[lecoyote418]

This post was 2016. Six years later, this is no longer true, at least here in my area (Montréal). At my work in a post-production company, we finish around 8-10 long form fiction movies a year and a bigger number of shorts, and I would say around 90% of thoses projects are now shot 24.0 fps.

All high-end cameras like the ones from Arri, RED and Sony can switch easily between 23.976 and 24.0 since many years. The sound recorders can now too, like the Sound Devices, which is the most common brand used (at least here in North America). The choice of shooting in 24.0 was already available in 2016, but not every gig would be used to shoot 24.0 so they chose 23.976 just to be safe, I guess.

Also, in 2016 television was still a major deliverable, but this has changed. Video on demand, which supports any framerates, is now the main distribution channel when a movie has finished playing on the big screen.

Documentaries are more of an exception because they are still aimed at television and also, they often use old footage which was telecine'd at 23.976 so it's easier to edit when everything's 23.976.

[thrdbndndn]

> Video on demand, which supports any framerates, is now the main distribution channel

But all the major VOD services, be it Disney+, Netflix, Hulu,... still mainly use 23.976 or 29.97 fps for their video distributions.

I don't know what your production company mainly works on, but these NTSC frame rates ares still the norm across the whole cinematic industry, and it's not going anywhere. It's not limited to documentaries at all.

The YouTubers etc. do use 30/60 fps more often OTOH.

[lecoyote418]

Good question. Last time I've submitted to Netflix, it was 24, but it goes through a third party "packaging" company before going to Netflix.

So some of them might reconvert to 23.976 even when we submit 24 fps masters as per the contractual agreement. Maybe you are right. I will check.

Low budget web series shot at 23.976 even get delivered and played back at 29.97i on some local platforms here in Canada (Crave, Noovo, tout.tv), so anything's possible nowadays.

On the other end, Blurays can be encoded at both 23 and 24, and Vimeo, Youtube, etc all support 24fps. So 24 fps exists, not just on DCPs.

By the way, the loss of quality from going to/from 23.976 and 24 is not much. I've never heard any artifacts from that kind of conversion. But since cinema theatres are most likely to have a better sound system that a home system, I think it makes more sense to have the unconverted mix playing in the cinema and not vice versa.

[highwaylights]

Not well versed in video production but really interested layperson.

I understand that the two main reasons for 23.976/24 fps are that it’s:

1) been the standard for a really long time so you know everything will more or less support it (cinemas/vod/broadcast tv).

2) is now in people minds as what film should look like (in that 60 fps somehow looks “off” because we’re trained to expect 24 fps).

Given that analogue broadcast tv is dying off and that digital OTA tv is a similar case to vod in terms of codecs (maybe not receiver support?), wouldn’t a stopgap be some multiple of 24 fps (e.g. 48fps) that would allow better motion handling without the pace seeming off?

[anothermoron]

Is that true ? 24fps is even specified in the Netflix requirements for content...

https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/hc/en-us/articles/360...

[wodenokoto]

> The sound recorders can now too [record at 24 fps]

What does that mean? I thought 44khz sampling meant 44.000 integers are recorded per second.

[pushrax]

Production audio and video recorders generate or intake an SMPTE timecode signal, and stamp recordings with this timecode.

This timecode format is a timestamp with seconds resolution plus a frame count within each second. To properly sync, all the timecode generators must use the same framerate. In other words, the audio recorder’s timecode framerate needs to match the camera.

[spindle]

I'm guessing, because I'm bored, and hopefully an expert will confirm or correct, but I think it means that they place sync markers every 24th of a second, to make syncing with video efficient.

[comprambler]

Frame sync ability?

[xani_]

It's 44100

[dncornholio]

Why would anyone in 2022 still record in 24 fps? I assumed most, if not every, recording device is at least 60fps?

[mod50ack]

Because 60fps and 24fps don't look alike and video shot at a very high frame rate can look off to an audience.

Remember also that typically a 1/2 rule is followed where the exposure of each frame is half the time of its display. So for each of the 1/24s intervals, an exposure is made for 1/48s. A shorter exposure would have less motion blur but look jittery. A longer exposure would look too buttery. People are extremely used to 1/48s exposures displayed for 1/24s (or similar).

48fps video in the Hobbit movies was very negatively perceived. It looked too much like a video game.

[daveslash]

As others have said, 60fps can actually look "off" to some audiences. It definitely looks "off" to me, and I can't quite put my finger on it/why. It could just be my age (late 30s) and my brain grew up on 24-30fps.

Many new TVs interpolate 24/30 fps to be 60fps. This is knows as "The Soap Opera Effect", and has been written about here before. [0].

To me, 24/30fps feels "smooth", almost "buttery". 60fps feels crisp. 60fps feels almost too real. It makes it more difficult for me to suspend disbelief, whereas 30 makes it easier to suspend disbelief and get lost in the imaginary world that's being presented to me as if it were real. It's really difficult for me to explain....

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10613575

[heldrida]

I've completed a video shot at 24fps, some footage was recorded at higher frame rate for slow motion, but you can tell the diference. The 24 fps is the best, as it looks and feels better in the eyes for most people and also my audience :)

[paulmooreparks]

To be fair, the first line of the response heavily qualifies the answer: "Truth is that most digital projects shot for either broadcast or cinema use 23.976 instead of 24 in the U.S."

[ewwhite]

MELS?

[garaetjjte]

>Video on demand, which supports any framerates

I don't think so, majority of displays are still 60Hz without VRR.

[connicpu]

A lot of TV displays are now even 120Hz, which is convenient for being able to display 24fps, 30fps, and 60fps content without any conversion

[GekkePrutser]

But the playback box handles the conversion. With TV there were stricter standards for broadcasts.

[teawrecks]

I think they mean the VOD service doesn't restrict the creator on what frame rates they can author their content in, the box just makes it work for whatever the display requires.

[bpye]

Displays will often sync at lower frame rates than their maximum, though I guess I don’t know if they all do non integer factors.