Europe Official forum with complains about lacking this feature, than probably something would happen. However, only 9 or 10 people expressed their concerns over there... So it's an insignificant rant for them. If you still want to try, please go and post on the link below

http://panasonic-broadcast.com/inde...B3A&cmd=forum&forum=1&fo_group_id=4&locrepl=1


In other news, I'll be tryin' the HVX ntsc next week.. :)
 
Last edited:
The JVC does do 24p in the European 50Hz camera, yes.

It involves rebooting the system into a different mode, but it can do it.

Same with the Z1 -- it can do either 50hz or 60hz, but it involves rebooting the camera into the different mode. Presumably running off a different crystal.

The HVX would have to have been designed from the beginning to be a multi-territory multi-boot camera like the others apparently were. It wasn't. So it can't. It's not a matter of someone making a simple software change, it's a matter of that the hardware does not support the frame rate you want it to.
 
Barry_Green said:
The HVX would have to have been designed from the beginning to be a multi-territory multi-boot camera like the others apparently were.
Click to expand...

There would propably be a need for 2 crystals if the camera could support 23.976, 24 & 25 fps.
What we are asking is 24 & 25 fps for PAL model.
I don't see any need for 2 crystals with just those framerates and no support for ntsc.
 
Barry_Green said:
The HVX would have to have been designed from the beginning to be a multi-territory multi-boot camera like the others apparently were. It wasn't. So it can't.
Click to expand...

And that's the sad thing... why did they do such a silly thing?
 
Barry_Green said:
This is not remotely close to being true.

There is only one HDV camera that can record PAL and NTSC; the Sony Z1.

The XLH1 could do both if you paid a $500 upgrade, but it's the only camera besides a Z1 that could.
Click to expand...

At least the option is there with the XL-H1, and $500 is a lot cheaper, quicker & easier in the long run than buying or hiring a NTSC model.....
 
Hey, I'm not saying it wouldn't be desirable! I asked for it too, way back when.

What I'm pointing out is that there was a characterization made that "everyone else does it", and I'm saying "well, actually, no, nobody else does it. Only the Z1 does it. Or the XLH1 if you pay a $500 upgrade."

I'm not defending someone's choice to leave the feature off, but I am saying that it's extraordinarily rare.
 
When the first competitor introduced that, it was a nice idea and helped the product. Then another competitor had to copy this feature since clients were asking for that. Why can't Panasonic copy like a normal company? :)

Nothing extraordinary rare! Just a simple feature.

In Europe, JVC , Z1 and XL 1H all do NTSC rates and 24p. Only Panasonic ignores Europeans.
 
Originally Posted by Isaac_Brody
Another thought, if you have the money to bump video to film, you should be shooting on film in the first place. It will cost you at least thirty thousand dollars to transfer a ninety minute film to 35mm. The chances of a film being picked up and having a wide release are well...let's just say that you have a better chance of a brick wall picking itself up and moving out of your way.
Click to expand...

Ok but my futur films will have a lot of comp and CGI so id have to film then scan into a computer then once finnished then film out..... We are and have been moving into a digital realm for some time now.....
Why do we film out, for big screen releases, that is untill cinemas become digital also.

All I wanted was a 24p function so that I could cut down on converting 25p to 24p, thus cutting time and money on the finnal product....
 
Last edited:
But the thing is that you don't have to think about the 25/24 conversion.
You just finish the film at 25 fps and send your master to the facility doing the film printing. They will just print all frames to the negative, and then do the 4% timestretch on the audio, then when played in the cinema it will be in sync at 24 fps.

The only quality issue can be audio artifacts from the timestretching, but dolby systems makes a very expensive DSP processor that is very good at this. It is included in the process of doing a Dolby Digital release print.
You can also fix this by having your audio post facility do the timestretch on the dialog tracks only and do a seperate 24 fps mix, using non stretched foley and music tracks.

I have done finishing on a few releases here in denmark. Some were delivered to the printer on digibeta, when shot in SD, some delivered as uncompressed Tiff frames in 1080p. Some where shot in 24fps some where 25. The cheep 24 fps ones were scanned to DV for editing at 25fps, then rescanned and graded still at 25p. One reason for this is that you can run a spirit datacine in realtime at 25p and the scan directly at 4:4:4 into a Decklink card in a G5. Makes film scanning much cheaper.

It's really a non issue. The good thing about going 25p is that you can easily create expendabels like DVD's in PAL format. Something that is impossible using 24p.
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
, but I am saying that it's extraordinarily rare.
Click to expand...
Btw, every film camera has had 23.976, 24 & 25 fps for the last 3 decades.
But then again, film cameras are quite rare and maybe those japanese video engineers haven't seen them. Nevertheless these new hd cameras are aimed for digital cinema also.
 
