Framerates: Your Preferences for Shooting and Editing

IAM4UK wrote on 7/1/2018, 1:58 PM

Scenario: You're producing a video that will ultimately be rendered and distributed in 1080p/23.976fps

Your cameras can capture video in a variety of framerates, including 23.976, 24.000, 29.97, 59.94, without getting into possible "high framerates" for slo-mo.


Questions: What framerate would you pick to capture the footage in your camera, given your output parameter of 23.976fps? Why would you pick the capture framerate you specified? What trade-offs matter most, and why?


Former user wrote on 7/1/2018, 1:59 PM

I would shoot in your delivery format if possible. Why go through conversions which ultimately degrade the picture quality.

IAM4UK wrote on 7/1/2018, 2:09 PM

Logical, david-tu, but I ask because I borrow cameras for my main projects, and don't have time to experiment with them. I don't want to choose sub-optimal settings due to my own ignorance of things I might not have considered. And since I recognize that everything involves trade-offs, I'm open to the possibility that capturing at a higher framerate and having Vegas Pro convert to the output rate might actually be preferable for reasons I do not yet know.

Former user wrote on 7/1/2018, 2:14 PM

It would only work well if you capture at something like twice the framerate. Any other framerate (such as 29.97) would involve throwing out frames at intervals you have no control over and sometimes interpolating frames and actually possible synthesizing frames. I don't see any good reasons to shoot at other than delivery unless you are having multiple delivery formats, then I would shoot at the one that is the most important. I personally do not like 23.97 framerate. I would prefer shooting much higher (even 120 if possible) because I want as many frames as possible. I find 23.97 to jittery and distracting. In a theater it doesn't bother me because of the persistence of vision but normal TV viewing it drives me crazy.

IAM4UK wrote on 7/1/2018, 2:32 PM

That's good info, david-tu, thank you.

As 48fps (or its drop-frame variant) aren't available on the cameras I borrow, I suppose I won't be shooting HFR with that benefit of no interpolation. I understand the limitations of 23.976, but it is a requirement for my project. Actually, I do prefer that framerate for movies, because (I suppose) my brain has been conditioned to associate it with movies. 29.27 or 59.94 look like TV shows to me, rather than "cinematic." But I do want to minimize jitter, which is one of the possible reasons I have wondered if shooting at higher rates might have some benefit.

Former user wrote on 7/1/2018, 2:47 PM

Framerate is part of the perception, but a bigger part is lighting and camera focus. At least that is my opinion. On broadcast TV you have never seen a movie shown at 23.97. It has always been converted, by interpolating frames to 29.97. If you have seen the Hobbit, it was not shot at 48fps. Still looks cinematic to me. (not one of my favorite films though)

IAM4UK wrote on 7/1/2018, 5:30 PM

I watch movies via bluray or ultra hd bluray more than via broadcast, and my television plays such content at 23.976fps.

I saw The Hobbit in a theater at 48fps; it looked like a very expensive soap opera.

Kinvermark wrote on 7/1/2018, 5:37 PM

Given that, I don't think you will like the look of higher frame rate video ("ultra realistic"). I would shoot 24p (23.976) for majority with 60p (59.94) for slow motion scenes. I typically don't pan or zoom, and by shooting UHD there is lots of latitude for stabilization (if necessary) and NLE digital pans/zooms.

wwjd wrote on 7/2/2018, 8:56 AM

yea, I'd stick with 23.976 if that is the final

Musicvid wrote on 7/2/2018, 10:47 AM

In order to prevent suboptimal results, all cameras should record at the delivery frame rate. Other compatible frame rates are 2x, 4x, etc.

IAM4UK wrote on 7/3/2018, 3:37 PM

Thank you all. I am glad to know I hadn't overlooked some consideration about framerates for shooting video.