Guywithcat:

I am obviously not articulate enough to make my point.

No I think you have done a good job. 

My only last point is use the workflow that makes sense for the project (or what the client requires, not always the same) sometimes we get wrapped up in our own bias and need to expand our thinking (me included).

I have enjoyed the discussion.

Job ter Burg:

if you are delivering in 30i on a regular basis (As we do here) then shooting in 24p is kind of a waste.

Huh? If one feels it looks nicer than 30i, what's wrong with that? How can it be a waste?

Personally, I cannot watch any fictional footage that has been shot interlaced. It just looks wrong. That would be a reason to shoot 24p (at least in the NTSC world).

I always worked under the assumption that the pulldown inserted on output is the exact same cadence as that inserted on ingest. Do you find that to be not the  case?

He meant that if you pulldown 24p to 30i, then edit and master, you end up with lots of broken cadences in a 30i master. If you edit 24p and master to 30i, you add a consistent pulldown. The latter is much easier to remove when deinterlacing afterwards. That was my point earlier as well.

 

Very well said. I said the same thing but apparently flew over their head - thanks for doubling it. ;)

tompearson:

we are cutting on an avid  a video editor

It's NOT a video editor per se, sorry unless you are indeed cueing video tapes back and forth on some weird, Avid-branded system.

yet so many want "that film look "you all have been barking about. so just go cut film and really be the purist you strive to achive

and really personal attacks are not productive

Once again: what the 'film look' has to do with the tool we use to edit our footage on a computer...?

You're one weird cookie, Sir. :D

ravidedit:

A lot of people that I've seen shooting 24p are doing it because they have a pipe dream that their going to get have it transfered to film at the end as if it was that simple.  Most of those people don't have any idea what the process or the cost of such a venture is.  And of course if most of them had the means to transfer to film they'd probably have the means to shoot film or HD Cam.  Most stuff I've seen that was shot 24p dv or hdv looks like garbage projected on a 50 or 60" plasma so I can't imagine how good it would look projected as film

 

It's exactly like when some people have the pipe dream that the garbage they have seen is all they have to see in this lifetime in order to be able to declare things about 24p or DV or HDV...

Guywithcat:

I am cutting a few projects now -- all shot in 24p over 30i, editing in 30i. If we decide to go to film we can convert to 24 later and if we go to tv as planned we can stay at 30. I am still baffled as to why anyone would shoot 24, lay down to tape in 30, pulldown to 24 to edit, then reverse to 30 for output.

vs

Guywithcat:

I know people say they would rather edit native 24.. but honestly (and dont be offended) I truly believe that only about 1% of the people who do this have any idea what they are talking about.

I hope you feel the irony...

Guywithcat:

I think most of the people who shoot 24/30 then pulldown to 24 for edit are fundamentally missing the point of what this is all about and why any of this matters at all. I also think progressive is the larger part of the improved picture as opposed to frame rate. But of course, this is ALL just conjecture and since I am arrogant and dumb as someone hinted about 15 posts earlier, I may not know what I am talking about.

Oh yes, you did.

Ok Kamm, you're done. You were warned about the personal attacks.

Ah 24p.... we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet

so many miles to go before we sleep.

OK here is my first example... nothing personal to this nice fellow but from where I sit, this guy had no business cutting this in 24

http://community.avid.com/forums/t/58708.aspx

So can I get an Amen? (or am i wrong here?)

Well yes and no Guy. He's cutting 24p because he wants a different look. Unfortunately he doesn't know how or why he achieves that look or what the end result will be once he lays back to tape. 

"It just looks cool".

Welcome  to the desktop publishing era of our business.

Blkdog is right.

 If you are outputting to 30i and you just want the look, shooting in 24p and editing in 30i is a non issue. Also, if he is passing the finished video for DVD publication, he should coordinate with the DVD encoder and author to make sure they know he will be giving to a 24p or 24p with pulldown stream (assuming they want a 24p DVD).

Just guessing here -- the DVD encoder wants 30i, 24 was never on the table. Our DVD dupe houses (we deal with MANY) dont know anything from 24 by the way.

I wont bother you nice folks with this one anymore...

For the dup house it does not matter for them. It is all the same (24, 25, 30 etc). It is the DVD author and encoder that should be 'in the know'.