30 fps or 24 fps
- Thread starter ramkuma
- Start date
There are thousands of articles regarding this and at the end of the day, it's really a matter of preference. If you like the look of 24p, then shoot 24p. If you hate 30p, then don't shoot 30p.
Generally speaking:
24p = "film" like look without lots of motion
30p = web videos....although I've posted 24p videos to Vimeo and they looked great
60p = fast motion / slow motion.
Personally, I shoot in 24p because I like that way it looks and never had any issues adding 2:3 pulldown to make it 30p if needed.
Generally speaking:
24p = "film" like look without lots of motion
30p = web videos....although I've posted 24p videos to Vimeo and they looked great
60p = fast motion / slow motion.
Personally, I shoot in 24p because I like that way it looks and never had any issues adding 2:3 pulldown to make it 30p if needed.
It's entirely an aesthetic choice.
Also depends a tad also on what you are shooting. You can pan 25% faster with 30P than 24P. Even zoomed all the way out a 90% pan requires around 15 seconds to complete without being choppy. This is exactly the same issue 35mm film has.
So if you are shooting with a lot of camera movement then try 30P. Sports etc, I advise 60p.
So if you are shooting with a lot of camera movement then try 30P. Sports etc, I advise 60p.
I agree with abeas and do not understand those who argue in favor of 24p because it is more "filmic". The only thing "filmic" about 24p is its ugly, choppy appearance. Good cinematographers learn to work around the limitations of 24 fps. They are very careful to pan slowly and minimize any visual choppiness in action scenes. They exploit the image qualities of film -- gamma, grain, dynamic range, et al. 30p means less effort to avoid the annoying choppy look and more time to worry about content and the other aspects of visual appeal.
Does that mean that you should always shoot in 30p? Probably not. I think the real issue is that you want to avoid the visible artifacts of speed conversion as much as possible. If the primary audience/market for your video will view it from film (e.g., theatrically), then shoot in 24p by all means. If your primary audience is on the web, then 30p has the advantage. If the most important aspect of certain shots is the ability to deliver the smoothest possible slow motion, then 60p probably is best. In other words, the end use for your video should determine the speed.
Well, because it is. 30i (and with HD video 60p) are very 'video' looking. 30p will get you a little closer to looking like film, but it's still not quite there. Only 24p gives you the natural look of film. Yes, you have to work within it's limitations, just like 35mm cinematographers do. But if you want your piece to look like film, you really need 24p.
30p is neither an HDTV nor a Blu-ray specification. It can't be "delivered" as is to a client except via computer file. Therefore it should probably be avoided unless that is the goal. Your standard choices for HD will be 24p, 30i, or 60p.
No, but 30p can delivered in a 60i or 60p stream and retain the 30p aesthetic. There's really no visual difference between holding a picture for 1/30th of a second, or repeating the same picture back to back for 1/60th of a second each.
I am curious what you mean here. I shoot a lot of things at 720/30p and have created AVCHD discs for clients to play back on compatible blu-ray players and they look great. Can you elaborate a little bit for me?
Chris S. Alexander
Well-known member
Agreed. Personally, I shoot short films, feature films, and other narrative works (web videos, commercials, etc) at 24p. I reserve 30p for things like instructional videos, and non-narrative pieces.