Frame per seconds animation dilemma

HFR - 60 fps, is not a cinematic look and so far the general audience reaction to high frame rate projection is mixed with the majority of the audience preferring 24 fps projection in theaters. Think the HFR distribution of The Hobbit. My wife, a huge fan of the book and the Lord of the Rings, walked out of the HFR (48 fps) movie after about 10 minutes. We talked for a while in the Lobby and she said she would try it on a standard screen. It was much better for her.

Cartoons - Bugs Bunny, are projected at 24 fps but they actually only create 12 different drawings per second, they just photograph them twice with the animation camera. They look great - because we are used to seeing them that way and the artists designed the motion to fit their production method.

If you are animating with keyframes in AE and you change the comp frame rate the time position of the keyframes does not change so the animations take the same amount of time whether your comps is 10 fps or 60. The problem with distributing at 60, if it is really 60 fps and not 29.97 interlaced, is that most devices still can't playback that kind of footage, It's incompatible with most television and most broadcast, and the data rate is a lot higher. YouTube always checks the connection and then feeds the viewer what they think will give them the most reasonable chance of real time playback without stuttering. That means the a lot of your audience will be watching your 59.94 P footage at 29.97fps. What that means is that you need to learn how to design for the lower frame rate.

There is a lot to learn. There is a lot to experiment with. The lower the frame rate the harder it is to design motion that looks smooth and does not judder or strobe when you watch it. I would spend some time doing some research and carefully examining the story you want to tell. Peter Jackson admits a major failure with the Hobbit at 48fps. It was a noble experiment that did not help him tell the story for most folks in the audience.