You just finish the film at 25 fps and send your master to the facility doing the film printing.
Click to expand...

so if the frame rate ect is changed by those guys...why did the NTSC model bother with 24p?? surley just shoot at 30p and those guys can change it to 24p??

its beyond me , unless its a technical prob.. why 24p isnt included in the PAL version...24p isnt just another frame rate like all the others...its the universal frame rate that film has been shot at for ...???? 80 years+ ??..

dosnt 30p on the ntsc translate to the 25p on the pal..as in the norm frame of each of our tv systems , so to include 24p on the ntsc and not the pal one = ?? huh.

maybe they thought "theres not much call for it around here " ..to steal a line from a rather popular cheese shop sketch!

to give the pal model lots of different frame rates and then to leave out 24p seems like a bad marketing route.. especially when " 24p" is such a buzz word.. even JAN mentions it in an early preview i saw on the net somewhere..obviously mentioning it as a selling point.

just my opinion , but wouldnt panasonic increase the chance of sales WITH 24p..some people may not the idea of messing about afterwards converting and such - less time converting is good isnt it?? -- isnt that a selling point of P2 ??

then again , would they sell a few more models with a BUILT IN MP3 PLAYER!!!!!
wooohoooooooo ...

:)
 
24P is not a buzz word in PAL territories, we have 25P and it´s hard to see the difference. There is a lot of know how to handle it in the filmlab. Anyway, it is always good to have the opportunity to go 24P within a reboot or a software selection ( no hardware needed) in the HVX. But, and now I am asking: how many EU and AU filmers really need the 24p option and shoot with a HVX $6000,- cam?

If you go the filmprint way what is extreme expensive way (and for me, I almost never get funds to do that after I shot on video) So IF you go the filmprintway and you know at in advance, do you shoot with a fixed lens camcorder?
You can, and you will have some results, but how big is the market ? Why not shooting with a better (2/3")cam or on film itself?

And if you did not know in advance that you are shooting for a filmout, and funds are available later on, and you did shoot video, you have to find a good lab to get your video printed. Then the 25P to 24P work and audio 4% slow is just a marginal sum of the hole printing process and the results are good
 
I am in the opposite situation

I am in the opposite situation

Hi Guys


Now i am in the opposite situation of what you are talkink about:

i have shooted at 24p(varicam),and i have a 24p uncompressed timeline

i have to make a PAL DVD

i use a apple G5 sistem

........and now what can i use to go from 24 to 25?in the correct way?

i think i have to compress video and audio by 4% and not "export the timeline at 25fps",
and not directly the timeline to DVD Pal at 25fps becouse this will add one more frame every 24 and in the playback we will see it like a stutter i think....

so what can i use to make 25fps compressing video and audio by 4%?

there is a tool to conform 24 to 25....like finalcut tool to conform 25 to 24?

or there is onother way to go from 24 to 25?


thank you


best regards
 
Last edited:
androoow said:
so if the frame rate ect is changed by those guys...why did the NTSC model bother with 24p?? surley just shoot at 30p and those guys can change it to 24p??

dosnt 30p on the ntsc translate to the 25p on the pal..as in the norm frame of each of our tv systems , so to include 24p on the ntsc and not the pal one = ?? huh.


:)
Click to expand...

The bureau with the film printer will just treat your image master as a 24p master and print every frame to the negative. No conversion is needed.

Only the audio is modified.

25 is so close to 24 that you don't notice it as a slowdown, but 30 playing at 24 would seem way slower. Thats where the need for 24p comes in.

In 60i its easy to encapsulate a 24p signal by doing a standard pulldown.
In 50i you cant do that and would force you to introduce only two duplicate fields, which would create a really stuttering motion.
 
SPZ said:
There's a process of conversion from 24p to 25p and vice-versa, and this takes time and money. Stop attacking people who want usefull options.
Click to expand...

actually going from 25p to 24fps for a filmout takes mere minutes (as you'll want to set up a frame sequence anyway).. converting the sound to 24fps is pretty easy as well (and has to be done in a lot of labs anyway, since the machine that prints the sound film often only runs at that speed).. so, all this will maybe raise the total cost of the first print from 25000 to 25200 EUR.

on the other hand, editing in 24p is rather expensive and has much more potential for errors, thus it's NOT an useful option (in PAL land at least).

++ chris
 
hal-9000 said:
there is a tool to conform 24 to 25....like finalcut tool to conform 25 to 24?

or there is onother way to go from 24 to 25?
Click to expand...

1. export the 24fps timeline to a Quicktime file. (Can be a small reference file)
2. open the Cinema Tools application.
3. Choose "Open Clip" (CMD+O)
4. Click the "Conform" button
5. choose "25" from the popup.
6. The framerate of the file has now changed from 24 to 25, just by changing a flag.

The audio will also be in sync, but will have a 4% higher pitch.
You can change the pitch back using an app like amazing slow downer or Soundtrack pro.

And like that you now have a 25 fps master!

(Beware that cinamatools changes the original file on disk. Dont do this to an original backup quicktime)
 
This is truly the thread that refuses to die.

Guys, its a non event. It happens all the time in real world production.

Shoot your film and 25 and print at 24 then pitch change the sound - and if you're concerned about that costing you money in post for a "big screen release" then you probably havent got enough money to pay for catering on a film anyway (a film out to 35mm costs mucho big bucks anyway not to mention distributon costs, prints etc).

Essentially shoot at 25 and treat it as though it were 24 - you cannot tell the difference on screen except that your film will run 4% faster overall.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top