Hello

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: 24 fps film  (Read 1387 times)

Offline videoholic

  • Silly little freak
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 18034
  • Karma: +10/-0
24 fps film
« Reply #15 on: January 05, 2004, 02:59:13 PM »
Nevermind, I read it wrong.  Yes, everything video broadcast is faster than 24fps.

But this still doesn\'t answer my initial question.  Why are they still projecting at 24fps?  

Are they not wanting to update systems?  

Do they like the jerky look?

WHat\'s up?
Logged
I wear a necklace now because I like to know when I\'m upside down.
 kopking: \"i really think that i how that guy os on he weekend\"
TheOmen speaking of women: \"they\'re good at what they do, for what they are.\"
Swifdi:

Offline Paul2

  • Breath of the Earth
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5873
  • Karma: +11/-0
  • PSN ID: jokermit
24 fps film
« Reply #16 on: January 05, 2004, 03:05:41 PM »
WHat\'s up?

My penis.
:jack:
Just kidding.:D

Back to the question:

Why are they still projecting at 24fps?

My already answer:

 Why? Well of course, to cut cost.
Logged

Offline §ôµÏG®ïñD

  • ñµñ©Håkµ må§tË®
  • Global Moderator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9682
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Ǧµî✟å® Ĵµñķîë
    • §ôµÏG®ïñD'§ Electrical / Electronics shit.
  • PSN ID: SoulGrind81
24 fps film
« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2004, 03:55:27 PM »
don\'t they play every frame twice in movies
Logged
  Ǧµî✟å® Ĵµñķîë!!  

Offline videoholic

  • Silly little freak
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 18034
  • Karma: +10/-0
24 fps film
« Reply #18 on: January 05, 2004, 05:07:49 PM »
That\'s what THX mentioned before.
Logged
I wear a necklace now because I like to know when I\'m upside down.
 kopking: \"i really think that i how that guy os on he weekend\"
TheOmen speaking of women: \"they\'re good at what they do, for what they are.\"
Swifdi:
Offline Coredweller
  • The War on Error
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5654
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • http://
24 fps film
« Reply #19 on: January 05, 2004, 06:00:21 PM »
Cecil Adams to the rescue:

http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_067.html

Quote
One thing you need to know about the old silent movies. Sure, they were shot at slower speeds than today\'s movies. But the main thing was that the camera was hand cranked. The only form of speed regulation was the cameraman going "one one thousand, two one thousand" as he rotated the handle. As a result, there wasn\'t any such thing as a standard silent speed. Old flicks ran at anywhere from 12 to 22 frames per second, with 16-20 fps being about average up through the early 1920s.

With the advent of sound in the late 1920s the industry switched to a standard speed of 24 frames per second. There were two reasons for this. First, it was the average speed of most silents then being made--there had been a steady increase in projection speeds during the 20s as theatre owners tried to cram in more showings per night and movie directors speeded up their cameras to compensate. Second, 24 fps was the minimum necessary to produce decent sound quality. The faster the film\'s sound track ran through the projector, the more sound information you got per second, and the better the fidelity


As far as WHY the 24 fps standard is still around... well I think that\'s simply because standards are hard to kill when they\'ve been implemented widely enough.  Consider not only how many 24 fps projectors there are in the world, but also how many very expensive pieces of machinery there are for film printing, compositing, and editing... much of which is also based on 24 fps.  It would be a massive investment to change optical motion picture photography to a different standard, so why bother.  Just wait for digital to eclipse it.
Logged
ZmÒëĎwåCęЯ
Let the Eagle Soar!
\"The American Dream: You have to be asleep to believe it.\"  - George Carlin

Offline videoholic

  • Silly little freak
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 18034
  • Karma: +10/-0
24 fps film
« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2004, 06:33:18 PM »
I think that is the main reason why.  I think in 5 years or so there is going to be a major push towards digital.  We have a couple screens here in Tampa and it\'s pretty damn nice.
Logged
I wear a necklace now because I like to know when I\'m upside down.
 kopking: \"i really think that i how that guy os on he weekend\"
TheOmen speaking of women: \"they\'re good at what they do, for what they are.\"
Swifdi:
Offline THX
  • nigstick
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8158
  • Karma: +10/-0
24 fps film
« Reply #21 on: January 05, 2004, 08:34:38 PM »
Seinfeld and Friends are/were both shot in 24fps film btw.  If you train yourself you can spot what shows are being filmed and which are using HD cameras.  Shows shot digitally look smoother.
Logged

\"i thought america alreay had been in the usa??? i know it was in australia and stuff.\" -koppy *MEMBER KOPKING FANCLUB*
\"I thought japaneses where less idiot than americans....\" -Adan
\"When we can press a button to transport our poops from our colon to the toilet, I\'ll be impressed.\" -Gman

Offline Paul2

  • Breath of the Earth
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5873
  • Karma: +11/-0
  • PSN ID: jokermit
24 fps film
« Reply #22 on: January 05, 2004, 11:53:05 PM »
also, i believe 35mm still have a much better picture quality than the top of the line HD video camera.
35mm have a 24 x 36 mm image sensor while HD video camera have like what 2/3" CCD while is like what?  13 x 7 mm?
Beside the Image sensor, a 35mm may have as  many as 12 megapixels and above.  Some thereotically suggested as high as 50 million pixels or more.  Not to mention 35mm is easier to adjustable white balance and high color bandwidth and all are uncompress.  But just one 24 expo (frames) of 35mm cost quite some money.  and 1 hour long take up nearly 100,000 frames shot at 24fps.

HD video camera.  Which to pick?  the 100 Mbits per second like DVC100, or 140 Mbits from Sony HDCam (beta), or 250 Mbits from Panasonic HD - D5?

Well lets start with 100 Mbits, its have a 7:1 lossless compression with a resolution of 1280 x 1080i with 4:2:2 YUV sampling.

The Sony HDCam 140 Mbits have 4.4:1 lossless compression with a resolutin of 1920 x 1080i with 3:1:1 YUV sampling.

The Panasonic HD-D5 have a whopping of 250 Mbits with a 4:1 compression, resolution of 1920 x 1080i with 4:2:2 YUV sampling.

So, in spec, the panasonic gives the best picture quality, and some movie studio master their film on it with DVD quality of 720 x 480 resolution.

nevermind what the heck i am talking about.  i am lost.
Logged
Offline Samwise
  • Moderator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12129
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • http://151.200.3.8/~vze29k6v/you.html
24 fps film
« Reply #23 on: January 06, 2004, 12:32:38 AM »
Coredweller explained it well - the cost is what\'s keeping the industry using 24P.

Besides, I don\'t think the problem is that bad. I rarely, if ever, see any jerky moment in movies these days.
Logged
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAPETIME!
(thanks Chizzy!)

Offline Kurt Angle

  • Administrator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7923
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • PSN ID: Supes1975
24 fps film
« Reply #24 on: January 06, 2004, 08:05:40 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Samwise

 I rarely, if ever, see any jerky moment in movies these days.


What about your extensive porn collection ? ;)
Logged
Offline Samwise
  • Moderator
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12129
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • http://151.200.3.8/~vze29k6v/you.html
24 fps film
« Reply #25 on: January 06, 2004, 08:09:12 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Kurt Angle
What about your extensive porn collection ? ;)

Then I\'m the one doing the jerking, not the movie. :)
Logged
RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAPETIME!
(thanks Chizzy!)
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »
 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk