rsbush
Well-known member
A closer read will reveal that my argument is against strict realism as a defacto choice, just because it's possible.
GH5 Game Over, Panasonic
- Thread starter Jim Simon
- Start date
Thomas Smet
Veteran
The user experience designer in me will tell you it isn't always about what we think is best. We have to follow what the users want and the users tend to prefer the magic of 24p. People have tried 60p and it looks fake and cheap like anybody could have shot it. Cinema isn't always about realism but a pseudo realism and for whatever scientific reason 24p resonates with people to have a certain level of magic.
The scientific and logical brain would find 24p appalling but cinema is never really about that. Its not a mathematical calculation but an art form. Same reason why I would spend $1000 on a painted portrait vs a large printed photograph of the same subject. Sometimes its the non realistic that holds more value.
If Hollywood is worried about nobody spending money on movies anymore then switch to 60p and 120p and watch it crumble. Movies need to keep as much of the mysticism as possible or people just won't care anymore. It will be cheapened into oblivion and people will just treat it like a YouTube video and either expect it for free or $1.99.
The only people that truly hate 24p and the only ones even aware its a thing are those shooting video who never mastered the art of shooting at 24p so they lashed out against it. No movie attendee ever has said "the movie was great but I wish it were 60p". Only video producers who don't understand 24p hate it.
The scientific and logical brain would find 24p appalling but cinema is never really about that. Its not a mathematical calculation but an art form. Same reason why I would spend $1000 on a painted portrait vs a large printed photograph of the same subject. Sometimes its the non realistic that holds more value.
If Hollywood is worried about nobody spending money on movies anymore then switch to 60p and 120p and watch it crumble. Movies need to keep as much of the mysticism as possible or people just won't care anymore. It will be cheapened into oblivion and people will just treat it like a YouTube video and either expect it for free or $1.99.
The only people that truly hate 24p and the only ones even aware its a thing are those shooting video who never mastered the art of shooting at 24p so they lashed out against it. No movie attendee ever has said "the movie was great but I wish it were 60p". Only video producers who don't understand 24p hate it.
Matt Gottshalk
Resident Preditor
joe12south
Veteran
All those "hard" factors being true doesn't have that much to do with the retail price. R&D + costs and labor rarely do. Successful products are priced and sold at their perceived market value. Panasonic believed that they could get away with charging more by targeting a slightly different market. That's their prerogative, and I hope it's working out for them. But given that many GH5S users are also GH5 users, the need for two cameras made the price hike sting even more. I'm only a datapoint of one, but I've been shooting the GH-line since the GH3, and the price premium for the GH5S gave me pause long enough for a competitor to sneak in and steal me away. Only time will tell which one of us better represents the market's overall reaction.
John Brawley
Well-known member
The discussion was in the context of 10 bit pre-processed / compressed being "enough" when the image is well exposed.
I was illustrating the fallacy of this idea.
Moreover, encoded vs unencoded makes little difference in this scenario.
In the same way 8 bit is to 10 bit....10 bit is again to 12 bit.
Not everyone sees it this way, but for the work I do, (narrative drama) bit depth is the most important metric.
For me, I'll take bit depth over resolution any day.
JB
filmguy123
Veteran
ahh this thread.... 
I remember when it started, everyone was complaining about the inflammatory title, yet here we are, 1068 posts and 107 pages later, saying the same things over and over and keeping the thread title #1 and as perhaps one of the most active threads on the entire forum!
I remember when it started, everyone was complaining about the inflammatory title, yet here we are, 1068 posts and 107 pages later, saying the same things over and over and keeping the thread title #1 and as perhaps one of the most active threads on the entire forum!
I totally buy your argument. If one wants to shoot fiction then by all means use all available options to get the message across to the viewer. I have a problem when people shoot archives of an event or instructional videos in 24P because its artistic !! To me in both cases one needs to get as close to real as possible. Fastest frame rate and highest resolution as the intent is to place the viewer live to the event as if they were there.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
And yet some of the most beautiful and award winning wedding videos have been shot at 24p. The kind of wedding videos people now actually watch on a regular basis and get a lot of entertainment value out of. The same is true of marketing videos which have enjoyed a massive spike of significance as they have become more artistic in style. That may or may not be because of 24p but I think it’s fair to say 24p is not hurting those videos in any way shape or form.
Cary Knoop
Veteran
I can't believe that some people seem to think that artistic means setting the dial to 24p instead of 60p, or that someone who decides to use 60p is not artistic and ignorant!
What great artistry must one have, in some people's eyes, to operate an fps dial!
Why not put that dial on 24p (23.98 is only half artistic) and cut the aspect ratio to 21:9, surely that means one must be an master of artistry.
But needless to say that the True Artist does not stop at a measly 24p, the true artist must go back to the good old 18p, that leaves much more to the imagination, thus more magic!
Oh, and did I forget to mention that the Ultimate Artist would only shoot 18p with low resolution noisy film, obviously only in black and white, color is too realistic!
What great artistry must one have, in some people's eyes, to operate an fps dial!
Why not put that dial on 24p (23.98 is only half artistic) and cut the aspect ratio to 21:9, surely that means one must be an master of artistry.
But needless to say that the True Artist does not stop at a measly 24p, the true artist must go back to the good old 18p, that leaves much more to the imagination, thus more magic!
Oh, and did I forget to mention that the Ultimate Artist would only shoot 18p with low resolution noisy film, obviously only in black and white, color is too realistic!
Last edited:
Thomas Smet
Veteran
I can't believe that some people seem to think that artistic means setting the dial to 24p instead of 60p, or that someone who decides to use 60p is not artistic and ignorant!
What great artistry must one have, in some people's eyes, to operate an fps dial!
Why not put that dial on 24p (23.98 is only half artistic) and cut the aspect ratio to 21:9, surely that means one must be an master of artistry.
But needless to say that the True Artist does not stop at a measly 24p, the true artist must go back to the good old 18p, that leaves much more to the imagination, thus more magic!
Oh, and did I forget to mention that the Ultimate Artist would only shoot 18p with low resolution noisy film, obviously only in black and white, color is too realistic!
Calm down dude. None of us are saying only 24p is artistic. We are saying what it’s perceived in the industry by the creators and those viewing the art. While 24p on its own does not equal art it is the lack of realistic motion that lends itself to something a little outside of reality. We are more arguing against those that think 24p is a bad format.
joe12south
Veteran
It's certainly one part of turning a wedding "video" that no one wants to ever watch again except for the bride and maybe her mom into a wedding "film" that gets shared over and over. Of course there's a lot more to it than that, but it's one small part of making real, surreal. Someone cool and talented that I can't remember - probably French - compared cinema to a fever dream.
Very similar paradigm applies to concerts. You can shoot it like a sporting event, or you can shoot it like a movie. I know which I'd rather watch, and I know that's one of the reasons I get hired over much bigger crews with better gear.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
We create movies to invoke feelings. That’s their entire purpose really is to connect with people on an emotional level. 24p plays a part in those feelings because it creates a kind of felling or mood that 60p or (shudder) 120p could never create. You completely alter that felling and remove a part of the emotional response to the content.
Sure soap operas can evoke feelings as well but only for a small portion of the population that falls for that crap. It’s more the shock and awe of pathetic story telling people relate to in those hyper insane series. The last time I was emotionally connected to a character in 60i was on Seaseme Street and it was a puppet with a guys hand up its butt.
Anybody who thinks that 24p is just less frames and a flip of a dial clearly has no clue what the essence and majesty of shooting in 24p as an art form can actually mean. It is no wonder why those people question it if they think it’s just a dial switch. That’s like saying photos are like paintings without the mess.
