What's the shutter speed logic nowadays?

Chris Johnston

Chris Johnston

Veteran
I always have heard and abided by the "shutter speed twice the framerate" rule. Just because everyone said so and I was just to bizzy (or lazy) to test it out myself.

but now I see lots of people with the FS100 shooting at high shutter speeds alot. (and not just for slowmo or SFX type stuff)
Basicly just to get exposure right. (I guess)

What the prevailing logic now?
I imagine (without testing) that if you shoot at 60 shutter at 30 fps you're gonna get a little bit of motion blur on some fast stuff (just like you should if you're shooting film)
but if you pop it up to 120 I would imagine that blur is now gone and if you go to 500 (or whatever) it's not gonna look any different that 120. True?

So If you're not concerned with motion blur is there any reason NOT to use shutter speed for exposure control?
 
When you shoot at high FPS - ive done it on my 5d before I got any ND people get a painful robotic motion

It both looks dumb and hurts the eyes of the viewer

With the FS100 which im having some difficulty NDing nicely I have been considering a 100 shutter (at 25p) just to cut the light a little

best to test and decide for yourself?

S
 
I like running my shutter at least 180 if im shooting 60p, 96 if im shooting 24p. I tend to always shoot a little higher and ive shot 1000+ before too and barely noticed a difference...
 
You don't use shutter to set exposure. You use NDs and aperture along with lighting control. Not ISO and shutter speed. DSLRs have given way to bad practices for a lot of people.
 
William_Robinette said:
You don't use shutter to set exposure. You use NDs and aperture along with lighting control. Not ISO and shutter speed. DSLRs have given way to bad practices for a lot of people.
Click to expand...

im going to disagree with this. I'm sure you're dealing with a much more professional setting with expected standards. I tend to adjust between 48 and 250 at 24p to dial in the right iso and aperture. Sure, if its a sunny day ill set my aperture, set my shutter then adjust with an ND but for any kind of variable light situation, small adjustments in shutter can work nicely. obviously if you're shooting in a studio, you do your exposure once and you're done but with what i do (action sports) the light changes constantly.

Edit note: I don't like setting my variable ND higher than i need to, i find the less i use the ND the better the IQ so id rather keep my vari-nd at say 3 or 4 stops and then bring up my shutter speed or aperture then max out my ND.
 
William_Robinette said:
You don't use shutter to set exposure. You use NDs and aperture along with lighting control. Not ISO and shutter speed. DSLRs have given way to bad practices for a lot of people.
Click to expand...

i dont think there are any rules - one has to balance the tools you have - too small aperture = diffraction softness and unwanted DOF

too much nd can cause reflection colour shift issues

and of course you use ISO :)

SamMM
 
I shoot mostly at 1/2500, when I was shooting at 1/150 I noticed a lot of blur, turning it up to 2500 saw perfect motion (I shoot very high speed stuff)
 
Running the standard 1/60 shutter with 30P, but I noticed that when I do a pan a little fast (in this case, of people standing in line), the image blurs enough that it is unusuable, so maybe a higher shutter speed will allow the faster pans to stay in focus.
 
Last edited:
I use 48/50 when shooting 24p, and 125 when shooting for slo mo. I think it's a gamble to ride the shutter too much. I did it once recently when shooting slo mo (since I thought I wanted to use twixtor to slow it down even more) and I got a flicker from the HMI that the refresh rates on the monitor could not display.

If you're riding your shutter to 1000, why not just stack another ND!?
 
William_Robinette said:
You don't use shutter to set exposure. You use NDs and aperture along with lighting control. Not ISO and shutter speed. DSLRs have given way to bad practices for a lot of people.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, I don't use shutter to set exposure. I use apeture and ND and lights. (although I have absolutely no problem bumping the gain up to 9 on this cam when needed)
but my question was.....
So If you're not concerned with motion blur is there any reason NOT to use shutter speed for exposure control?
(i.e., I'm looking for the reason you would consider this "bad practice"........What's the downside?)
 
You can do whatever you want. The rules have completely changed today. If it looks good to you, then do it.

The main reason I never did is because of what someone said to you in one reply..you get a weird look to the footage with a high shutter speed (you can probably get away with it up to 100)...but after that it starts to look robotic, almost studdery if that makes any sense.
 
