PAL RULES- OK

C

Cecil_Beta

Active member
Did I get your attention, well with the caveat PAL rules OK for video to film.

In Scott Billups’ great book “Digital Moviemaking - A butt-kicking, pixel twisting vision of the digital future and how to make your nex movie on your credit card” he states the following info.

‘The PAL frame rate is 20% more efficient than NTSC for video for film.’

‘PAL has 11% more vertical resolution than NTSC.’

Number one of Scott's top 10 technical considerations is:
‘If you’re serious about shooting in digital video then up-converting to film give serious consideration to building a PAL system. Computers and software don’t care. Basically any format in PAL will out-perform the same format in NTSC in both resolution and color-space. There is simply 30% more data going to each frame at the film printer from images originating from in PAL.’
There you have it from the man. Great read.
His web site is http://www.pixelmonger.com/
Just thought I would stir the possum.

Cecil beta from PAL - LAND ;D
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

;)Just every second production, scharky. Just kidding.
As I said I am stirring the possom or O'possum in your case. (Aust. slang: to be controversial)
Joking aside, "Digital Moviemaking" is recommended reading for anyone intending shooting digital (any format) and ending on film.
My intention is to make a short short film with my baby DVX and end on film.
Cecil Beta
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

You're all over it on the vertical resolution . . .

But as for efficiency for film-out? PAL is surpassed by 24p, an option the PAL DVX doesn't have.
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

There's not a whole lot of difference, but he was talking about "efficiency" for filmout. 24p is more efficient than 25p, because you still have to do something about/with that extra frame.
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

you dont , you have to do something whith the sound pitch.
no one see slow down by 4 % and if we are talking film its quet depends what cinema you are going , in israel the last show runs between 25-26 fps (depends how the screanning person horry to go home :-)
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

The rule is simple: if you're in PAL country, get the PAL camera. Marcus at DVFilm recommends using the PAL camera for film transfers, because the speedup in audio is compensated for fairly easily, and the 96 extra lines of vertical resolution do help. But if you're in an NTSC country, you can transfer to film with a straight 24P frame rate, no audio issues... PLUS you can actually use your camera for purposes other than transferring to film!

In NTSC territory, go NTSC. In PAL territory, go PAL.
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

Wise advise (as usual :D).
I think that only in rare circumstances someone will use the DVX for output to film ONLY. You'll have other projects that will be video/DVD in your home country and then you're REALLY bummed.
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

Well, that wasn't the point. The guy who started the post made the blanket statement that PAL "rules" for video-to-film projects, and while he's correct that PAL has slightly better resolution, he's not correct that it's more "efficient" than 24p.

His post seems to say that even if you live in NTSC land, if you have a film project in mind, you should shoot in PAL.

And, well, I don't agree.
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

Efficiency depends on what you're doing to your footage, and if you have a lot of post-production work, including compositing and/or CG, 24p can be a real hassle. You have to deal with 3:2 and that is just not fun. PAL gives you a series of clean, individual frames you can work on without having to put them through the blender of putting 3:2 in, taking it out, putting it in, etc etc etc.

I do commercials in the U.S. and I go absolutely nuts dealing with pulldown, since we have to put 3:2 in the footage even if it's shot on 35mm. (at least if we want to shoot at 24 frames and not 30)

Now, I'm not sure this is accurate but I heard someone saying Final Cut can bring the footage in as real 24p frames, in which case you've just wasted one minute reading my post. :)
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

Let me qualify that -- Premiere Pro, Vegas, Blade, and FCP all claim that they can do it. Of the bunch, I never hear complaints about the way Vegas does it, the process is truly transparent. There's lots of complaining and questioning from the Premiere and FCP group though... I see posts everywhere asking "why didn't it work?"

If using Vegas, editing in 24P, doing rotoscoping etc., is absolutely transparent, and the easiest thing in the world. Hopefully the other editors will address whatever difficulties there are, and get that smooth of a workflow with 24P material.
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

Well, fair enough . . . the others can do it IN THEORY.

But being a Vegas user, I guess I just assumed good things, 'coz life is good for me!

;)
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

Here in Australia (as would be in any PAL country) a lot of film acquired material for television is shot at 25 FPS for telecine to match the PAL rate. Whereas film acquired material for theatrical release is shot at 24FPS.

OK, what happens when we PAL viewers watch a theatrical released film on video, DVD or TV. Well the 24FPS film is telecined at 25FPS. So all American blockbusters will run 4% quicker (which can be a blessing in disguise).

So to transfer to film from PAL 25P you simply slow it down by 1 frame per sec. It is not noticeable. If you want you can play with the pitch of the dialogue to accommodate the frequency change.

As Scott Billups says in his Book “Digital Filmmaking” (he is American from NTSC land I do believe), he has been using PAL for motion picture applications for years and no one has mentioned the extra frame. And he goes on to say ‘ There is no such thing as perfect sync, not in film, not in video, not in life.’ “SHOCK HORROR” - my words

Like I said I recommend his book to any one intending on finishing on film from video acquisition from NTSC or PAL

I didn’t realise how much this would stir the possum.

Cecil Beta
:-[
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

A 4% difference that you don't have if you shoot in 24p.

This isn't a stubborn NTSC v. PAL rivalry.  This isn't an "America rules!" position, for heaven's sake.  This is saying that PAL isn't necessarily your best choice for film out anymore, now that there's true 24p.

As for the Billups book, his first edition was published before the DVX and the affordable availability of 24p.  He's all gung-ho for the DVX in his second edition, but even THEN it was written before the anamorphic adapter was available, so there wasn't much to go on at the time.

A follow up as to how he feels about PAL v. 24p NOW after almost two years of the DVX would be interesting. And, well, he's just one guy with one opinion besides.

Never heard the phrase "stir the possum."  "Stir the pot," yes.  Are you referring to Roadkill Stew?

;)
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

Nice one Cecil! You really did stir the possum! ;D
Once again I am now going to have to go out the back and grab my pet kola-bear jump on my best ridding Kangaroo and start throwing boomerangs! :P
In terms of frame rate there is no real difference between 25p and 24p.... But we do have beter resolution, color, and we can shoot 25p for a film project and very easily (no 3:2 as has already been said) go to video 50i.

There is no argument our video system just like our roadkill pie (i don't really like the stew) kicks ass! ;)
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

Except, of course, that there is a difference . . .

I mean, "all you have to do is" isn't the same as "it already is." Period. ;D
 
Re: PAL RULES- OK

you don't have to do anything. As Oleg said the frame rate that your film is played back at at the cinema will probably vary by that much anyway.

Sorry PAL rules and Australia is going to take over the world! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top