24 p what is it good for?

I

ingoandfloyd

Active member
Whats the good thing about 24 p? I know film is 24 but gh2 is not film..... And to be honest i dosent look good not if you Want to pan or use a glidetrack (720p 50 much smoother but then you only have 17mbs) And there is a hell to mix it with 25 p and very hard to make it look good ( brodcast quality) With 25 p. If you are in pal-land stay with Your gh13. I have one years of documatary shoots on 25 p and dont know what to do now with My gh2 24 p not good enough and 720p ? Well i culd do that with à unhacked gh1. Thinking of selling, any buyers here?
 
Last edited:
i agree with you 24 p judder to much should give 24- mbps to 60 i unless i am doing some thing wrong with my edius 6 setting to get rid of the judder
 
I'm sure you could find lots of buyers. I personally like the look of 24p, anything else looks too smooth and too unnatural to me.
 
i see other video shot on 24p look great but when i shoot it's judder look stroby evan when on tripodi just can not repoduce what i see with video shot on 24p here.
 
It looks ok when you dont do pans or slides on a glidtrack, if you try that you will see what i mean, to much jutter look like super vhs....
 
24P does not work for me either ,its nothing to do with pc playback as playing the files strait via a hdmi to my tv has the same juddery look,720P may look better if you dont mind losing 20% of the resolution, i miss 25P but i am learning to live with 1920x180i
 
Ummm 25p is not really perceptively smoother than 24p. It's a 4% difference...barely anything.
 
Ben_B said:
Ummm 25p is not really perceptively smoother than 24p. It's a 4% difference...barely anything.
Click to expand...

There is a great difference i also have a canon HV30 that looks great in 25P as did my previous canon 550D,i am talking about pal use , believe me if 24P looked watchable not jerky with moire /ailising i would love to use it.
 
Ben_B said:
Ummm 25p is not really perceptively smoother than 24p. It's a 4% difference...barely anything.
Click to expand...

It is when viewing it on a PAL television set. One either has to re-time it to 25 fps which causes sync issues with other cameras and separate sound or live with a pretty jerky 24-to-25 fps cadence. As ingoandfloyd has learned the hard way now. Panasonic's decision to keep 24 fps instead of 25 in the top quality mode on GH2 PAL models isn't that smart. Made it a no-buy for me.
 
depends on what your final target is. you can always switch the project to 25P after finishing offline.
 
24p was created solely to save on film stock costs. Cameras nowadays are digital...many projectors are digital there will be little need for 24p eventually.
Some think it makes their footage look more "filmic" but to me it just looks like it has blurry motion (you can recreate this same look by using slower shutter speeds with 25p if you want).
Im not under the illusion my videos will converted to film to be shown at some out of date cinema.
When I shoot someone moving I dont want a burry mess thats why I dont use/like 24p.
 
Ben_B said:
Ummm 25p is not really perceptively smoother than 24p. It's a 4% difference...barely anything.
Click to expand...
Still you said you can't use anything but 24p because everything else looks unnatural (keep telling that to yourself enough and you might start to believeing it).
 
mimirsan said:
24p was created solely to save on film stock costs. Cameras nowadays are digital...many projectors are digital there will be little need for 24p eventually.
Some think it makes their footage look more "filmic" but to me it just looks like it has blurry motion (you can recreate this same look by using slower shutter speeds with 25p if you want).
Im not under the illusion my videos will converted to film to be shown at some out of date cinema.
When I shoot someone moving I dont want a burry mess thats why I dont use/like 24p.
Click to expand...

don't remember the specific thread but there were enough arguments declaring very opposite facts upholding 24p for future use.
 
Indeed something about Bluray using 24p....however I speculate this is probably more about easier transition for transfering back catalogue movies from film. I was pointing out why 24p is 24p (to save film) as we no longer using film its time to move with the times no?
Heres a example.
James Cameron recently has been pushing for a set framerate that moves away from 24p and its limitations for a more global standard...the industry all followed his push for 3D...most likely they probably will follow this also. Calling it cursed! lol
He wants 48fps
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983864?refCatId=1009

Were in the digital age now. And most modern TV & projection units will play whatever framerate.
Theres a reason why recent cameras are using 50p/60p
24p is progressively (no pun) ending up being a niche...when film goes maybe so will 24p.
I do agree it looks unnatural beyond 30fps....but this looks to me the way things are going.
I go by how it looks and 24p dont look good to me.
 
Last edited:
but what about the natural eye vision and 24p? can't recall the thread but this is a basic argument of keeping 24p (cause that's how the eye works or something ?)
i mean it's not just the "save film" thing.
 
I think 24p will stay with us for very long time. 24p having less number of frames per sec doesn't mean it carries less data per second. Each frame in 24p contains more data than each frame in 60i/60p. In earlier days consumer TVs were not capable of displaying such high bitrate frames from true 24p. After Bluray's arrival, we began seeing HDTV supporting 24p true cinema in recent years. Finally we can watch true 24p for the first time at home.

The industry began touting for better standard like true 48p because they gotta introduce new things to attract more buyers. I will stick to 24p for very long time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top