Question about a double frame after converting 23.976 to 24 fps

Is the original footage STILL 29.97? If so, that's why you see double frames. 24fps needs to fill the 30fps frame rate...so 6 frames will repeat. Typically spread between fields...a typical 3:2 pulldown.

is that what you mean? Or what?

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

I think since the video was edited, the reverse pulldown does not work perfectly. Although it does say Compressor should adjust for this. But I'm not sure if that means it will or will not leave double frames.

"If you take these telecined clips and edit them as NTSC video, the result will be a final video file that has a broken cadence with an inconsistent 3:2 pattern. It is much more difficult to remove the telecine from this clip since you have to constantly verify the cadence to make sure you don’t inadvertently choose incorrect fields when creating the 23.98 fps video.

The Reverse Telecine feature included with Compressor automatically detects broken cadences and adjusts its processing as needed."

Thanks for the explanation. That makes a lot of sense. I'm one more step towards understanding this stuff :)

"Second, I'm scratching my head why you insisted on real-live 24fps and didn't simply leave it at 23.976."

I'm glad you asked me this since after redoing the short film I'm re-editing a feature film I shot on film to HD (I have rescanned all the film to DPX).

If you can scare me away from editing it at true 24fps please do so. I've been debating this for a while. I've read about it, heard the arguments and know everyone says to edit at 23.976.... but most of the arguments I've heard were against people shooting video at true 24.

This is my thinking behind editing at true 24:

First, the film was shot at true 24 as was the sound.

To edit at 23.976 I would have to convert all the film and audio to 23.976 to edit it at that frame rate. Which would be a pretty big job considering the dozens of audio tapes.

I would then have to convert it back from 23.976 to true24 if I ever want to go to a film festival.

Also I like the idea of having a master where the audio has not had the speed changed (I've never really understood if converting from 24 to 23.976 compresses the audio, or it just plays in the timeline at a different speed)

It seems I can just edit everything in its native true 24, then when I'm done, convert the final product to 23.976. I would just be doing it later rather than sooner.

But I don't really understand the inner workings of computers and video as I understand film. If there something I'm missing?

I'm very open to any argument against what I'm doing. I don't want to be far down the road and say "Ohhhhh THAT is why everyone says to edit at 23.976.... wow.. I'm really messed up now..."