8 ms·

This post was 2016. Six years later, this is no longer true, at least here in my area (Montréal). At my work in a post-production company, we finish around 8-10

This post was 2016. Six years later, this is no longer true, at least here in my area (Montréal). At my work in a post-production company, we finish around 8-10 long form fiction movies a year and a bigger number of shorts, and I would say around 90% of thoses projects are now shot 24.0 fps. All high-end cameras like the ones from Arri, RED and Sony can switch easily between 23.976 and 24.0 since many years. The sound recorders can now too, like the Sound Devices, which is the most common brand used (at least here in North America). The choice of shooting in 24.0 was already available in 2016, but not every gig would be used to shoot 24.0 so they chose 23.976 just to be safe, I guess. Also, in 2016 television was still a major deliverable, but this has changed. Video on demand, which supports any framerates, is now the main distribution channel when a movie has finished playing on the big screen. Documentaries are more of an exception because they are still aimed at television and also, they often use old footage which was telecine'd at 23.976 so it's easier to edit when everything's 23.976.

wodenokoto 4y ago
> The sound recorders can now too [record at 24 fps] What does that mean? I thought 44khz sampling meant 44.000 integers are recorded per second.
- spindle 4y ago
  I'm guessing, because I'm bored, and hopefully an expert will confirm or correct, but I think it means that they place sync markers every 24th of a second, to make syncing with video efficient.
- comprambler 4y ago
  Frame sync ability?
- pushrax 4y ago
  Production audio and video recorders generate or intake an SMPTE timecode signal, and stamp recordings with this timecode. This timecode format is a timestamp with seconds resolution plus a frame count within each second. To properly sync, all the timecode generators must use the same framerate. In other words, the audio recorder’s timecode framerate needs to match the camera.
  - lecoyote418 4y ago
    Yes, sound needs to be recorded with proper metadata, otherwise the sync process with the image is going to be pretty tedious. We could just record with a "dumb" audio recorder that doesn't write timecode and fps metadata and it would sync up by hand to any camera FPS (23.976, 24, 25, 29.97, etc). It's not just practical for any professional projects. The funny thing with timecode, which is hh:mm:ss:ff, is that the frame count is done at 24 frames, even at 23.976. So 1 frame of 23.976 is longer in actual "real time" duration than 1 frame at 24 fps. This can get confusing when going from and to 24/23.976. There are more sophisticated workflows where the audio is recorded at 48.048 kHz (0.1% faster sample rate) called audio pull-up (or pull-down). The technique is used when shooting, for example, a TV spot, with a film camera at 24 fps. Since the 24 fps picture will be played back at 23.976 at the edit, the audio will follow the same speed down because it will itself play at 48.000 kHz instead of 48.048 kHz. I'm not sure that many productions still shoots TV spots in film, though, contrary to fiction where film is still being used sometimes.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    But the timestamp is not recording actual seconds, right? Half the time it's recording intervals of .999 seconds. That is much weirder to handle than merely having the right framerate.
    - klodolph 4y ago
      The time code is always incrementing by one frame at the given frame rate. For any of the NTSC-derived framerates, there are then two ways of incrementing. You can increment as if the frame rate is integral--so after 30 frames at 29.97 fps, your timestamp will show that 1 second has passed. The other option is a "drop-frame" timecode, where you skip over certain numbers when incrementing. In all cases, the time code increments at the frame rate you are using.
- xani_ 4y ago
  It's 44100
garaetjjte 4y ago
>Video on demand, which supports any framerates I don't think so, majority of displays are still 60Hz without VRR.
- GekkePrutser 4y ago
  But the playback box handles the conversion. With TV there were stricter standards for broadcasts.
- connicpu 4y ago
  A lot of TV displays are now even 120Hz, which is convenient for being able to display 24fps, 30fps, and 60fps content without any conversion
- teawrecks 4y ago
  I think they mean the VOD service doesn't restrict the creator on what frame rates they can author their content in, the box just makes it work for whatever the display requires.
- bpye 4y ago
  Displays will often sync at lower frame rates than their maximum, though I guess I don’t know if they all do non integer factors.
thrdbndndn 4y ago
> Video on demand, which supports any framerates, is now the main distribution channel But all the major VOD services, be it Disney+, Netflix, Hulu,... still mainly use 23.976 or 29.97 fps for their video distributions. I don't know what your production company mainly works on, but these NTSC frame rates ares still the norm across the whole cinematic industry, and it's not going anywhere. It's not limited to documentaries at all. The YouTubers etc. do use 30/60 fps more often OTOH.
- anothermoron 4y ago
  Is that true ? 24fps is even specified in the Netflix requirements for content... https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/360000579527-Cameras-Image-Capture-Requirements-and-Best-Practices https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/360...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - thrdbndndn 4y ago
    This is not a guide for framerate. Netflix accepts multiple frame rates. This is a guide about data bitrate, what it says is that for 24fps, you need at least 240Mbps (means it needs more if it has higher frame rate). If anything, all the other language versions actually use "23.98" as example instead. E.g. this Deutsch version: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WLz0O_dwmVWjqHafaHoLav0qvHUD1133/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WLz0O_dwmVWjqHafaHoLav0qvHU... This guide https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/4415931246995-Dailies-Best-Practices https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/441... mentions more about frame rate but it's basically just "don't convert frame rate around, and use constant frame rate for intermediate file".
- lecoyote418 4y ago
  Good question. Last time I've submitted to Netflix, it was 24, but it goes through a third party "packaging" company before going to Netflix. So some of them might reconvert to 23.976 even when we submit 24 fps masters as per the contractual agreement. Maybe you are right. I will check. Low budget web series shot at 23.976 even get delivered and played back at 29.97i on some local platforms here in Canada (Crave, Noovo, tout.tv), so anything's possible nowadays. On the other end, Blurays can be encoded at both 23 and 24, and Vimeo, Youtube, etc all support 24fps. So 24 fps exists, not just on DCPs. By the way, the loss of quality from going to/from 23.976 and 24 is not much. I've never heard any artifacts from that kind of conversion. But since cinema theatres are most likely to have a better sound system that a home system, I think it makes more sense to have the unconverted mix playing in the cinema and not vice versa.
paulmooreparks 4y ago
To be fair, the first line of the response heavily qualifies the answer: "Truth is that most digital projects shot for either broadcast or cinema use 23.976 instead of 24 in the U.S."
dncornholio 4y ago
Why would anyone in 2022 still record in 24 fps? I assumed most, if not every, recording device is at least 60fps?
- mod50ack 4y ago
  Because 60fps and 24fps don't look alike and video shot at a very high frame rate can look off to an audience. Remember also that typically a 1/2 rule is followed where the exposure of each frame is half the time of its display. So for each of the 1/24s intervals, an exposure is made for 1/48s. A shorter exposure would have less motion blur but look jittery. A longer exposure would look too buttery. People are extremely used to 1/48s exposures displayed for 1/24s (or similar). 48fps video in the Hobbit movies was very negatively perceived. It looked too much like a video game.
  - _tom_ 4y ago
    24 FPS can look "off" to an audience, too. As someone who hates 24fps, because it looks way too jerky, and not lifelike, the sooner we lose 24FPS, the better.
    - nvarsj 4y ago
      You're in the minority, I think. The Hobbit was shot in 60fps and most people found it very uncomfortable to watch. It felt like you were watching a movie set rather than a movie. Suspension of disbelief is pretty important for cinema and 60fps really messes with that. I also think most jerkiness in 23.976/24 is due to incorrect display settings leading to dropped/skipped/repeated frames. If your display can match 23.976, even panning scenes look pretty smooth. It's the jitter that messes with our brains and looks bad.
      - maskros 4y ago
        I'm also in the 24fps hater camp. It's not jitter that bothers me, it's the stop motion effect. It's especially bad with action sequences that have a lot of closeup shots. This is basically every movie with any sort of action in the past decade or so. If you do closeup shots in on some fast action in 24fps you don't have to worry one bit about choreography, since it'll just be a choppy blurry mess and nobody can tell what's going on anyway.
ewwhite 4y ago
MELS?

