Why does 24p look like film

Modern video games are a non-stop visual assault of objects moving at high speed, and a gaming POV that can be pointed anywhere at will by the player.

All this kinetic, frenetic action requires high frame rates 60, 90, fps to keep up. A technology pioneered to let you mow down digital zombies at frames per second is also why Siri answers your questions a little better. As new digital display technologies replace film projection, higher frame rates suddenly become practical and economical.

And as monitors move off of walls and on to your face because smartphones , all the cues that tell our brains that motion is an illusion will begin to break down. Moving pictures no longer appear as shadows and light on a flat wall. The minimum frame rate for Virtual Reality systems is 60ps, with many developers aiming for 90 to The inverse of VR is Augmented Reality, when the pictures appear to run loose in the real world. Systems like Magic Leap which has yet to come to market and Microsoft Hololens are bringing the images off the frame and into the real world.

The goal of these augmented reality systems is to create an experience that is indistinguishable from the real world. That some day, very soon, the illusions we used to watch on screens, flickering in the darkness, will run into our living room and tell us that we have an email. In traditional cinema, directors use shot selection , camera movement and editing to determine the pace and focus of each scene. But all those tools all go out the window to varying degrees when working with VR, which requires minimal cutting and camera movement so as not to disorient your viewer or make them barf.

This can be done a variety of ways: blocking and motion, set layout, lighting, audio, etc. Just remember: since everything in your video will likely need to play out in longer unbroken takes without you on set, pre-production and rehearsal are your best friends. Leave nothing to chance. Again, consider your project and what it requires. Being precise about your production workflow is critical in VR, as errors made at the top of the chain can cascade down and complicate production in a variety of frustrating ways.

After pre-production comes the actual shoot. Time will tell. If the worlds of sports broadcast or video gaming have anything to say about it, the divorce from 24p should be well on its way. You only have to open up the comments section for a new game release to see the bitter outcry of "only 30fps?!

The smoother, more realistic motion does add an extra level of realism and immersion to enjoy. Reality television, in general, does well in the bed of high frame rates, too, since it is supposed to look as real as possible. It is conceivable that, as more generations of people grow accustomed to faster frame rates for their video games, sports and TV shows, they will start to expect the same from feature films and dramas. Is it perhaps the fault of the audience then?

Are we just so used to 24p that we've become narrow minded at the prospect of anything else on offer? In some ways, this is true. After all, the frame rate didn't become a standard for any artistic reason; just like any bygone filming technique, it was chosen because of limitations with technology or budget. Also, it comes down to whether or not the motion effect that a certain frame rate provides suits a particular project.

I can't help but feel that it is more than that and it's not so easy to simply dismiss that legacy. It is true that 24fps may not have originally been an artistic choice, but the reality is that it very much is now. Many have talked about the slower frame rate giving a dreamlike quality, arguing that this is why 24fps suits the fantasy of a film.

It's hard to argue against that point. It's become as much a part of the artistic process as using a shallow depth of field. In the end, I think of the circumstances of how 24fps came about simply as a happy accident. It's possible that, had it not have happened, some artistic cinematographer would have come along and done it anyway and audiences still would have loved it.

Actually 18 fps was the slowest frame rate where motion appears smooth. Incidentally, this is why Chaplin and other clips often appear so fast and choppy, because they were shot in 18 fps but played at 24 fps in most archive footage. Shoot, I should patent that. There are considerations for shutter speed and exposure as well that limit the speed of capture. A few considerations P for Progressive - that's a big part of it.

A progressively sampled video delivers greater clarity than interlaced video generally. It is basically higher resolution. People often feel the unique motion characteristics lend a more filmic quality to the image.

I find the decressed temporal resolution unplesant, and don't consider the increased apparent spatial resolution balances that out.

Now, higher rate progressive standards are a different issue! Well, it's worth talking about Douglas Trumbull. He created something called Showscan which shot and then projected film at 60 frames per second big large pictures nearly looked real, so some place near 60 frames perhaps ?

But 60fps looks more real And that's a problem. We're used to and educated around 24 frames. We like that look - have you ever seen a child watch a movie for the first time? It blows television away; it's huge and moving, etc Some other things that occur to me Nearly every 'major' film has rotoscoping work done drawn using computers nowadays.

You're talking about nearly tripling the work to be done. Mar 11, TV's are set at 50Hz the htpc too 24p and 25p Footage from all the cameras above, edited or not, played trough everything I have in every way look bad to my eyes.

Reply to thread Reply with quote Complain. Just to make some things more clear. Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain. Some ppl even find 15fps ok, it drives me wacky! Good Luck! Tom Ki wrote: I do not know why so many people prefer 24 frames per second.

See above. Don't worry, only the higher-end cameras today can even shoot at 24p any more. What is a "decreased frame rate" in your opinion? Sean Nelson wrote: If you're shooting relatively static subjects baby in a crib, for instance then slow frame rates may be OK. F Forum M My threads. Latest sample galleries. Tamron mm F2. Panasonic S 35mm F1. DJI Mavic 3 Cine sample gallery. Nikon Z9 pre-production sample gallery. See more galleries ». Latest in-depth reviews.

Read more reviews ». Latest buying guides. Best video cameras for photographers in Best cameras for Instagram in Best drones in Best cameras for vlogging in Check out more buying guides ». Nikon Z9 initial review. Sony a7 IV initial review. Nikon Nikkor Z mm F2.

Sigma mm F Discover more challenges ». Fujifilm X-T4 3. Popular interchangable lens cameras ». Popular compact cameras ». Shedding some light on the sources of noise. Dynamic, DRO etc. Does it work with RAW sensor data? Mobile site. Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited. Threaded view.