"For BluRay, I guess this does not happen (?). "

Indeed, no rescaling required so things are pretty simple.

"For the future, if rendering out in 2-5 years from now, I guess 50i is the right choice in most cases."

Pretty much so. 25p will typically give you more resolution than 50i and it is easier to scale to SD and certainly it is a lot easier for motion tracking and compositing. However the low frame rate makes it quite difficult to shoot. For anything with lots of motion and where you need to pan fast definately stick to 50i.

I think I can safely say that 50p/60p is the way of the future.

Bob.

I have the HF10 as well and as a rule I never ever shoot 50i. I got this advice from the "HD Survival Handbook" by Philip Hodgetts. He explains in detail why you should never shoot interlaced. TV broadcasters will always interlace you footage anyway if they braodcast it. For your movies stick to progresive. LCD, plasma and TV screens can handle transmitted interlaced footage if it has to, but progressive always looks better.

My prefs are 25P in Cine Mode and I get great footage with that little cam.

-Craig

I too prefer the progressive mode and regularly shoot 24p. Years ago, I used to shoot film and have always like the look, so I use my video cam like an electronic film device.

I too prefer progressive ,I like that film look

Panning in 25p takes a little more care and always, always,use a tripod , fig rig , or steadycam and go slow with AVCHD pan, extra slow
working in HD compositing for me is better in progressive as Bob said
I also always output progressive because the image quality is better , if it’s for live feed or broadcast they will interlace anyway

So all round its progressive for me

>I too prefer progressive ,I like that film look

There are filter you can apply, they add dust, scratches, wash-outs and so on, if you really like the film look :-)
When 50p (60p) soon becomes the standard, some people may regret not shooting interlaced back then, when they in the future want to publish old material.

The film-look will definitely soon be gone. Like the very old black and white film with 16 (or 18) fps where people walk like Buster Keaton and Charlie Chaplin. Movies soon become digitalized all over, at least in this part of the world. I predict the days of judder-films will be gone while we still are here in this news group.

Shoot interlaced, unless under special conditions, is my advice from my amateurish viewpoint.

ingvarai

Ingvarai, I don't think you understand what we like about film. The "film look" is not the slower frame rate, but the fact that it is PROGRESSIVE and smooth. The human eye behaves much like film in that bright lights will leave streaks and fast motion will leave a blur. Just look at a waterfall shot with video vs film. The video will capture all the splashes as hard objects like a strobe light, while film will leave smoth softer streaks.

Again, the film look is about replicating the human vision system. Interlaced high-speed video does not do this without applying a variety of effects.

Another thing thing that I think is important about 24/25p is the EDITING-and thats what we all do here.

TNT showed MI3 and Bourne Supremacy this weekend and I caught bits of them. Both have lots of action, shakey camera and judder, but MI3 is harder to follow than the Bourne. Same shooting styles, but better editing. In the Bourne film, even thought its fast, each cut shows something specific to the building of the sequence, there is an end result in mind that is pursued through clear, concise editing.

When shooting 24p myself, I find its best to get alot of coverage. If one shot is too juddery, I can find something to replace it. The nice about these new cams is you don't have to worry about film stock, so shoot more than you think you need.

Matt,

Since most of your shooting involves a lot of action, then 50i is the way to go.

Here is a link to post I wrote some time ago about interlace vs progressive. It still applies.

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=4&MessageID=285294

Tech Diver,
as I said: "from my amateurish viewpoint".

I am not convinced at all. I need to do a lot of testing myself. If not BluRay existed, I would have shot 720 50p (my camera allows this). And there had been no discussion. But I believe full HD is the best for BluRay (I so not have a burner yet), and then I am back to 50i.

Just look at a waterfall shot with video vs film. The video will capture all the splashes as hard objects like a strobe light, while film will leave smoth softer streaks.
Good example! I have not thought about this. I will soon film just waterfalls, so this is an opportunity for me to try it out.
As I said - test test and test. I have a very good plasma TV, I think this will reveal all "secrets" and show me strengths and weaknesses. If I now could get hold of a bluray burner..

ingvarai

"Just look at a waterfall shot with video vs film. The video will capture all the splashes as hard objects like a strobe light, while film will leave smoth softer streaks."

That's a function of shutter speed producing motion blur, not frame rate. If human vision had anything like that kind of motion blur we'd never be playing tennis or racing cars around a track at 200mph.


"Again, the film look is about replicating the human vision system."

