Skip to main content
rathibhanr59901821
rathibhanr59901821
Participant
June 20, 2019
Question

Premiere Pro - FPS and Resolution

  • June 20, 2019
  • 1 reply
  • 1700 views

if I inset a 60 fps clip for example on a 30 fps timeline:

1) It's not automatically slow mo, like on a 24 fps timeline (what do you typically do?)

2) I want to be able to speed ramping easily as it were on a 24 fps timeline

3) It's really stuttery

I've also heard that scaling video clips from 4k to 1080p in Premiere Pro will result in better quality especially if you are uploading on youtube. Is that correct?

The reason why i don't use 24 fps timeline anymore is because I received these answer:

"Use the slowest fps that you have video shot in. So, if you are mixing 30fps and 60fps, use 30fps for the timeline sequence."

"Don't buy into the BS hype about 24fps being more cinematic. Yes, Film is generally 24fps (which actually has more to do with sound than video - Look up the history of Vitaphone and 24fps). TV historically is 30fps while video is generally 60fps. Having less frames DOES NOT make video look better. However, a slower SHUTTER can induce more motion blur and make things look smoother and more natural. Now, this is effected by the frame rate as a shutter can only be slowed to length of one full frame. However, unless you are making movies for the big screen, don't buy into the "Cinematic" BS these junior videographers are spewing. 24fps on a drone is THE WORST fps you can use. 60 fps is ideal for drones."

Looking forward to your answers. I imagine a premiere pro forum would have some experts to help me out

    This topic has been closed for replies.

    1 reply

    rathibhanr59901821
    rathibhanr59901821Author
    Participant
    June 20, 2019

    Ops I forgot one more question regarding export. Can anyone verify this? Or how would you export for youtube?

    "Use a 1080p/30fps sequence in Premiere and either scale down the footage to fit, or use the extra area to be able to re-frame your shots. You can really do some amazing things having that extra border to play with. When you export, select the YouTube 4K preset, but make the following changes.

    Check render at max depth and check max quality. Change the render to V2 pass and set the target to 70 and the max to 85 Mb/s

    The file will be large, but you will get very good quality."

    R Neil Haugen
    R Neil Haugen
    Legend
    June 20, 2019

    Ah yes ... wonderful discussions may abound.

    You can have endless arguments over the 23.97/24/29.976 frame-rate issue alone. Most "agree" that a "180 degree shutter" is more "cinematic" in general. That's a shutter at twice the 'speed' of the frame rate. So for 24fps, it would be a 1/48th second shutter, 29.x would be 1/60th, and on.

    One lengthy online argument had a guy what pointed to the work of one director especially referring to a couple "classic" films, and the look of them as being so totally ideally cinematic.

    Well, gee, thanks for adding to my point, said another respondent, as both films were filmed at different shutter settings than "180" for reasons within the gear & process used for those films. And still "looked cinematic" even to the guy arguing for 24fps/180* as the "only" possible cinematic look.

    I've seen a test setup where the guy blind tested for "cinematic" especially focusing on blur. And tried both 180 degree shutter and specific shutter speeds. He found most people thought something with a 1/48th sec. shutter looked more "cinematic" whether it was in 23.x, 24, or 29.x fps. Something around 60% thought the 1/48th example the "most cinematic" no matter the fps. Only about like 10% were able to actually accurately pick out the 24fps/180-shutter clips from the rest ... which would be around the case of close your eyes and say "that one".

    Next ... what's the "feel" of film for image? Dynamic range, contrast, colors at various brightnesses, all that?

    Well ... it varies dramatically by the film stock used for shooting, the processing, the film stock used for "prints", and the processing of that. Plus of course the brightness of the lamp and the darkness of the theater.

    So ... what sort of gear and situation will your end-users be using for viewing your work? That tells you something of real use.

    Pick an fps and shutter speed that looks nice and fits your needs. Faster fps naturally means more bandwidth during uploads and viewing/downloads. As does say trying to go 4k. So ... 1080 is fine, screens upscale rather decently, and 23.x/24/29.x fps are all usable.

    And using 60fps drone media on a 23.x/24/29.x sequence simply dropped to the sequence fps makes for a smoother view of that media anyway, in slight to moderate slo-mo.

    As to the export settings ... I disagree.

    "Render at max depth" is needed IF you are not using a full dedicated GPU in your processing, or possibly even with one if you mix CPU-only effects and GPU effects up in the Effects Control Panel ... check the list of GPU Accelerated Effects, and note that color,

    Warp, and several other things are GPU effects, but many other things aren't. Basic exporting with some color work and not a lot of extensive other effects will NOT need the "R-Max Depth" setting as it won't do anything, and occasionally can cause glitches. I leave that off. And that ain't internet hype, check the video here, which is outside the paywall.

    https://mixinglight.com/color-tutorial/demystifying-premiere-pros-color-management-and-finishing-pipeline/

    That was prepped through hours of contacts with engineer Francis Crossman, and in working with both Pat Inhofer and Robbie Carman at MixingLight.

    The "Render/Max Quality" is a scaling thing. If your are doing major resizing, including any Warp stabilization, you should probably test with that on. If not, it's a waste of time.

    2-pass renders especially for YouTube to me are an utter waste of CPU time. Modern gear does a very close job in 1-pass, and by the time it's re-encoded TWICE on YouTube, you cannot distinguish 1-pass or 2-pass.

    And 70-85Mbps for YouTube in a 1080 is also rather high.

    Another possibility for high quality YouTube uploads is using the DNxHD in the Op1a options. It's an intraframe so larger file size and longer uploads, but ... say at 30/40 target/max, should get a pretty decent YouTube "experience".

    And your mileage will ALWAYS vary! Test.

    Neil

    Everyone's mileage always varies ...
      rathibhanr59901821
      rathibhanr59901821Author
      Participant
      June 20, 2019

      Thank you very much for the elaborate response Neil. Great points. Btw I’m primarily gonna record in 2.7k 60 fps + 1080p 120 fps on my GoPro and 4k 30 fps + 1080p 120 fps on my drone. Would it be optimal to work on a 23.976 timeline even though I don’t use any 24p clips? For my outcome I aim to get the absolute best quality possible when uploading it to youtube. + If i insert my 2.7k 60fps clips on a 30 fps timeline the playback lags.. If I insert it on a 24 fps timeline it’s running buttery smooth. Why is that so?

      “Another possibility for high quality YouTube uploads is using the DNxHD in the Op1a options. It's an intraframe so larger file size and longer uploads, but ... say at 30/40 target/max, should get a pretty decent YouTube "experience”.”

      Would you say that this is the “best” export for youtube and which preset would you pick?

      Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
      Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices