24p or 29.97??

Rogueone wrote on 6/2/2004, 9:41 AM
I stumbled on this subject in the help file last night while searching for pre-render info, and it got me thinking. Is 24p better than 29.97? And do you have to have a camera that shoots in 24 to get the results? I got curious, and did a little test. These results surfaced:
1. Took a quick project I've been working on, and rendered the file as standard DVD NTSC. It was a 12 second clip, and it took about 12 seconds to render it.
2. Took same clip, only this time rendered it as 24p. This time it took about 44 seconds to complete.

Now, the help file said that 24p takes up less space on DVD, so you can fit more video on the DVD. My standard 29.97 file was 7.xx meg, while the 24p was 9.xx meg. Also, the 24p file was slightly blurred than the regular 29.97. Nothing too major, but enough that I could tell.

Now, do I have to camera that shoots in 24p to get it completed successfully? I use a Sony Digital8 camcorder, so it doesn't have the 24p option. And why the 24p file a little blurrier than the 29.97?

Comments would be appreciated! Just when I think I'm getting all the standard and tricks down to make a quality DVD, little stuff like this crops up!

Cheers,
Ben

Comments

johnmeyer wrote on 6/2/2004, 9:50 AM
The whole problem with your tests is that you started with a 29.97 file. You must start with a true 24p file to understand the differences.
John_Cline wrote on 6/2/2004, 10:22 AM
NO, 24p is not "better." Click on the link below to read my recent post about this subject:

Progressive Scan Questions

John
BJ_M wrote on 6/2/2004, 11:12 AM
i'm with you 100% John C..

Rogueone wrote on 6/2/2004, 11:19 AM
Thanks for the feedback. I guess reading the help file just made the concept a little more confusing, as it seemed to me to be promoting the 24p over 29.97. Since I can't afford a 24p camcorder, I'll happily stick with what I've got!

Cheers,
Ben
Jackie_Chan_Fan wrote on 6/2/2004, 12:47 PM
Is there a benefit to deinterlacing to 24p? or even 30p?

Lets say i use Magic Bullet in AE, or Fhauhaffer's deinterlacer which both do adaptive deinterlacing which produce a nice image....

Would it be worth converting all of teh footage to progressive?

It seems appealing... but a lot of work. I'm also worried about image quality.. .

John_Cline wrote on 6/2/2004, 1:25 PM
Rarely is there any benefit to deinterlacing to 30p or 24p. It is an effect and if that's the effect you're after, then go ahead. Did you not read the link I posted above?

John
Jackie_Chan_Fan wrote on 6/2/2004, 8:34 PM

I did.. browse over it but it didnt quite answer what i was after.

John_Cline wrote on 6/2/2004, 10:22 PM
JCF,

What was your question specifically? The question, "is it worth it" is very broad.

John