Sure soap operas can evoke feelings as well but only for a small portion of the population that falls for that crap. It’s more the shock and awe of pathetic story telling people relate to in those hyper insane series. The last time I was emotionally connected to a character in 60i was on Seaseme Street and it was a puppet with a guys hand up its butt.
Anybody who thinks that 24p is just less frames and a flip of a dial clearly has no clue what the essence and majesty of shooting in 24p as an art form can actually mean. It is no wonder why those people question it if they think it’s just a dial switch. That’s like saying photos are like paintings without the mess.
NorBro
Major Contributor
People use to argue (shocking) about this a few years ago and post faux clips from past Hollywood movies on what they would/could look like at 60p. Obviously not exactly the same as the original content wasn't shot in 60p and they are using various post techniques to create the look, but it's pretty similar to what the real world results would/could look like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUV_7qXWzmQ
I'm probably the furthest thing from a "filmmaker", but I just cannot watch anything in 60p.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUV_7qXWzmQ
I'm probably the furthest thing from a "filmmaker", but I just cannot watch anything in 60p.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Another example is I hate football as a sport. Despise it really but I do enjoy watching movies like Rudy centered around football. For two hours I actually give a damn about a sport I typically hate. No amount of grotesque motion graphics attempting to slam me in the face about Monday Night Football is ever going to have the same effect on me. Yes there is a lot more to it then just the frame rate but the point is 24p didn’t hurt it at all and may have actually made it more enjoyable on an emotional level.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
There is also a vastly massive difference between shooting something as 24p and converting to 60p vs shooting in 60p in the first place. The approach and method to shooting at different frame rates is where the core of the difference is. Different tools invoke different styles and methods. The entire approach to how the scene plays out and the camera moves is very different. It isn’t just a frame rate for viewing but a style for shooting and capturing what plays out in front of the lens. It’s the process of taking a step back and creatively thinking of how to pull off a shot because it may not look as good at 24p if shot a certain way. 60p opens up too much laziness where not as much care is needed anymore to compose shots.
NorBro
Major Contributor
No one would ever shoot 24p/30p to convert it to 60p, ever. You only use higher framerates to overcrank, which could be going from 120p to 60p if that's what one likes, but they are still played back at the slower framerate.
The video above was to provide an example of 60p motion, which turned out to be very similar to as if they had originally shot it in 60p (minus the artifacts and/or any other blemishes).
The video above was to provide an example of 60p motion, which turned out to be very similar to as if they had originally shot it in 60p (minus the artifacts and/or any other blemishes).
I really dislike the look of 60p for narrative. One interesting approach is something I think James Cameron mentioned for the upcoming (shudder) Avatar movies: variable frame rates within the film. If I remember correctly, he wanted the dialogue and "normal" scenes to be 24p but when the action/camera movement demanded it, the frame rate would dynamically ramp to 48 or 60p. With film projection, this was impossible. But with modern digital projection, multiple frame rates within a single film are possible. Just as Cameron forced the exhibition industry to update to 3D with Avatar, I expect him to force dynamic frame rates with the release of his future films. Say what you will about him, he has always pushed the envelope of cinematic technology.
All the stuff I have done since shooting film in the 60's is to record an event and the goal every time was to make it appear live. I was delighted when I moved to video away from 18 or 24 fps so that I shot in 60i for a much smoother real look. Clearly counter to the goals of most of you. My aim was not to make a movie but to record a live event as close as possible to what one would have seen if one was there. I fully understand the effects of slower frame rates and grading to create the desired emotional effects. However the effect I want is to be there and at most looking through a clear window. I shoot UHD60P on both my GH5 and GH5S one not moving at all the other different framing but most of the time also not moving. Shutter is at 1/60 ( all my stuff is indoors ) so is a little motion blur so not starkly sharp. Mainly edit in a 60i project ( allows me to crop/pan/zoom into the UHD file ) and go to DVD or Bluray at 60i.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
oh please no. Just no.