24p 1/48, 60p 1/125 strictly, unless you're going for a look. Using your shutter speed to adjust exposure is just plain lazy and poor practice. Nothing stands out more than when someone uses shutter speed to control exposure, ugly. That immediately draws me out of what I am watching, so distracting. Invest in a good set of ND's, they'll go far.
 
robmneilson said:
If you're riding your shutter to 1000, why not just stack another ND!?
Click to expand...

Because it's not about making it darker, it's about motion. I have shot stuff at 1000 and it's been blurry, different situations call for different ways, I know other shoots who do the same stuff as me that also shoot 1/2500...
 
I think that throughout the history of motion pictures, this shutter angle / speed concept evolved. The now 'accepted' shutter angle /speed of 1/2 the time the fps produces a motion blur that gives about the same motion blur that our eyes perceive with a moving object in real life. That's what it's all about. Remember that film, and now video, is an illusion, and the shutter speed evolved as the best imitation of reality. However, if you like the 'Private Ryan' look (look at the film 'Saving Private Ryan' during the initial beach battle scene) in which Spielberg made a creative decision to use a very fast shutter speed to create a choppy effect to create a sense of chaos and brittleness, that's valid too. But it 's not because he didn't have enough NDs, it was a creative decision to create a mood.

Sometimes, out of necessity, in really low light, I'll increase the shutter time to 'no shutter.' I know this will make moving objects even blurrier, but I accept that. Some DPs use 360 degree shutter all the time. It's their style. If I didn't have NDs and I was in a pinch, I might increase the shutter speed, and then if I needed to, apply Revision Effects Blur to it to get the 180 degree shutter look. Sometimes, if I know I'm going to stabilized the footage in post, I'll purposely use an insanely high shutter speed, but after I stabilize it I might add some motion blur back in.

But basically, whether in camera or in post, if you want it to look 'normal reality' the 180 degree shutter is the accepted and time proven setting.
 
kmoreau893 said:
I think that throughout the history of motion pictures, this shutter angle / speed concept evolved. The now 'accepted' shutter angle /speed of 1/2 the time the fps produces a motion blur that gives about the same motion blur that our eyes perceive with a moving object in real life. That's what it's all about. Remember that film, and now video, is an illusion, and the shutter speed evolved as the best imitation of reality. However, if you like the 'Private Ryan' look (look at the film 'Saving Private Ryan' during the initial beach battle scene) in which Spielberg made a creative decision to use a very fast shutter speed to create a choppy effect to create a sense of chaos and brittleness, that's valid too. But it 's not because he didn't have enough NDs, it was a creative decision to create a mood.

Sometimes, out of necessity, in really low light, I'll increase the shutter time to 'no shutter.' I know this will make moving objects even blurrier, but I accept that. Some DPs use 360 degree shutter all the time. It's their style. If I didn't have NDs and I was in a pinch, I might increase the shutter speed, and then if I needed to, apply Revision Effects Blur to it to get the 180 degree shutter look. Sometimes, if I know I'm going to stabilized the footage in post, I'll purposely use an insanely high shutter speed, but after I stabilize it I might add some motion blur back in.

But basically, whether in camera or in post, if you want it to look 'normal reality' the 180 degree shutter is the accepted and time proven setting.
Click to expand...

this is great for narrative work, but any kind of action, especially action sports, you still get a blur with 1/250, 1/350, which is why i use that because 1/125 60p is way too blury for me. about 4 years ago when i first got into ski filming i used to shoot 1/1000 and 1/2000 shutter. why? im not sure, i didnt really know what i was doing, but my image looked fine to me. Now, i enjoy a tiny bit of blur created from 1/180 or 1/250 but 1/125 is too blurry for my taste. it really all depends on what you like. Sure there are standards for professionals, but not all of us (like me) are under that kind of reign.
 
Its a little bit more than "the accepted standard". It is a huge par of what makes a "film look". the 180 degree shutter at 24fps is what gives you that film look. There are times when you should break that rule.. but you have to understand why, and when to do it.
 
Use shutter speed as a means of look/style opposed to exposure. Most of the time I used 1/60th for anything at 30p or 1/48th for 24p. For action oriented footage I will typically double that or more, depending on how much "staccato" I'm looking for.

Say you're shooting an action sequence of two guys fighting that you want to hide the fact they're not really hitting each other; I would kick up my shutter and move the camera rapidly to give a tense "feel." I wouldn't adjust because I was overexposed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top