Originally posted by: Doctor M
To be fair at least 23.976 is close. Until there's a true 24 fps home format it'll have to do.
If the lines of resolution bother you get an HD-DVD/BluRay Player.
Anyone with a tin ear can hear how bad 25 fps sped up audio is. Those extra lines of resolution mean squat in comparison. Well that's not true because pitch is preserved these days. And to be perfectly honest, coming from a PAL country you do miss the 90 or so lines that is missing from NTSC whos resolution holds 480 lines, PAL has 576 lines, so From your point of view (if you're in an ntsc country) the difference is about a 20% increase in resolution compared to what you're used to. If you don't think that's significant then why is it that so many people here think there's such a big difference between non-anamorphic and anamorphic NTSC?
2.35:1 NTSC: 720x272
2.35:1 PAL: 720x324
The September DVD's will be in (about) the above resolutions.
2.35:1 Anamorphic NTSC: 720x360
2.35:1 Anamorphic PAL: 720x432
You still don't think it's significant?
And even when I watch movie in PAL and then NTSC I cannot tell the difference in speed. Even movies that don't have a corrected pitch. And I have an excellent ear, I’m not tone deaf, I distinguish pitch and tone and volume probably better then most people - to me MP3's sound hollow compared to CDA... yet most people can't tell the difference. MY visual senses are probably more forgiving then my auditory ones. Can you honestly say that a Pal movie that isn't pitch-corrected sounds wrong to you? If I gave you 3 Pal movies (one shot in 25 fps, one shot in 24 fps and pitch corrected, and the other shot in 24 fps and not pitch corrected) – would you really be able to pick out the one that wasn't pitch corrected? I'd find it difficult just to find a Pal DVD that wasn't pitch corrected in the first place.
The one thing that does bother me is "steady" pan shots in NTSC, because they always look awful due to the jitter, aside from that the pulldown doesn't bother me too much - I read once on the internet that more of the American population finds NTSC jitter noticeable then British people find the increased pitch noticeable - and as I said, to be fair these days movies released in PAL still play at the correct pitch. Also, from what I've heard when NTSC is broadcast the signal is highly unstable which causes it to be called "Never The Same Colour". I've never seen NTSC broadcast, so I don't really know, but someone told me this was related to the framerate being 29.97 instead of 30 fps.Originally posted by: Doctor M
Frankly I'd go so far as to say 99% of all film (for theatrical release) is shot at 24 fps regardless of country. The rare times you'll find true 25 fps film is when the destination is expected to be TV in a PAL country. Even the U.S. shoots it's TV at 24 fps instead of 30.
Yes I know that NTSC countries never shoot movies intended for cinema in 30fps, and I really don't know how accurate your "99%" is - because as I said you can never really know. If your ntsc dvd plays back at a 2:2:3:2:3 pulldown, then you may know - but I have a feeling that slowing the movie down to 23.976 fps is more common then using that pulldown (not that I'm an expert but someone told me that pitch suffers much more when it's slowed down a bit compared to if it's sped up). I have heard of cinema movies being shot in 25 fps instead of 24, mostly movies from Britain and other Pal countries - but you can never really know, I strongly suspect that quite a few American hollywood movies were shot at 25 fps too. I really wouldn't be prepared to estimate how many movies I think might be shot at the faster frame rate, because I'm really in no position to even make an informed estimate, I would simply be stabbing in the dark.To be fair at least 23.976 is close. Until there's a true 24 fps home format it'll have to do.
If the lines of resolution bother you get an HD-DVD/BluRay Player.
Anyone with a tin ear can hear how bad 25 fps sped up audio is. Those extra lines of resolution mean squat in comparison. Well that's not true because pitch is preserved these days. And to be perfectly honest, coming from a PAL country you do miss the 90 or so lines that is missing from NTSC whos resolution holds 480 lines, PAL has 576 lines, so From your point of view (if you're in an ntsc country) the difference is about a 20% increase in resolution compared to what you're used to. If you don't think that's significant then why is it that so many people here think there's such a big difference between non-anamorphic and anamorphic NTSC?
2.35:1 NTSC: 720x272
2.35:1 PAL: 720x324
The September DVD's will be in (about) the above resolutions.
2.35:1 Anamorphic NTSC: 720x360
2.35:1 Anamorphic PAL: 720x432
You still don't think it's significant?
And even when I watch movie in PAL and then NTSC I cannot tell the difference in speed. Even movies that don't have a corrected pitch. And I have an excellent ear, I’m not tone deaf, I distinguish pitch and tone and volume probably better then most people - to me MP3's sound hollow compared to CDA... yet most people can't tell the difference. MY visual senses are probably more forgiving then my auditory ones. Can you honestly say that a Pal movie that isn't pitch-corrected sounds wrong to you? If I gave you 3 Pal movies (one shot in 25 fps, one shot in 24 fps and pitch corrected, and the other shot in 24 fps and not pitch corrected) – would you really be able to pick out the one that wasn't pitch corrected? I'd find it difficult just to find a Pal DVD that wasn't pitch corrected in the first place.
The one thing that does bother me is "steady" pan shots in NTSC, because they always look awful due to the jitter, aside from that the pulldown doesn't bother me too much - I read once on the internet that more of the American population finds NTSC jitter noticeable then British people find the increased pitch noticeable - and as I said, to be fair these days movies released in PAL still play at the correct pitch. Also, from what I've heard when NTSC is broadcast the signal is highly unstable which causes it to be called "Never The Same Colour". I've never seen NTSC broadcast, so I don't really know, but someone told me this was related to the framerate being 29.97 instead of 30 fps.Originally posted by: Doctor M
Frankly I'd go so far as to say 99% of all film (for theatrical release) is shot at 24 fps regardless of country. The rare times you'll find true 25 fps film is when the destination is expected to be TV in a PAL country. Even the U.S. shoots it's TV at 24 fps instead of 30.
Anyway at least Pal plays back frame-for-frame, that almost makes up for the difference in speed (which although I can't notice it's still a little difficult to accept you're watching a movie timed incorrectly). At the end of the day they're both stupid standards. They have to make a 600Htz display standard for TV (that's 600 FPS), then that will handle everything fine (24 fps, 25 fps, 30 fps), played back at the correct frame rate with no pulldown, or shift in speed - when broadcast.