Um, no. The exact opposite. Human vision has resolution that's around 400fps. Studies show that 60fps is when we begin to feel it's real.
Lower frame rates appeal because we can disconnect from reality and accept what logically we'd find unbelievable. I know many are realising that as resolution and frame rates are increased it becomes harder to keep the audience engaged. Any defect starts to distract and take the audience out of the story. Same goes for the soundtrack as well.

Bob.

"Human vision has resolution that's around 400fps. Studies show that 60fps is when we begin to feel it's real.

Absolutely. I suppose this will help separate the creative men from the boys.

John,
Thanks for that link, I do remember reading that, it is highly informative.

One of the reasons I started with 24p was with small P2 cards I could get more footage on a card. Now with bigger cards and an AVCHD cam, it has become a moot point. So I shot one of our videos at 60p adn another at 60i, just to play around, and I didn't like either as much, so now I guess its just my preference for this show. "That's what I'm used to" !

As the show has had some local success and positive feedback, and we have worked out some interlacing/other issues (further down the pipeline, we have some terrible technical stuff going on with Bahamian TV) I don't want to mess with a recipe that seems to be working okay!

When I first got into all this, I had no idea how much frame rate actually does affect the viewing experience, whether you realize it or not. I like the disconnect from reality when I watch a movie, sometimes you just need a break from it all!

kairosmatt

Edit: Sorry, just realized you were talking to the other Matt, but I enjoyed re-reading your post anyways

Thanks for the info John

Before I flame some questions

The Hz =refresh and frame rate match at 60p so if I shoot at 720 60p it will look great broadcast in USA

1.What if I shoot at 720p 25 frames render that out at 50 frames so that the refresh rate and frame rate match,shouldn’t that solve the judder problem?
2.Can I render this 50frame content to a DVD? To playout on a PAL plasma


In your post you said 1280x720 pixels has a temporal resolution of 60 progressive??? Only if shot at 60p or am I missing something

Thanks Rory

Matt if you shoot interlaced footage say 1920x1440 HD now you have to resize to fit a DVD 720x576

Immediately you have a problem you will start to blend scan lines together whereas progressive footage resizes quite nicely
So also depending on what you are going to do with the footage will dictate progressive or interlaced

First of all, there is no such thing as 1920x1440 HD. It is 1920x1080 with a PAR (pixel aspect ratio) of 1.0 or 1440x1080 with a PAR of 1.3333.

Vegas will resize interlaced footage just fine as long as you have a "Deinterlace method" selected in the Project Properties. I almost always use "Interpolate."

Vegas will split each frame into its separate fields and then resize them. In the case of HDV, it will take the 1440x1080 frame and split it into two 1440x540 fields. These fields are now progressive and Vegas can resize them just fine. Once this is done, it re-interlerlaces the resized fields back into new size frames and all is well.

I'm all for shooting, and even more editing, progressive material - were it not for one little thing:

- apart from 24p (and all framerates of 720p), only interlaced streams are accepted by both DVD and BD specification.

Having said that, I shoot 100% progressive. But I can't help feeling a little uneasy when rendering out my video streams from Vegas for DVD Architect to use in my DVD's or BD's... I'm assuming what I get when rendering 1080/25p into 1080/50i is really 25PsF, and no true interlacing (in terms of field time offset) takes place - but I have witnessed the dreadful combing in motion once or twice in such DVD/BD compliant streams!

Thanks John I meant 1440x1080

As regards resizing interlaced footage no matter what magic wand you wave at resizing interlaced footage you will still get scanlines blending as you said you choose interpolating = mixing ..its unavoidable

So although it might be fine and you can get away with it……its not good

"So although it might be fine and you can get away with it……its not good"

Seriously, Vegas rescales interlaced video with extremely high quality on a progressive field by field basis. There is no better way to do it than the way it is done in Vegas. You DO NOT get scanline blending.

Thanks John that is really good news I always rip interlaced clips first through TMPEG then back into Vegas and then out again so will give it a bash direct

Guys

I thought this was a simple question :) - I'm still no clearer as to which one I should use as few here are of differing opinions

I thought 25P was simply for a movie look but 50i would be better for general videos sports events / video around house e.t.c.

YES! Use 50i for general sports videos and events, it will give you smoother motion as it will contain 50 individual images per second. 25p only contains HALF as many individual images per second and the motion will be exactly half as smooth.

Pay NO attention to what anybody else says! :)

Pay NO attention to what anybody else says! :)
Probably very good advice, probably no one on this board edits faster motion video than what John does on a regular basis. Even Spot's sky diving videos, probably don't catch up.