Author Topic: Is 24fps the most universal frame rate? (Read 7043 times)

dragonblade · « **on:** May 01, 2019, 11:10 »

For quite a while, I was wondering which frame rate was the most compatible with different international buyers' needs. Sometime back, I read that it's easier to convert 25fps to 30fps than the other way around. Plus I live in a PAL country. So it made sense to me to shoot stock footage at 25fps. And that's what Ive been doing so far until now.

However, recently an American video guy who works with stock footage a lot essentially tells me that what I read is wrong. According to him, it's a real nuisance when he gets hold of 25fps footage because it's hard to convert it to 30fps with acceptable results. Though I'm not too keen on adopting 30fps because I would also like to cater to all the PAL countries out there which outnumber the NTSC countries by a fair margin.

Ive read elsewhere that the cinema standard 24fps can be converted just as easily to 25fps and 30fps. Would everyone agree that this is true? If that's the case, I might shoot my stock footage at 24fps from now on.

georgep7 · « **Reply #1 on:** May 01, 2019, 12:03 »

Perhaps there is no right or wrong but more or less relevant to what one want to achieve in a video. Here some more info:

https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/guide-frame-rates

qunamax · « **Reply #2 on:** May 01, 2019, 12:07 »

I know nothing about it, but I thought that PAL and NTSC were things of the past, that now you shoot fps that's best suited for the genre of video your are recording and the look you are after.
I guess everyone is now after that film look so 24fps makes sense.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #3 on:** May 01, 2019, 12:09 »

Quote from: dragonblade on May 01, 2019, 11:10

However, recently an American video guy who works with stock footage a lot essentially tells me that what I read is wrong. According to him, it's a real nuisance when gets hold of 25fps footage because it's hard to convert it to 30fps with acceptable results.

Why would it be hard? It seems to me that's just as easy (or hard) as converting from 24fps to 30fps.

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #4 on:** May 01, 2019, 12:34 »

Quote from: dragonblade on May 01, 2019, 11:10

Ive read elsewhere that the cinema standard 24fps can be converted just as easily to 25fps and 30fps. Would everyone agree that this is true? If that's the case, I might shoot my stock footage at 24fps from now on.

24p (or often 23.976p) is just sped up 4% (not CONVERTED) for the European market (yes, even Netflix, although they don't have to). 24p is converted to 30p (or 60i) if needed. If you have a European Netflix account the pitch of voices is slightly higher than the original, and the movies are shorter.

Pretty much every TV show (like Game of Thrones) you see on TV is filmed at 23.976p these days, and 24p for theatrical movies.

But in the end, I find that for stock footage without sound, it doesn't really matter much. Check the bestsellers and you see a mix of everything. If there is no sound, just speeding up or down footage (not converting) is very simple.

For slow motion and time lapse it absolutely doesn't matter at all since it's not real-time footage anyway.

You can film at 30p and upload 24p (nice 80% slow motion) , or 25p, or 30p. Or film at 25p and upload 24p. Since there is almost never on-site audio synced with stock footage, it shouldn't be much of an issue.

Not Today · « **Reply #5 on:** May 01, 2019, 13:06 »

You can get artifacts and judder if you drop a 25 fps footage onto a 30 fps timeline. If it happens, then you need to convert the footage with another software first.

Minor issue but can be irritating and time consuming.

georgep7 · « **Reply #6 on:** May 01, 2019, 13:09 »

Guess IncreasingDifficulty answer covers the best the question for the output files we upload, but according to the original post:

Quote

I might shoot my stock footage at 24fps from now on.

perhaps we mislead with our answers.

Shooting in various frame rates do serve miscelaneous needs depending the clip. Shooting e.g. in 240 vs just 24fps gives incredibly better slow motion clips.

dragonblade · « **Reply #7 on:** May 01, 2019, 23:33 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on May 01, 2019, 12:09

Why would it be hard? It seems to me that's just as easy (or hard) as converting from 24fps to 30fps.

Previously, I was under the same impression. After all, 24fps is very close to 25fps. However, this guy claims that there is some visible blur after the conversion.

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on May 01, 2019, 12:34

Pretty much every TV show (like Game of Thrones) you see on TV is filmed at 23.976p these days, and 24p for theatrical movies.

Yes very good points. Ive also heard the HBO shows are shot at 24p too. And for years, the top US TV shows like Law & Order, NYPD Blue, Ally McBeal, Prison Break, Scrubs etc were shot on film at 24fps. And the same case for theatrical movies over many decades (since the introduction of sound films during the 1920s.) So it's no surprise that for a long time, they've had a good established system in place for converting 24fps to 29.97fps.

And as you say, going from 24fps to 25fps just requires a slight increase in speed.

Yea using 24fps for stock seems like a no brainer.

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #8 on:** May 02, 2019, 02:40 »

Quote from: dragonblade on May 01, 2019, 23:33

Previously, I was under the same impression. After all, 24fps is very close to 25fps. However, this guy claims that there is some visible blur after the conversion.

There is a very big difference between just speeding up and actually CONVERTING the footage to another frame rate while maintaining the speed of the motion. Two completely different things. CONVERTING 24p to 25p will not look too good, which is why it is usually just SPED UP 4%.

On the other hand, for NTSC broadcast, 24p footage is actually CONVERTED, not sped up. This is called a 3:2 pull down and you can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-two_pull_down

The motion speed is maintained, but of course 6 frames have to be added every second. It has been done this way for a very long time, and people are used to that. Of course, with digital monitors, this isn't necessary.

---

In the digital world, the frame rate is just a line of text in the video file. Nothing more. Just something that tells the player how fast to flip through the image sequence. After all, footage of course isn't ACTUAL moving imagery, just still images played fast enough.

Change that line of text and you can have the same clip at 12p, 9p, 12,000p... Of course, the action won't play back at the same speed.

A nice "trick" is to film at 30p and deliver 24p (23.976p), by slowing down (not real converting). That gives the footage a slightly dreamy feel but you don't really think of it as slow motion.

dragonblade · « **Reply #9 on:** May 02, 2019, 02:57 »

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on May 02, 2019, 02:40

There is a very big difference between just speeding up and actually CONVERTING the footage to another frame rate while maintaining the speed of the motion.

Exactly. This guy was referring to converting 25fps to 29.97fps, not speeding it up.

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #10 on:** May 02, 2019, 09:01 »

This blog is one of the better ones I've seen on this.

https://blog.frame.io/2017/07/17/timecode-and-frame-rates/

dragonblade · « **Reply #11 on:** May 02, 2019, 09:56 »

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on May 02, 2019, 02:40

After all, footage of course isn't ACTUAL moving imagery, just still images played fast enough.

It appears that way due to the 'persistence of vision.' It's actually a fault in our vision that allows us to still 'see' or retain a previous image with our brain and eyes during a rapid succession of similar images. And the illusion of movement is created. Interestingly, flies (insects) do not possess this 'defect.' If a fly was to watch a TV or movie screen, they would see a series of still images and not movement.

dragonblade · « **Reply #12 on:** May 04, 2019, 19:36 »

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on May 02, 2019, 02:40

There is a very big difference between just speeding up and actually CONVERTING the footage to another frame rate while maintaining the speed of the motion.

Yes, I know.

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on May 02, 2019, 02:40