wodenokoto 4y ago

> The sound recorders can now too [record at 24 fps] What does that mean? I thought 44khz sampling meant 44.000 integers are recorded per second.

spindle 4y ago
I'm guessing, because I'm bored, and hopefully an expert will confirm or correct, but I think it means that they place sync markers every 24th of a second, to make syncing with video efficient.
comprambler 4y ago
Frame sync ability?
pushrax 4y ago
Production audio and video recorders generate or intake an SMPTE timecode signal, and stamp recordings with this timecode. This timecode format is a timestamp with seconds resolution plus a frame count within each second. To properly sync, all the timecode generators must use the same framerate. In other words, the audio recorder’s timecode framerate needs to match the camera.
- lecoyote418 4y ago
  Yes, sound needs to be recorded with proper metadata, otherwise the sync process with the image is going to be pretty tedious. We could just record with a "dumb" audio recorder that doesn't write timecode and fps metadata and it would sync up by hand to any camera FPS (23.976, 24, 25, 29.97, etc). It's not just practical for any professional projects. The funny thing with timecode, which is hh:mm:ss:ff, is that the frame count is done at 24 frames, even at 23.976. So 1 frame of 23.976 is longer in actual "real time" duration than 1 frame at 24 fps. This can get confusing when going from and to 24/23.976. There are more sophisticated workflows where the audio is recorded at 48.048 kHz (0.1% faster sample rate) called audio pull-up (or pull-down). The technique is used when shooting, for example, a TV spot, with a film camera at 24 fps. Since the 24 fps picture will be played back at 23.976 at the edit, the audio will follow the same speed down because it will itself play at 48.000 kHz instead of 48.048 kHz. I'm not sure that many productions still shoots TV spots in film, though, contrary to fiction where film is still being used sometimes.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  But the timestamp is not recording actual seconds, right? Half the time it's recording intervals of .999 seconds. That is much weirder to handle than merely having the right framerate.
  - klodolph 4y ago
    The time code is always incrementing by one frame at the given frame rate. For any of the NTSC-derived framerates, there are then two ways of incrementing. You can increment as if the frame rate is integral--so after 30 frames at 29.97 fps, your timestamp will show that 1 second has passed. The other option is a "drop-frame" timecode, where you skip over certain numbers when incrementing. In all cases, the time code increments at the frame rate you are using.
xani_ 4y ago
It's 44100

garaetjjte 4y ago

>Video on demand, which supports any framerates I don't think so, majority of displays are still 60Hz without VRR.

