24p is outdated

[zlfan]

24p is hailed as cinematic. it was just a frugal approach at the time of film days. 

5k 60p of gp 12 is so smooth. seeing is believing. 

[Al Dolega]

You're assuming that "smooth" is the goal. For many it's not.

(for the record, I mostly shoot in 60p and deliver in 30p, so I'm not some 24p hyper-traditionalist)

[zlfan]

gen z boys and gals grow up with 1080p or 4k 60p. to them, the so called 24p motion cadence aesthetics is just old school. there is nothing magic for 24p, just the old school grand daddies'  habit who watch too many old holly wood movies. these grand daddies' grand daddies like 16p no sound movie more than 24p sound movie for the same reason. lol.  

time changes.

[Clark Nikolai]

It's only considered cinematic because we (viewers) associate it with drama and we do that because of how things were in the past. Drama was always 24fps and live video was always 30 (in NTSC countries). We got used to that. Nowadays dramas are in 30fps and 60fps. I remember when drama was starting to be shot with video cameras and it seemed wrong at first for drama to have a "video" frame rate but now it doesn't anymore. People are used to anything.

So all that's left is choosing a frame rate for a "look".

[Jedi Master]

6 hours ago, zlfan said:

24p is hailed as cinematic. it was just a frugal approach at the time of film days. 

5k 60p of gp 12 is so smooth. seeing is believing. 

I agree with you. I don’t want footage that looks “cinematic”, I want footage that looks good, and higher frame rates look better to me. The only reason we were stuck with 24FPS was because film costs were lower at lower frame rates and the studios were cheap.

I don’t like a bunch of other things that have become more or less standard in Hollywood. The biggest thing that irks me is hand-held footage. Some of it is so jittery it’s nearly vertigo-inducing. It wasn’t used in the old days because cameras were massive and not hand-holdable by any stretch of the imagination. Now that cameras are smaller and lighter, the trend is to use more and more hand-held footage in movies. Some claim it offers more of a “you are there” first-person experience, but I disagree. When I see the world with my own eyes, I don’t see a jittery, shaky view at all—it’s like my vision system has built-in IBIS.

Another thing I don’t like, but seems to be gaining popularity is to add film-like grain to digital footage. This can only be due to some misplaced nostalgia for the old days, because why make the footage look worse? I prefer the pristine look of good digital, again because when I look at the world with my eyes, I don’t see any grain. I don’t need to be reminded that I’m watching a movie—I already know that.

[zlfan]

1 hour ago, Jedi Master said:

I agree with you. I don’t want footage that looks “cinematic”, I want footage that looks good, and higher frame rates look better to me. The only reason we were stuck with 24FPS was because film costs were lower at lower frame rates and the studios were cheap.

I don’t like a bunch of other things that have become more or less standard in Hollywood. The biggest thing that irks me is hand-held footage. Some of it is so jittery it’s nearly vertigo-inducing. It wasn’t used in the old days because cameras were massive and not hand-holdable by any stretch of the imagination. Now that cameras are smaller and lighter, the trend is to use more and more hand-held footage in movies. Some claim it offers more of a “you are there” first-person experience, but I disagree. When I see the world with my own eyes, I don’t see a jittery, shaky view at all—it’s like my vision system has built-in IBIS.

Another thing I don’t like, but seems to be gaining popularity is to add film-like grain to digital footage. This can only be due to some misplaced nostalgia for the old days, because why make the footage look worse? I prefer the pristine look of good digital, again because when I look at the world with my eyes, I don’t see any grain. I don’t need to be reminded that I’m watching a movie—I already know that.

totally agree. 

i use hanheld most of the time, because of its convenience. but sometimes when i look at my footage from a tripod session, i am always amazed by the image quality, the cam movement is so nice, wide angle panning and tilting are almost perfect. 

i also don't like grain, no matter how "organic" it is claimed, it is just noise. 

i think the real filmic characters are high light rolling off, and the color, which are why alexa and f35 excel in either category. the shallow dof holy grail has been already busted since 5d2. 

not much left for film. 

 

[EduPortas]

9 hours ago, zlfan said:

24p is hailed as cinematic. it was just a frugal approach at the time of film days. 

5k 60p of gp 12 is so smooth. seeing is believing. 

No.

60p = sports

30p = TV

24 = cinema

Sorry Tony, some things will never change. 

[Jedi Master]

33 minutes ago, EduPortas said:

Sorry Tony, some things will never change. 

That's a defeatist attitude that will impede progress.

When The Hobbit came out a few years ago, some people were ready to break out the pitchforks and torches and march on Hollywood, but I loved it--those movies looked much better to me than the typical 24 FPS stuff.

[newfoundmass]

56 minutes ago, Jedi Master said:

That's a defeatist attitude that will impede progress.

