I would like to shoot with a sony 1080i hdv camera at 24 frames per second. Is this possible in the shooting or do I shoot and then capture in final cut pro at 24 frames per second? Thanks.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
shooting 24 fps with a sony 1080i
- Thread starter tmacintyre
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Can you tell us what camera you have? I believe Sony only has 24fps (or proper term is 24p) on their prosumer line cameras. I know Canon has 24p on their consumer lines of cameras. It depends on what camera you have!
Anyway, you NEVER, EVER, import something in another framerate. Always import at native framerate. In post, you can use a plugin like Magic Bullet or Natress Standards Conversion to change framerates if needed, although you do lose a little bit of vertical resolution if you use those tools.
Anyway, you NEVER, EVER, import something in another framerate. Always import at native framerate. In post, you can use a plugin like Magic Bullet or Natress Standards Conversion to change framerates if needed, although you do lose a little bit of vertical resolution if you use those tools.
tmacintyre
I use JES Deinterlacer to convert 1080i 60fps to 720p 24fps.
Also try MPEG Streamclip.
I use JES Deinterlacer to convert 1080i 60fps to 720p 24fps.
Also try MPEG Streamclip.
If your camera doesn't shoot 24 frames per second natively (also known as 24p or 24F if you're using a Canon), then conversion after the fact probably won't give you the results you want. It's not just the frame rate, but the motion blur that goes a long with it. If you don't have the right motion blur, then it will look choppy.
You're probably best off just editing and outputting in the format you shot in. Keep in mind though, that 24 fps is far from the magic setting that will make your footage look like film. If anything, lighting is much more important.
P-Worm
You're probably best off just editing and outputting in the format you shot in. Keep in mind though, that 24 fps is far from the magic setting that will make your footage look like film. If anything, lighting is much more important.
P-Worm
Check out my videos on vimeo...
http://vimeo.com/1533359
I give a description of how I got there...
What do you think?
Thanks
http://vimeo.com/1533359
I give a description of how I got there...
What do you think?
Thanks
Very true. If you've got a consumer grade camera without 24p, it's best to check if your camera has shutter speed settings. If you're shooting in 60i, always shoot at 1/60 if you have any shutter speed settings, since that'll give you the best mix of proper motion blur to go along with any post 24p conversion. If you've got a 24p mode on your camera, shoot in 1/48 shutter.
Also, it would really help if you told us what camcorder you've got. Most newer camcorders are starting to give us more "pro" features, so let us know what you have, and we should be able give you more help!
The primary feedback is that you need to invest in a tripod - the camera motion is way too distracting to enjoy the subject
...still looks like video.
converting to 24fps and masking to 2.35 isn't going to make it look like it was shot on film. sorry.
Apple Corps,
I have a tripod, in fact I have 4.
The point of the video was laid out in the narrative...
It was a quick grab... Not meant to be a documentary on butterflies.
I was just interested in the filmic quality, if any.
bigbossbmb didn't think it was good enough.
I'll give it another try some day.
Thanks for your input...
I have a tripod, in fact I have 4.
The point of the video was laid out in the narrative...
It was a quick grab... Not meant to be a documentary on butterflies.
I was just interested in the filmic quality, if any.
bigbossbmb didn't think it was good enough.
I'll give it another try some day.
Thanks for your input...
it's not a matter of conversion settings... shooting 60i will not give you a film look, period, no matter what you do to it later.
scamperdekot - I understood the point - I just found it difficult to watch.
bigbossbmb - would you expand a bit more on how to achieve the more cinematic look within the context of this thread? I am a real beginner - but my assignments need that cinematic look and a lot less video look.
Thank you.
bigbossbmb - would you expand a bit more on how to achieve the more cinematic look within the context of this thread? I am a real beginner - but my assignments need that cinematic look and a lot less video look.
Thank you.
then you need great lighting and a camera that actually shoots 24p (and shoot with a 1/48 shutter)... then it'll look more like a film.
if you want it to seem like a movie then add great sound (just give up if you use the internal mic), lowered saturation, some shallow DOF (don't over do it), and steady camera movements (use a tripod or steadycam, never hand hold it).
you have to shoot it like film to make it look like film... it's not about the post-production.
if you want it to seem like a movie then add great sound (just give up if you use the internal mic), lowered saturation, some shallow DOF (don't over do it), and steady camera movements (use a tripod or steadycam, never hand hold it).
you have to shoot it like film to make it look like film... it's not about the post-production.
Thanks - I am leaning toward the Canon XH A1 with a Manfrotto 503 fluid head on one of their video tripods. I've used the Canon Vixia HF 100 and with no experience was very pleased with the results - credit the camcorder.
I'm adding video capability due to client needs - have done a fair amount of 35mm still photography and many of the principles carry over. My most critical work will be indoor video clips of people in work settings. I love the HD clarity but want a warmer / softer image to present.
Other suggestions and comments please.
The Canon is a very good camera. I cannot speak highly enough about the Manfrotto 503. It is an amazing tripod and is perfect for whatever camera you choose. I just sold my camera package (DVX100B+Manfrotto 503/351mvb) and actually miss the tripod the most.
Depending on your timeframe for buying the camera I would also look into the Panasonic HMC150. These are new Panasonic cameras that will both deliver higher quality compression than the A1's HDV. The HMC150 should be comparably priced and shoot to inexpensive SD memory cards.
skamperdekot - may I continue with the highjack of your thread 
The Panasonic looks impressive - my camera time frame is over the next 2 - 3 months. I have to work on managing my love of Canon lenses - it will open up other product potentials.
My head is spinning with all of the AVCHD work flow / intermediate codec / yada yada concerns - very confusing. To some extent, I think on these computer forums the file format / digital details overwhelm the more critical components (lens, processor, composition, content, technique, lighting,....)
Maybe that is what I am hoping as a way around all of the technical debates going on (tape vs memory cards, codec, storage, work flow,...)
The Panasonic looks impressive - my camera time frame is over the next 2 - 3 months. I have to work on managing my love of Canon lenses - it will open up other product potentials.
My head is spinning with all of the AVCHD work flow / intermediate codec / yada yada concerns - very confusing. To some extent, I think on these computer forums the file format / digital details overwhelm the more critical components (lens, processor, composition, content, technique, lighting,....)
Maybe that is what I am hoping as a way around all of the technical debates going on (tape vs memory cards, codec, storage, work flow,...)
