[3dAnimation]

PAL is 25 fps
Film is 24 fps
NTSC is 29.97

NTSC is 29.97fps because the early tv engineers Drop X number of frames per hour to make room for vertical blanking. This is how you are able to get Closed Captioning along with the video and audio signal.

This is also known as "drop frame". You can tell when you are editing "drop fram" because your time code will read:
00:00:00;00
hh:mm:ss;ff
Notice the ; between ss and ff. If you are editing non drop frame, you will have a : there instead.

For the most part, you should edit drop frame, but unless you are editing long form (1hr +) and your project NEEDS to be an exact length for broadcast (ie. 1 hour, 47min) you'll never know the difference. Non drop frame will cause your project to be about 2 minutes longer per hour than it *should* be. (I think 2 minutes is about right, although I could be off a little)

Hope this helps explain things.

-GregM.

[mattmarshall]

hey all....

i'm just tyring to read up on dv and learn as much as i can about it.....and it seems like the biggest desire of everyone is to make it look like film.

i've read over and over that video's 30 fps is part of why it looks different than film. well, why doesn't dv record at 24 fps? i read that there was some standard agreed upon....but why wasn't that standard 24 fps?

just curious. if anyone knows of any sites (other than 2-pop) which explains things like this, and other issues with "filming"--such as lighting, difference between PAL and NTSC, etc--please let me know!!

thanks!

-matt marshall

[SirCastor]

DV wasn't designed to replace film, it was designed to replace analog video. People want to make it look like film because it's an inexpensive way to produce quality, that doesn't look like backyard video.

DV looking like film is a Marketing tactic more than a medium development goal..

[Millennium]

24 FPS is only the standard in PAL. In NTSC, it's 30 (actually 29.97; I don't know what they were smoking when they came up with that number, but they did).

Anyway, the reason they did 30 FPS, I'd imagine, is that while it's fairly easy to downsample from 30 FPS to 24 or 29.97, you can't do the reverse. A case of "you can always cut off, but you can't put back".

[lucylawless]

Originally posted by Millennium:
<STRONG>24 FPS is only the standard in PAL. In NTSC, it's 30 (actually 29.97; I don't know what they were smoking when they came up with that number, but they did).

Anyway, the reason they did 30 FPS, I'd imagine, is that while it's fairly easy to downsample from 30 FPS to 24 or 29.97, you can't do the reverse. A case of "you can always cut off, but you can't put back".</STRONG>

I thought PAL was 25, and film was 24

[rod]

Originally posted by Millennium:
<STRONG>24 FPS is only the standard in PAL. In NTSC, it's 30 (actually 29.97; I don't know what they were smoking when they came up with that number, but they did).

Anyway, the reason they did 30 FPS, I'd imagine, is that while it's fairly easy to downsample from 30 FPS to 24 or 29.97, you can't do the reverse. A case of "you can always cut off, but you can't put back".</STRONG>

Pal is 25 FPS. Back in the good old day, NTSC 30 FPS color wouldn't play on Black & White TV's, but 29.97 FPS would. So they did it to be backwards compatible.

Rod