ah yes good point.. missed that..
FS5: Merits of Filming a wedding in 60p, shutter speed of 1/60 ?
- Thread starter Budgieboots
- Start date
ah yes good point.. missed that..
Yes then there was the weird thing that the Varicam 720p wasn't considered broadcast standard .. but the HDX900 in camera up res to 1080 was ok.. I knew alot of Varicam owners that were driven nuts by that ..
Run&Gun
Veteran
Never heard that. My tape Vari worked CONSTANTLY from the day I bought it until about 12-18 months after I bought my first P2 Vari(that could up-rez like the HDX). Then they became my workhorses, but I rarely used(use) them in 1080. Probabaly a max of 10 times since I got the first one in '11(?). Actually, my biggest client(a network) wouldn't accept the HDX-900 early on. They wanted all VariCam, but finally relented after several shooters didn't want to spend the money on the more expensive Vari and talked them into accepting it.
Of course, I'm talking about here in the US.
I was in th UK then.. but presumed it was all over.. quite a bit on the inter web back then.. 720p was turned down was t wasn't 1080.. but the HDX900 (I had one) was on the OK list .. because it did up up res in camera to 1080.. but recorded 720p.. so there was no logic in the Varicam being turned down..
Heres one thread I just found from 2010.. its from the US actually.. it refers to one production company but one poster says he has had the same from others
http://ls.cinematography.net/read/messages?id=169657
http://ls.cinematography.net/read/messages?id=169657
Run&Gun
Veteran
Scanned through the first few posts. HDNET was all 1080 in the beginning, if memory serves me, so if a nets specs are 1080 acquisition then not accepting 720 makes sense, but just saying that 720 wasn't accepted for broadcast in and of itself is just incorrect, at least here in the states. But Art Adams post is incorrect(sort of). The VariCam, as a camera was(is) 1280x720. The codec DVCPro HD was(is) 960x720, much like what was recorded on HDCAM tape was not 1920x1080, it was 1440x1080. Depending on who you talk to, the vertical resolution(720 or 1080) is the really important number, much more-so that the horizontal rez, anyway. Kind of ironic that now the horizontal resolution is the one that everyone identifies now(2k, 4K, 8K, etc.), most likely because it's the more impressive sounding number since it's larger.
Run&Gun
Veteran
Oh I totally get what you're saying. It goes back to what I said earlier, "It all depends on the world you live in". I think it's kind of like some of the discussions that have been going on recently about resolution "trumping" other (more) important aspects of cameras. The HDX was/is like the two original Vari's in that it has native 720P chips(there was a 1080 only P2 Vari, but no one bought it), but it would do an internal up-convert to 1080, BUT the recording, even though it was DVCPro HD, was inferior to the VariCam because of the compression scheme it used, because the smaller tapes that the HDX-900 used ran at a much slower speed than the larger tapes that the Vari used.
I'd like to be able to say were talking about "ancient history", but the HDX-900 is still in fairly widespread use, even today. I'll be shooting with my P2 Vari(720P) three out of four days next week and I had a specific request for my tape Vari from a net a little under a year ago. Hell, I didn't "officially" retire my Betacam until 2012(ish)!!! And I wish I was kidding about that.
Very helpful post.
What I get out of this is that I can shoot @ 30 fps at 1/30 shutter speed, and gain an additional stop of light (coming from 1/60) with no appreciable increase in motion blur unless the subject is moving around excessively. If I am not interested in slow motion, then this would appear to be a good setting for low-light situations. For some reason, I've been brainwashed into the idea of the shutter speed being double the frame rate.
What I get out of this is that I can shoot @ 30 fps at 1/30 shutter speed, and gain an additional stop of light (coming from 1/60) with no appreciable increase in motion blur unless the subject is moving around excessively. If I am not interested in slow motion, then this would appear to be a good setting for low-light situations. For some reason, I've been brainwashed into the idea of the shutter speed being double the frame rate.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
Of course there will be appreciable motion blur at 1/30. Even someone talking with their hands during an interview at 1/30 is going to look excessively blurry. Just pause on a frame in post and have a look.
Last edited:
liondor1969
Well-known member
And I am filming in the low light , I prefer to shoot with 25P and 1/25.. fs5 is not so good too low light,at wedding..ok increse motion blur but is ok
Liam Hall
Veteran
No. No. And no again. You'll gain an additional stop but it will look like s*%t. Fine if it's the news, but not fine for anything else.
Some of the replies in this thread are just plain wrong. I'm not sure everyone here fully grasped what the OP was asking.
I have to say that I've always shot double the frame rate. It has always been a set it and forget it setting for me. But now that I'm trying to shoot in S-LOG, I was open to the idea of lowering the shutter speed for additional light.
From the video sample in this thread, it looks pretty good at 60 fps @ 1/60th.
But when you drop down to 30 fps @ 1/30th, I am assuming it must be too much blur, but not too much at 60 fps @ 1/60th?
At 30 fps, do you see any harm in coming down to 1/50 or 1/40th or is that too much too? I was reading on another thread about Shane Hurlbut shooting 30 @ 1/40-50ish.
Like I said, I've always shot double the frame and never messed with it, so that's why it so interesting to see 60 fps @ 1/60th looking so good.
I'm just trying to figure out what works best and realize I need to get out tonight and shoot some test footage.
I appreciate your feedback.
From the video sample in this thread, it looks pretty good at 60 fps @ 1/60th.
But when you drop down to 30 fps @ 1/30th, I am assuming it must be too much blur, but not too much at 60 fps @ 1/60th?
