|
Post by Vincent R. on Oct 26, 2019 19:44:17 GMT -6
Ok, so this is not pro audio, so feel free to move the subject if it doesn’t belong here, but I’ve been working on a few new videos for my YouTube channel with a new camera and lighting rig in HD, and I have been strongly debating between 24 frames per second and 60 frames per second. I wanted to get thoughts from anyone here who may be filming for YouTube or even working on music videos, etc. For me there is much more detail in the 60 FPS, but their is something more natural about 24 FPS. Which do you prefer?
|
|
|
Post by schmalzy on Oct 26, 2019 19:55:11 GMT -6
I worked in video as an editor/producer/videographer/director (depending on the project budget) for 11 years and still continue to do some video stuff here and there now.
We often thought about what frame rates we were shooting at. It really comes down to "what are you planning to do with it?"
24fps is what we're used to seeing from moody and emotionally resonant productions. 60fps looks like a soap opera or a sports broadcast and appears to be a little sharper/crisper.
You can save some data space and processing power on your machine if you shoot 24fps but that shouldn't be the main reason for choosing it.
Shooting 60fps is great if you're looking to slow stuff down later and manipulate the time of it. You could shoot 60fps and produce at 24fps so, when you need to, you could slow your video down to 40%-ish of the original speed and it'll still look good.
If you're looking to do something that is trying to tug at people's emotions, 24fps is probably better (until you need to do some slow-mo stuff). If you're trying to appear scientific or technically credible, shoot at 60fps.
|
|
|
Post by hadaja on Oct 26, 2019 19:56:48 GMT -6
Nice info here, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Oct 26, 2019 20:18:58 GMT -6
I like the way 24p looks, but we shoot 30p at work, and it looks good too. I think lens choice is more important.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 26, 2019 21:20:05 GMT -6
I do video work as well.
There's no more detail in 60fps, just more frames.
Detail comes from the resolution, such as 1920x1080 pixels in HD vs the higher resolution of 3840x2160(4k) UHD.
Most online videos are 30fps, aka 30p, because most monitors have a screen refresh rate of 60hz. If you shoot 60p or 30p it generally aligns well with the refresh rate of the monitors but if you shoot 24p and don't do any kind of conforming, then it can lead to a strange stuttering looking video.
If you're doing mostly online videos, capture it in 30 or 60p.
Most higher end cameras have multiple choices for all these settings so it's rare to find a camera that won't do most of them at least at HD quality.
I'm a big fan of Panasonic/Lumix cameras, specifically the GH series. I currently have a GH5 and it's a great camera for everything.
However, a camera is only a small part of production value. Good audio and good lighting are equally important if not more so these days.
I'd try to balance your budget between the camera, lights, audio gear and a good editing system.
I use davinci resolve as my editor and the 300$ pricetag is well worth it, but it's also free if you edit HD or less. I do 4k with 10bit color, so I have to use the pay version.
|
|
|
Post by keymod on Oct 27, 2019 3:17:24 GMT -6
How does all of this line up with the old reasoning that " recording audio for video should be done at 48k " ?
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Oct 27, 2019 6:07:31 GMT -6
I’m just using my wife’s Nicon and the image looks really nice in both 24 FPS and 60 FPS. I’m currently playing with a new lighting rig too. I was shooting some samples and I was just curious what everyone thought about this. I may just alternate for a few videos and decide what is going to work best.
For my last few videos I was shooting with my iPhone in 60 FPS.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 27, 2019 7:06:32 GMT -6
I am a total novice in the video field, I have shot exactly 1 video, but it hasn't been edited together yet. I was working with someone more experienced than myself and we shot at 24p.
I use a Sound Devices MixPre 6 for my audio capture. My camera is a Panasonic GH4.
Sold my Peluso 2247 SE to fund this new hobby.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 27, 2019 8:38:00 GMT -6
How does all of this line up with the old reasoning that " recording audio for video should be done at 48k " ? Honestly I don't know. At some point it became a standard now everyone uses it. Maybe the same way that 23.976fps is the film version of "24p" but many digital systems shoot and display 24.000fps.
|
|
|
Post by ml on Oct 27, 2019 11:10:07 GMT -6
I do a lot of video for web and socials. I always shoot 24 or 30p. 60p if I’m doing slow-mo shots. A lot of social media platforms convert 60p to 30p/24p anyways. I shoot 4K then crop to 1080, which gives me a sharper image and crop flexibility in post. As a point of reference square Instagram videos are 640x640. I use Lumix GH series cameras and Adobe PP. I’m thinking about upgrading to the Nikon Z6 line.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 27, 2019 11:39:26 GMT -6
I do a lot of video for web and socials. I always shoot 24 or 30p. 60p if I’m doing slow-mo shots. A lot of social media platforms convert 60p to 30p/24p anyways. I shoot 4K then crop to 1080, which gives me a sharper image and crop flexibility in post. As a point of reference square Instagram videos are 640x640. I use Lumix GH series cameras and Adobe PP. I’m thinking about upgrading to the Nikon Z6 line. Why go z6 when you can go with the Lumix SH line?
|
|
|
Post by ml on Oct 27, 2019 16:58:18 GMT -6
I do a lot of video for web and socials. I always shoot 24 or 30p. 60p if I’m doing slow-mo shots. A lot of social media platforms convert 60p to 30p/24p anyways. I shoot 4K then crop to 1080, which gives me a sharper image and crop flexibility in post. As a point of reference square Instagram videos are 640x640. I use Lumix GH series cameras and Adobe PP. I’m thinking about upgrading to the Nikon Z6 line. Why go z6 when you can go with the Lumix SH line? I take a lot of photos too and I hate having to take 2 cameras with me. Photos (nikon dslr) for videos (gh5). Just trying to consolidate to one hybrid camera to cover all my needs. The GH5 does not excel in pictures. I'm considering the sony A7III or Z6 right now. The Eye AF really intrigues me. And of course the full frame should improve low light situations.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 27, 2019 17:45:33 GMT -6
Why go z6 when you can go with the Lumix SH line? I take a lot of photos too and I hate having to take 2 cameras with me. Photos (nikon dslr) for videos (gh5). Just trying to consolidate to one hybrid camera to cover all my needs. The GH5 does not excel in pictures. I'm considering the sony A7III or Z6 right now. The Eye AF really intrigues me. And of course the full frame should improve low light situations. But the Lumix SH1 is full frame..
|
|
|
Post by Bat Lanyard on Oct 27, 2019 22:14:43 GMT -6
Discussed this with Guitar several months ago, but shot this two years ago using FILMiC Pro and a Beastgrip MK1. Pretty cool what you can get from a phone camera when you get the feel for the Beastgrip. I think the notes on the lenses used are in the notes on that video, but very low budget ensemble that with FCPX or another editor gets you a long way. Have since acquired the Beastgrip MKII and its great. Edit: shot this in 24p
|
|