John_Moore
Active member
It's too bad you can't see a difference. I can see a huge difference.
35mm adapters - let me get this right....
- Thread starter reflex
- Start date
setarcos
Well-known member
My 2c on the 24p issue (beaten up for ages by now):
The 24 fps came to become "standard" as “the least amount of film” the film makers managed to "get away with" based on "persistence of vision" based on the HUGE brightness to complete darkness (between frames) as projected in theatre. Now.... an HDV display is based around the 60 HZ power supply (no matter what we want and do). 60 can not be divided by 24.
The core of shooting in 24P is to put an emphasis on what was (is?) considered a mistake!!!!!!! (excluding material intended for a film out, and even then, I heard of successful interlaced frames being blend to end up with 24FPS)
Don't pan to fast or you'll GET STROBING!!!!!!
The actual position of a subject (talent?) in the frame changes (or it should) change little when proper followed and framed. The BG usually is blurred (focus on the talent!) and what's left? A sharp character showing no strobing and a blurry BG strobing (if ever noticed)
There are LOTS of more important issues to consider getting a good looking image than the strobing. (Exposure time is indeed a bit “better” (1/48 instead of 1/60, but not relevant anymore; it used to matter more when one had to deal with lights set-up for a proper exposure on film. Now you can open the iris a bit or push the gain and ... problem solved. Motion blur is..... closer to film on 1/48 than 1/60 indeed, but that's only one tiny part of a good image)
Keeping the lights within the DR of the camcorder, nice framing and justified camera moves, GOOD STORY, SOUND, ACTING and EDITING,!!!!!!!!!! are far more important than shooting 24P... (imo).
The 24 fps came to become "standard" as “the least amount of film” the film makers managed to "get away with" based on "persistence of vision" based on the HUGE brightness to complete darkness (between frames) as projected in theatre. Now.... an HDV display is based around the 60 HZ power supply (no matter what we want and do). 60 can not be divided by 24.
The core of shooting in 24P is to put an emphasis on what was (is?) considered a mistake!!!!!!! (excluding material intended for a film out, and even then, I heard of successful interlaced frames being blend to end up with 24FPS)
Don't pan to fast or you'll GET STROBING!!!!!!
The actual position of a subject (talent?) in the frame changes (or it should) change little when proper followed and framed. The BG usually is blurred (focus on the talent!) and what's left? A sharp character showing no strobing and a blurry BG strobing (if ever noticed)
There are LOTS of more important issues to consider getting a good looking image than the strobing. (Exposure time is indeed a bit “better” (1/48 instead of 1/60, but not relevant anymore; it used to matter more when one had to deal with lights set-up for a proper exposure on film. Now you can open the iris a bit or push the gain and ... problem solved. Motion blur is..... closer to film on 1/48 than 1/60 indeed, but that's only one tiny part of a good image)
Keeping the lights within the DR of the camcorder, nice framing and justified camera moves, GOOD STORY, SOUND, ACTING and EDITING,!!!!!!!!!! are far more important than shooting 24P... (imo).
Ed Kishel
Veteran
I agree, you can put a Panavision in the hands of fools and will get nothing but the most gorgeous crap ever seen. You put a thrift store 8mm camcorder into the hands of some talented individuals, and then you will get something worth watching.dan said:
The cam, the 24p, the DOF, the microphone, take your pick: none of them really mean anthing at the end of the day if you don't have anything interesting to show.
And re: the DVX users who shot 24p and you didn't notice any difference, well, it is a subjective thing. To most it fakes super8/16mm well, and then to others it looks like a film "poser"- they can tell it is still video.
setarcos
Well-known member
Cough, cough...Slight correction (if I may) :grin: ; while "other" contraptions either have a fixed spot (battled for) where one or another camcorder manage to "fill the screen" with (more or less) vigneting or without it, while managing to focus on the gg (with or without any achromatic CU lenses, most of the times WITHrpster88 said:
!) the MPIC allows a bit of a zoom-in or out and therefore a 50mm Nikkor could "pass" as a 70?-85?mm (if you zoom-in a bit the camcorder framing in tighter on the 24/36mm frame). :thumbup: The downsize would be the relative enlargement of the grain on the focusing screen (hardly visible anyway but still...at least in theory).But you know what? Don't take if from me. You (anyone reading this post) take a bc, draw two frames on the back ; one 18/24 and another one 24/36mm. Now get YOUR camcorder to FILL the LCD screen with that frame. Zoom-in-out, focus, get closer, anything goes. When you get there, replace the bc with a GG (regardless quality) and place an SLR lens in front of it. How's the picture? Please compare that image with one originating in an SLR film camera using the same lens. May all veterinarians (cough, cough) Veterans! excuse the simplistic approach presented. Test suggested for educational and entertainment purposes only. :engel017: