Re: [Avid-L2] 29.97 and HD / RANT

And the case for 29.97p. (I promise, this is my last post on the topic)

If you are producing for US domestic video market, the most compatible format is 29.97p. It is the standard. Interlaced video is all but dead and what lingers of interlaced video is 100% compatible with 29.97p. Conversion from 24p to 30p is often unacceptable. 

For international distribution, I concede that 30p to 25p may also be unacceptable, but it's not as bad as 24p to 30p, at least in theory. Dropping from 30 to 25 results in five 1/25th second skips, while converting from 24p to 30p is six 1/15th second stutters. I can't swear that the 30p to 25p drop is less problematic, but the math says it should be. It was interlacing that made NTSC to PAL conversion so difficult, not the difference in frame rates.

I concede that both conversions should be avoided, so you are always betting on the more important market.

There is one major argument for 24p we have overlooked. The economic one. The efficiency advantage is the real reason that 24p still exists. If 30p had been cheaper to shoot at any point, Hollywood would have converted, but 24p has always been, and still is, the cheapest viable option.

There are clearly times where 24p has the advantage, but going forward I don't think anyone should accept this as a given. 

60p all the way baby! Or 50p. I'm not picky. That conversion should look okay in either direction. 

You want cinematic stutter? Add it in post. ;)

Cheers,

               tod

On Aug 5, 2020, at 12:22 PM, Mark B via groups.io <eatapc=me.com@groups.io> wrote:

Great summation, but allow me to elaborate on why I like 23.98 as the default. My argument for 23.98 is not that I'm attached to pulldown, it's that 23.98 is the most broadly compatible frame rate. A 23.98 final deliverable is widely accepted for both broadcast and web (and it looks great). Importantly, it can be converted without hassle (if with slight issues in some cases) to other frame rates when those requests come in after the fact. 29.97, if interlaced, is a problem for anything other than U.S. broadcast; 29.97 progressive is a problem for me if conversion to a slower frame rate is requested.

That last concern -- converting a 29.97 video to 24 or 25 fps -- is probably a non-problem for most editors, but I've had to deal with it many times in the past when working in NYC for a global ad agency: doing brand videos, case studies, pitch videos, some spots that were later run in movie theaters globally, and in one case some corporate videos shown on British Air flights. More recently as a freelancer, doing a few corporate videos for a global client, we got a request for 25 fps long after the project was finished. For that reason, I always recommend that directors shoot at 23.98 for the corporate videos I do. Creates fewer potential problem later. (And I never get pushback from the directors or DPs.) For editors who work primarily on other kinds of projects, 29.97 might be an excellent choice. -- Mark