Hi, Dave...

Because in it's original configuration, it is actually technically wrong. The project should not be 29.97fps, as that would assume the inclusion of split frames, which it doesn't have (since it's just an animation of still photos, as opposed to imported video). Normally, the split frames are then created during the render... and in this case, that would create a final video with a frame rate higher than 29.97fps.

When I do video fx for television, the standard practice is to import the 29.97fps footage, strip away the split frames (3/2 pulldown... which results in a 23.976fps project), composite the effect, then render it out (adding the split frames again), resulting in a final 29.97fps composited shot.

In this case, the project should be 23.987fps, so that when split frames are introduced at the rendering stage, the resulting video is 29.97fps.

To have a 29.97fps video with whole frames only (and no split frames) is an impossibility, and would probably cause playback issues.

So, I'm wondering (for the purposes of importing to DVDA to create a movie DVD), should the 'animation' render be 29.97fps with split frames.... or 23.976fps with whole frames only.... or 30fps with whole frames?

I was told by an editor (as a result of this question) that I could actually import either a 29.97fps video with split frames.... or a whole frame 23.976fps video (without split frames), as (supposedly) DVDA will accept either, and would introduce the split frames in the 23.976fps version.

Assuming this is true, I now wonder if one is better than the other. Rumour has it that the 29.97fps version might now play as nicely on a computer, for example.

i've put 29.97 vegas rendered files on to broadcast with no issues.

23.97 is only for 24fps with drop frame code. the only reason you would drop (and NOT expect issues) 29.97 down to 23.97 is if it was originally done @ 23.97 & re-done to 29.97 for TV broadcast & you want to edit the "original" footage w/o messing with the extra frames. But if it's for a few seconds it's not worth the trouble.

but why... unless you can't get the 23.97 footage in the first place... But broadcast NTSC is 29.97, not 23.97, so I don't get why you say it's "standard practice", unless noted above (maybe you deal with film transfers?).

But to answer your specific question, if the project in AE is 29.97 then, to keep the timing correct, you want DVDA to be 29.97. In fact, the DVDA project should always match the properties of the main presentation on the DVD (ie the main movie, show, slide show, etc). That includes PAR & interlace setup too.

29.97 = more data a second so it, technically, looks nicer (all a matter of preference) but you can fit more data on a DVD with 23.97 fps @ the same bitrate (duh).

Computers don't care what the FPS is. I'm (hopefully) doing a trailer soon where all the footage was recorded @ 60fps (progressive! yeah!) & the computer will display 60fps (but it's @ 60 for slowmotion, not high-FPS).

For the slide show no reason you can't do it all progressive @ 29.97fps. Best image possible via DVD. I've done that several times & it looks nice on SD & HD TV's.

Hi, Friar.... Well, in the case of FX work, the source material was always 29.97 (with split frames), and we'd remove the split frames (giving you a 23.97fps whole frame clip) to do the effects work on. You wouldn't want to just bring in the 29.97fps footage and do the effects on top, as you'd be putting whole frame 'effects' (gun flares, ufos, whatever) on top of split frames and such.... resulting in a final comp that no longer has the proper split frames (background would be correct, but added effect would not have the proper split frame/interlace thing happening... so it would stand out).

Now, in this case, I'm not sure... as I said. The video consists (mostly) of an animation of photos and graphics.... so, in that respect, the frame rate can be anything I like (since I'm not slave to any imported video)... So, I'm not even sure if I'd be putting split frames in at all. I'm really not sure of the procedure I should take here.

Normally, you could get away with whatever you wanted (if it were, say, to be played just on the computer. But since it's being made into a DVD, I'm assuming (and not aware of) any specific requirements or restrictions of the imported video in order for it to work properly on a final DVD.

Used to be so much simpler... but now, with all the formats, etc, it's getting pretty mindboggling...

Heck, I can remember not too long ago, it used to be 30fps and 24fps.... and then suddenly the whole 29.97fps and 23.976fps thing came in....

I just want to be sure this works...

To add to the fun, I also have a section in this where I have actual imported videos from a variety of sources... and even THERE the frame rates are all over the place... Some are 30fps... some are 15fps... some are 29.97fps...

Back in the old days (when I did those computer generated segments from the old Beetlejuice cartoon series), we would render 'on fields', so that our animation wouldn't strobe and move jerkily. Another thing I am pondering with this as well...

So, I guess it comes down to these questions:

1) For the purposes of importing into DVDA... Am I right in understanding that I can use either 23.976fps or 29.97fps?

2) Is either one more preferable (...aside from the apparent quality vs economy aspect you pointed out)? Does DVDA have a 'native' fps, or is one more compatible versus the other?

3) Should I put split frames into the final render from AfterEffects, or render them as whole frame versions?

BTW, the video is about 13 minutes long, plus I have a photo gallery (about 240 photos), and a 7 minute song)... So I guess I don't have to be overly concerned about optimizing the size/data.

Thanks in advance!...

Laer,

I assume you are talking about adding effects to Film shot at 24fps and transferred at 29.97. Otherwise, you are way off. NTSC television is natively 29.97 fps. There are not "split frames" if your video originated as electronic video (video camera) but if your source originated on film at 24fps, then you are adding pulldown when you transfer it to TV format at 29.97. Then it would make sense to strip out the pulldown, do effx and then render to 29.97 again. Although as I understand, the DVD standard allows for 23.97 and will add the pulldown for you.

If you are orignating the video yourself from stills with no film transfer involved. then you have no reason to be working at 23.97 for NTSC TV final products. NTSC is ALWAYS broadcast at 29.97 (not counting HD) and all frames are full.

Again, the only time you get pulldown is when you transfer 24fps film to NTSC 29.97. Is that what you normally do?

The last time TV was actually 30fps was when it was broadcast in B&W. 29.97 came along with color TV. Film (other than 8mm) has always been 24fps. It has always been transferred for TV at 29.97 with 3.2 pulldown, what I assume you are referring to as split frames.

I have known some film makers to shoot at 30fps so they have a 1 to 1 frame count when transferrring to NTSC 29.97. The film gets slowed down a bit, but when adding effects you don't have to deal with pulldown. But of course, this adds to the cost of the film shoot since you are shooting more frames.

Dave T2

Ya, the effects work was for tv shows in the '90s (Robocop, FX, and Earth:Final Conflict)... before digital video cameras came into play. I would imagine they were shooting on film and transferring it.

Part of the confusion is that even my more recent work (AirFarce tv series) was shot on a variety of cameras... and even though they were not film (therefore no transfer), they sometimes were cameras that simulated film (24fps), and thus would come to me with split frames.... sometimes..... It was a real mess that even the crew itself was often confused about... that and the sudden introduction of HD (while still having to conform to standard def 'safe areas' as well)... That was very painful...

Okay, what you are saying makes sense (3/2 split frames not being needed in this case). My understanding was that it's only to give you the proper fps since (under normal circumstance) it'll slowly go out of sync, as there technically isn't enough frames (...thus, you make up for it by introducing split frames at regular intervals....ex. a wwwss pattern). But, I wasn't sure in this case if you still needed it to 'make it work' for an NTSC DVD video signal.

So, I wouldn't render this with any field dominance either, right... Just full frames, at 29.97fps? That won't result in 'strobing' movement when (say) a photo travels across the screen?... or is that another throwback from the past that is no longer relevant?

I wonder why that editor guy told me that 29.97fps (full frame) was wrong, then... I can understand where he's coming from, in the sense that 29.97fps footage often contains split frames... but I wasn't aware that you could have 29.97fps footage as whole frames as well. But, ya, what you're saying is making sense (and is certainly nicer than having footage with split frames)!

Sorry, this must feel like explaining quantum physics to a 5 year old.... But I'm understanding where you're coming from now...

Yeah, the new trend is shooting with video at 24 fps to give video that "film look". 3/2 pulldown is what people tend to feel is a film look because movies and TV shows that were shot on film always had the pulldown.

If you are creating strictly for TV NTSC, 29.97 is the standard. If you want the "film look" for TV, then doing what you are doing does some of that.

But like I said, I believe DVDs standard will put in pulldown on 23.97 sources. That is how commercial movies save a little real estate on a DVD and allow them to have higher quality since they are not compressing as many frames.

Welcome to the new world of ever changing formats. Once we go completely digital, from shooting to broadcasting, then frame rates and fields will become irrelevent. You theoretically could shoot any frame rate you wanted in digital and it would be broadcast that way. But as long as we are mixing analog and digital with the NTSC standard, we are stuck with 29.97.
Good luck and have fun.
Dave T2