At 30 fps, do you see any harm in coming down to 1/50 or 1/40th or is that too much too? I was reading on another thread about Shane Hurlbut shooting 30 @ 1/40-50ish.
Like I said, I've always shot double the frame and never messed with it, so that's why it so interesting to see 60 fps @ 1/60th looking so good.
I'm just trying to figure out what works best and realize I need to get out tonight and shoot some test footage.
I appreciate your feedback.
One other thing to look out for is flicker off some practical lights when you start playing with your shutter.. esp Florries /sodium etc.. hence the 1/50th for 50Hz areas and 1/60th for 60Hz.. e.g. if Im shooting 25p in a 60hz country like the US.. I will change my shutter to 1/60th .. from 1/50th.. no one would ever know the difference between the two.. in a controlled studio environment not really a worry of course.. but doc, corp shoots.. on the street at night.. in offices etc.. TV screens.. you will get flicker at some shutter speeds/angles .. and not others..
With all this disagreement the answer is obviously to shoot some tests , its certainly easy enough. Whether its annoying will depend on the nature of what you're shooting, how much motion is in the shot, your personal taste, what it cuts with and even how large a screen it will be shown on. Generally I prefer it to noise but in some cases it would stand out. As far as it looking like sh%t - well no one has ever said a word to me and I've done it often.
Liam Hall
Veteran
On your FS7??
I get horrendous looking footage captured on my FS7 using a 360 degree shutter. It was fine in the days of interlaced cameras to drag the shutter but on a camera with a progressive scan CMOS sensor and a rolling shutter any motion looks awful (to my eye) at 360 degrees. I agree there are times when the trade off between noise and weird motion become a thing, but ISO2000 and a fast lens normally see to that.
Quite the variety of responses... Though going back to the OP question, I'd venture a guess that for most people, watching footage shot at 60p (at 1/60th of a second, or 360 degree shutter) and played back - normal speed by dropping every other frame - at 30p (which because the shutter was at 1/60th basically means 180 degrees) will look totally fine.
The question then is how does it look when slowed down to 2x slow-mo? - or will the 1/60th shutter look too smeary? My guess is that unless you're looking for extreme crispness in the slo-mo, people will accept it just fine. Just don't shoot carbonation or corn flakes that way.
The other question is whether you want to use that much more data (particularly in I-Frame) -- but that's an entirely different question.
While so many have related their frame rate stories, I'll just add that in shooting for clients who ask to keep the frame rate consistent with whatever they've been doing, I currently get about a 45% / 45% split between 30p and 24p. The last 10% are still wanting 60i. At the same time, the current split is about 75% for 1080, and 25% for UHD/4K. Almost no 60p shoots - except for some 7-camera VR rig stuff.
very little variation in shutter - typically 180 degrees, though often changed abit for clearscan/flicker elimination. Strangely enough one company I shoot for always seems to want the footage with their F3 to be at 24p / 360 shutter! I think it's too smeary, but they want it like that.
I also have clients who don't want to accept anything with a 'flash band' -- so global shutters are a must for them.
I remember talking to Doug Trumbull many years ago - and he wanted 60fps film back then as well.
As others have said, if you''re shooting for yourself do a test, or if you're shooting for clients make them happy.
The question then is how does it look when slowed down to 2x slow-mo? - or will the 1/60th shutter look too smeary? My guess is that unless you're looking for extreme crispness in the slo-mo, people will accept it just fine. Just don't shoot carbonation or corn flakes that way.
The other question is whether you want to use that much more data (particularly in I-Frame) -- but that's an entirely different question.
While so many have related their frame rate stories, I'll just add that in shooting for clients who ask to keep the frame rate consistent with whatever they've been doing, I currently get about a 45% / 45% split between 30p and 24p. The last 10% are still wanting 60i. At the same time, the current split is about 75% for 1080, and 25% for UHD/4K. Almost no 60p shoots - except for some 7-camera VR rig stuff.
very little variation in shutter - typically 180 degrees, though often changed abit for clearscan/flicker elimination. Strangely enough one company I shoot for always seems to want the footage with their F3 to be at 24p / 360 shutter! I think it's too smeary, but they want it like that.
I also have clients who don't want to accept anything with a 'flash band' -- so global shutters are a must for them.
I remember talking to Doug Trumbull many years ago - and he wanted 60fps film back then as well.
As others have said, if you''re shooting for yourself do a test, or if you're shooting for clients make them happy.
Last edited:
Liam,
Well to be honest I shot my tests long ago with cameras that had less resolution, and haven't used it on any thing with lots of motion in some time.
Its always great for an audience shot at a concert or similar event but that doesn't create blur and I sometimes use it just for an insert shot to get a little more DOF, but again, no motion. So you have convinced me to run some new tests with the FS7. Will report later.
BTW, my clients are also all over the map re frame rate and HD or UHD. No one has ever asked men for a shutter angle though.
Well to be honest I shot my tests long ago with cameras that had less resolution, and haven't used it on any thing with lots of motion in some time.
Its always great for an audience shot at a concert or similar event but that doesn't create blur and I sometimes use it just for an insert shot to get a little more DOF, but again, no motion. So you have convinced me to run some new tests with the FS7. Will report later.
BTW, my clients are also all over the map re frame rate and HD or UHD. No one has ever asked men for a shutter angle though.
Liam Hall
Veteran
Great Lenny. If I get time later I'll post a couple of shots that illustrate what I'm talking about. I've got a great shot of some dolphins somewhere that I completely screwed up due to shooting at the wrong shutter speed.
I often shorten the shutter on slow-mo for added punch. Works well with fast action, water, food... ...most things