When The Hobbit came out a few years ago, some people were ready to break out the pitchforks and torches and march on Hollywood, but I loved it--those movies looked much better to me than the typical 24 FPS stuff.

And how many films followed the lead?

You were in the minority. Most people hated it and most theaters showed it in 24 fps because of complaints.

[zlfan]

3 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

And how many films followed the lead?

You were in the minority. Most people hated it and most theaters showed it in 24 fps because of complaints.

the displaying technology is improving, most 4k tv now has 60 hz or 120 hz or even 240 hz, youtube has 4k 60p, the trend will follow. new generation of viewers used to youtube 4k 60p never care about 24p. in the near future, 24p will be a nostalgic look, like betacam, lomocam, sepia, etc. 

[fuzzynormal]

Art is conceit.

Cinema is a altered from reality by default.  Because of that, it's perfectly fine when some filmmakers decide for it to absolutely fail to be accurate in certain ways.

Flaws are beautiful.  They invoke an alternate reality.

Some filmmakers like 48 or 60fps.  So be it.  I like 24fps and a 360 degree shutter.  My preferences ain't wrong, they're simply mine.

[Emanuel]

Never in the history of this medium people were used to produce so much crappy footage... That's what really is.

Aesthetics is a science. No one can intend to teach what doesn't know. A physician goes to a medical school, a lawyer to a law school. No layman can accurately think to even discuss with one or another.

Eminem cannot be compared with Tchaikovsky or Strauss.

The same way Michael Protzman with Martin Heidegger, only to refer a most odd outfit to some statements I've been reading over here, really :- )

[Emanuel]

10 minutes ago, fuzzynormal said:

Art is conceit.

Cinema is a altered from reality by default.  Because of that, it's perfectly fine when some filmmakers decide for it to absolutely fail to be accurate in certain ways.

Flaws are beautiful.  They invoke an alternate reality.

Some filmmakers like 48 or 60fps.  So be it.  I like 24fps and a 360 degree shutter.  My preferences ain't wrong, they're simply mine.

Matt, we two were practically writing at same time...

Call it old-fashioned *cough cough* hey newcomers (never thought of a different meaning to this word I will omit to write it over here now LOL : ) but who once stared the eyes of Claudia Cardinale, face to face, as I've ever been lucky enough : ) realizes the real meaning for the expression TIMELESS... ;- )

 

[Emanuel]

But you know what?... Opera music genre can only be shit coz singers look like to scream there and not having nuff raspy (aka hoarse) voice to impress the babes... who doesn't like babes? ; )

LOL : D

 

Sorry guys, I couldn't resist and help myself! :- )

[newfoundmass]

2 hours ago, zlfan said:

the displaying technology is improving, most 4k tv now has 60 hz or 120 hz or even 240 hz, youtube has 4k 60p, the trend will follow. new generation of viewers used to youtube 4k 60p never care about 24p. in the near future, 24p will be a nostalgic look, like betacam, lomocam, sepia, etc. 

A new generation of viewers will still be able to distinguish between cinema and video seen on social media, just as the generations before did with film and television. It's fine if your preference is high frame rate content, but it's naive to think it will ever become the standard for cinema based on that argument. 

Peter Jackson tried it a decade ago and it was almost universally hated by movie goers. The issue wasn't the display technology, it was that it went against an entire lifetime of what people associate with cinema and that bothered people.

[zlfan]

15 minutes ago, newfoundmass said:

A new generation of viewers will still be able to distinguish between cinema and video seen on social media, just as the generations before did with film and television. It's fine if your preference is high frame rate content, but it's naive to think it will ever become the standard for cinema based on that argument. 

Peter Jackson tried it a decade ago and it was almost universally hated by movie goers. The issue wasn't the display technology, it was that it went against an entire lifetime of what people associate with cinema and that bothered people.

not sure about the universal hate thing. lor and hobbit series are  regarded as one of best series, not just by me, but by most of the viewers. peter jackson is not a fool himself. 

[zlfan]

if 24p is so critically fundamental in cinematography, then lor and hobbit and gemini should have been total disasters and have had huge loss in money making. on the contrary, they are so successful, envied by many holly wood directors and dps. 

[zlfan]

when i watch these well known hfr movies, i never have a second thought that these movies are junk made by non artists non scientists amateur dps. i just immerse myself in the movies and enjoy the story lines. i have watched lor and hobbit many times, about equal to god father trilogy and matrix trilogy. never had a negative thought about them. the only thing for me to complain is that there is no more episode. lol.   

[zlfan]

interesting, just did some research on hfr movies, avatar series and titanic are also 48p, gemini man 120p. james cameron and ang lee are no fools neither. 

[zlfan]

i watched titanic and avatar i 3d in theatre when they were just released. never thought they were shot on 48p. 

i also watched hobbit series in theatre, although i knew they were shot on 48p, but hey, my eyes did not care less.