GekkePrutser 4y ago
But the playback box handles the conversion. With TV there were stricter standards for broadcasts.
connicpu 4y ago
A lot of TV displays are now even 120Hz, which is convenient for being able to display 24fps, 30fps, and 60fps content without any conversion
teawrecks 4y ago
I think they mean the VOD service doesn't restrict the creator on what frame rates they can author their content in, the box just makes it work for whatever the display requires.
bpye 4y ago
Displays will often sync at lower frame rates than their maximum, though I guess I don’t know if they all do non integer factors.

thrdbndndn 4y ago

> Video on demand, which supports any framerates, is now the main distribution channel But all the major VOD services, be it Disney+, Netflix, Hulu,... still mainly use 23.976 or 29.97 fps for their video distributions. I don't know what your production company mainly works on, but these NTSC frame rates ares still the norm across the whole cinematic industry, and it's not going anywhere. It's not limited to documentaries at all. The YouTubers etc. do use 30/60 fps more often OTOH.

anothermoron 4y ago
Is that true ? 24fps is even specified in the Netflix requirements for content... https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/360000579527-Cameras-Image-Capture-Requirements-and-Best-Practices https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/360...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- thrdbndndn 4y ago
  This is not a guide for framerate. Netflix accepts multiple frame rates. This is a guide about data bitrate, what it says is that for 24fps, you need at least 240Mbps (means it needs more if it has higher frame rate). If anything, all the other language versions actually use "23.98" as example instead. E.g. this Deutsch version: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WLz0O_dwmVWjqHafaHoLav0qvHUD1133/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WLz0O_dwmVWjqHafaHoLav0qvHU... This guide https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/4415931246995-Dailies-Best-Practices https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/441... mentions more about frame rate but it's basically just "don't convert frame rate around, and use constant frame rate for intermediate file".
lecoyote418 4y ago
Good question. Last time I've submitted to Netflix, it was 24, but it goes through a third party "packaging" company before going to Netflix. So some of them might reconvert to 23.976 even when we submit 24 fps masters as per the contractual agreement. Maybe you are right. I will check. Low budget web series shot at 23.976 even get delivered and played back at 29.97i on some local platforms here in Canada (Crave, Noovo, tout.tv), so anything's possible nowadays. On the other end, Blurays can be encoded at both 23 and 24, and Vimeo, Youtube, etc all support 24fps. So 24 fps exists, not just on DCPs. By the way, the loss of quality from going to/from 23.976 and 24 is not much. I've never heard any artifacts from that kind of conversion. But since cinema theatres are most likely to have a better sound system that a home system, I think it makes more sense to have the unconverted mix playing in the cinema and not vice versa.

paulmooreparks 4y ago

To be fair, the first line of the response heavily qualifies the answer: "Truth is that most digital projects shot for either broadcast or cinema use 23.976 instead of 24 in the U.S."

dncornholio 4y ago

Why would anyone in 2022 still record in 24 fps? I assumed most, if not every, recording device is at least 60fps?

mod50ack 4y ago
Because 60fps and 24fps don't look alike and video shot at a very high frame rate can look off to an audience. Remember also that typically a 1/2 rule is followed where the exposure of each frame is half the time of its display. So for each of the 1/24s intervals, an exposure is made for 1/48s. A shorter exposure would have less motion blur but look jittery. A longer exposure would look too buttery. People are extremely used to 1/48s exposures displayed for 1/24s (or similar). 48fps video in the Hobbit movies was very negatively perceived. It looked too much like a video game.
- _tom_ 4y ago
  24 FPS can look "off" to an audience, too. As someone who hates 24fps, because it looks way too jerky, and not lifelike, the sooner we lose 24FPS, the better.
  - nvarsj 4y ago
    You're in the minority, I think. The Hobbit was shot in 60fps and most people found it very uncomfortable to watch. It felt like you were watching a movie set rather than a movie. Suspension of disbelief is pretty important for cinema and 60fps really messes with that. I also think most jerkiness in 23.976/24 is due to incorrect display settings leading to dropped/skipped/repeated frames. If your display can match 23.976, even panning scenes look pretty smooth. It's the jitter that messes with our brains and looks bad.
    - maskros 4y ago
      I'm also in the 24fps hater camp. It's not jitter that bothers me, it's the stop motion effect. It's especially bad with action sequences that have a lot of closeup shots. This is basically every movie with any sort of action in the past decade or so. If you do closeup shots in on some fast action in 24fps you don't have to worry one bit about choreography, since it'll just be a choppy blurry mess and nobody can tell what's going on anyway.

ewwhite 4y ago

MELS?