Posted 02 August 2005 - 12:51 PM
My question is:
based upon your experience, does it make sense to shoot progressive 25P (24P in the US), when the footage will only be shown on the tv, let's say on the BBC?
A note, I love progressive, just I keep constantly having to discuss with editors about this subject.
Posted 02 August 2005 - 01:10 PM
Posted 02 August 2005 - 01:50 PM
Possibly a reason that this format will not catch on for news gathering?
Posted 02 August 2005 - 02:03 PM
Unless it is some kind of way to tell the story better, of course. Say when you are cutting into news scenes in the fiction film etc.
Never did like those films where news shots obviously have been filmed with a 16mm or 35mm...
Posted 03 August 2005 - 09:55 PM
Posted 03 August 2005 - 10:57 PM
Posted 03 August 2005 - 11:49 PM
And I grew-up with a lot of news that was on film reels. That said, I've never liked the look of news broadcasts shot on video. I've never liked the look of Johnny Carson on video for that matter.
But I'm with you, give me 24p any day.
Edited by Charlie Seper, 03 August 2005 - 11:52 PM.
Posted 06 August 2005 - 09:20 PM
But to answer your question, even if your just going to TV with your movie, you will still notice a huge difference in 24p (25p) and 60i (50i)...
Edited by Landon D. Parks, 06 August 2005 - 09:21 PM.
Posted 07 August 2005 - 02:04 AM
I think that all it would take is a big name director to shoot a really good film in 1080 60p (when it arrives) for people to start to want to copycat that style. Although it may remain a niche.
I love 24p. But I still think that 50 or 60p is viable for digital projection in theatres. I do think however that such framerates may bring about their own shooting style. Can you imagine what slow motion would look like in 60p? Pretty cool I think.
There is one drawback to shooting at such high progressive rates. Unless home equipment keeps up there will be no way of making a progressive transfer to HD DVD or whatever is doing the rounds. The movie would have to be converted to interlaced form in order to keep the framerate. Not good.
Posted 07 August 2005 - 05:31 AM
I own a copy of "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Silver Chair", one of the BBC versions. I can tell it was shoot in Interlaced video, and the FX sucked...
Are you sure? The credits on Indb show FILM EDITING BY....
Could you be looking at a standards converted PAL/NTSC copy`
Posted 09 August 2005 - 03:24 PM
Can you imagine what slow motion would look like in 60p? Pretty cool I think.
You can currently see something similar on television. Sporting events (tennis matches, often) use 2x slow motion playing back at 60i. The fluidity is amazing - it would be awesome to see this on a big screen...
Posted 09 August 2005 - 03:42 PM
Perhaps someone better informed might put me right, but assuming that's true it will be interesting to see what happens with glossy BBC dramas - whether they'll stick with 25P for that slightly floaty unreal look or bump up to 50P which seems to be either the best of both worlds or a horrible compromise depending on how you look at it.
Has anyone actually seen any footage originated and displayed at 50P?