Creative COW SIGN IN :: SPONSORS :: ABOUT US :: CONTACT US
ADOBE AFTER EFFECTS: HomeForumBasicsExpressionsTutorialsPodcastsMotion GraphicsTrainingCinema 4DFAQ

...and a little more on 24fps....

Cow Forums : Adobe After Effects
FAQ   •   VIEW POSTS   •   ADD A NEW POST   •   SEARCH   •   CHANGE FORUM
Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread


...and a little more on 24fps....
by Dave LaRonde on Jan 24, 2008 at 10:51:11 pm

You now know that 24fps is the frame rate of film.

But did you know that in the early days of film, the frame rate was 18fps? Yup. It was the absolute slowest frame rate you could shoot and still see motion, rather than a series of discrete pictures. The early movie makers usually weren't Out To Create An Art Form, they wanted to make a buck! So if you could put less film through a camera by shooting at a slower frame rate, it meant more money in your pocket. Film was really expensive then.

Then along came sound for motion pictures. In the beginning of motion picture sound, it used an optical sound track that ran along the side of the film. Film technicians discovered that an 18fps optical sound track sounded like a certain well-known, vile-smelling brown substance. Further research indicated that they could get away with 24fps and still accommodate a reasonably-good-sounding audio track. So Jack Warner of Warner Bros., Sam Goldwyn of MGM, Mr. Paramount and all the Hollywood moguls grumbled about losing money and standardized the film frame rate at 24fps.

So throughout the course of movie history, movie makers have always used the absolute lowest, bargain-basement, cheapo frame rate they could get away with. To heck with the aesthetic qualities of a frame rate: they wanted to cut costs!

So when I hear a film school grad drone on about the story telling power of film's frame rate, my eyes glaze over. It's got nothing to do with aesthetics, and everything to do with the bottom line.

I think the only reason Hollywood sticks with 24fps now is because people are used to seeing movies at 24fps. Heck, movies don't use optical tracks any more, so why stick with it? Why not go back to 18fps? If a lower frame rate enhances aesthetics and narrative power, just think what 18fps would do for film! Why, we could go back to the roots of the film maker's art!

You never hear about THAT happening, do you? And why? People are used to 24fps. Screw aesthetics.

And I say that 30p video has much the same look to it as 24fps film, plus it's a lot easier to work with. If I was in Pal-land, I'd shoot 25p.

End of sermon.



Dave LaRonde
Sr. Promotion Producer
KCRG-TV


Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread


Current Message Thread:




Note: If you are a registered user please click here to login before posting.

Your post will not be accepted if your name and email address are not registered in our database. Click here if you do not have an account.

Name
E-Mail Address
Subject
E-Mail me when someone responds
Just This Message   Entire Thread   None  

Message:



Note: The following are HTML characters and may cause parts of your post to disappear if not used correctly: < > &
To include any portion of the post in your response, highlight the desired text and hit the "Q" key. Read more...



Add your message signature


 


Note: By clicking "Post Direct" button above, you are agreeing to the Creative Cow's Code of Conduct.



FORUMSTUTORIALSMAGAZINETRAININGVIDEOS - REELSPODCASTSEVENTSSERVICESNEWSLETTERNEWSBLOGS

© CreativeCOW.net All rights are reserved.

[Top]