23.98 VS 24

[Steve Roberts]

Can someone shed some light on the exact differences between 23.98 and 24 fps project bases?
If I shoot a project in 24 and never end up doing a film out, how will impact it going to Blue Ray vs 23.98?

[Doug Beatty]

IIRC, 23.98 is strictly an HD video format (IE- Canon is lying to you when they say 1080p24 on their DSLRs; the acquisition is actually at 23.98fps). I don't know the science behind this, but it's probably something stupid like why NTSC-DF exists.

Since they are both progressive formats, you won't have any issues if you decide to conform your project at 24fps going to Blu-ray vs 23.98.

[Trevor Meeks]

And 23.98 is really 23.976... :)
(Generally)

[Nick Morrison]

Can someone shed some light on the exact differences between 23.98 and 24 fps project bases?
If I shoot a project in 24 and never end up doing a film out, how will impact it going to Blue Ray vs 23.98?

Im probably going to shoot myself in the foot here but...

My guess would be that 24fps is an ANALOG-FILM project time base. And that 23.976 is an HD project time base that takes into account "DROP FRAME".

I work in broadcast and we only work in drop-frame 23.98/29.97/59.94 projects.

Someone will probably step in and tell me I'm wrong, but that's my guess. I would say shoot 23.98 to be safe, as the world is going digital.

[Sergei Franklin]

23.98 came about in the early days of HD so post would be compatible with NTSC standard def video.
You can easily convert from 23.98 to 24 or 24 to 23.98. If you have Final Cut 7 you can do it with Cinema Tools.

Sergei
www.sergeifranklin.com

[Mark Toia]

I really for sorry for all you 23.98, 24p people... That would be like a TV / FILM curse !
Who ever screwed that up at the start needs a swift kick in the arse...

LONG LIVE 25P.... and multiples there of...

[Subhadip Sen]

IIRC, 23.98 is strictly an HD video format (IE- Canon is lying to you when they say 1080p24 on their DSLRs; the acquisition is actually at 23.98fps). I don't know the science behind this, but it's probably something stupid like why NTSC-DF exists.

This goes back to the first NTSC standards way back in the 1940s. The first standard was black and white with a single luma channel, 30.00 frames per second (interlaced 2 x 60 fields per second). When the time for colour came around, in the 50s I think, NTSC decided to add chroma channels to the already existing luma channel. However, FM sound interfered with the frequency of chroma channels, leading to interference patterns on the images. To fix this, the frame rate was hastily slightly offset by a factor of 1.001. This led to 30 fps becoming 30/1.001 or approx 29.97 frames per second (once again, 2 interlaced fields at 29.97x2 fields per second). FCC had originally rejected the NTSC system and chosen a competing standard (I forget the name) which had 24.00 fps from 144 interlaced fields. For some reason FCC changed their minds and went for the NTSC 29.97 standard instead. Anyway, later, the need for an alternate standard with frame rate closer to 24 fps of cinema meant that the 30/1.001 was pulled down by a factor 1.25 to arrive at 23.976 fps. These quirks have stood the test of time and somehow carried over to the digital era. Here we are today, shooting at 23.97602398 fps.

As Mark mentions above, the PAL standard makes much more sense. 25.00, 50.00 or nothing.

[Patrick Tresch]

Sometimes you need to shoot 23.97 when you need video transmitter or another HD device that don t synchronise with true 24 progressive signal.

Pat

[Derek Chingwell]

What timebase/framerate are motion pictures (ie Spiderman or Prometheus or GWDT etc) shot on? 24P or 23.98?

[Stacey Spears]

2D Blu-ray supports 23.976p and 24p. Majority of titles on Blu-ray are 23.976p. 3D Blu-ray only supports 23.976p. 25p is not supported on Blu-ray at all.