30fps vs. 60fps: Pros and Cons ..?

[dmiraie]

Why might you choose one over the other?  Does it depend on video content?  File size?  Website destination?  Are there some cases where one or the other is simply inappropriate?  And why is 30fps apparently considered "more cinematic"?  Thnx!

[excited_Genie16B8]

For myself, I would choose 60 over 30 simply because I don't like interlacing and 30p isn't a standard. It's not part of either the Blu-ray or the broadcast specification.

But you're excluding what I think is the best choice for pretty much any project, 24 fps.  That is the cinema standard, and the most 'professional' looking frame rate.

[R Neil Haugen]

You say poetahtoe, and I say, puhtaytoe ...

The older real-film movie cameras used an effective shutter-speed of approximately 24fps ... 23.976. It has of course a fair amount of blurring during panning and motion by subjects in the frame, and ... it's what most people are 'used' to seeing. For many this is "the only standard that's an acceptable standard".

For me, it's a bit too ... blurry ... and I prefer the slightly faster "30" ... which is actually 29.98fps. While there are more that prefer "24" over "30", well, it's what I shoot. And post-process.

For many modern web-based uses, there's a wider range of frame-rates that can be used. Some like the sharpness even in motion of 60fps or higher. Some ... really, really don't like that look.

The question of interlacing comes in during some types of broadcast and/or disk distribution. As I don't do a lot of that, I stay "progressive" until I need to make an interlaced deliverable (export).

Neil

[Nexahs1138]

There are different formats all over the world, NTSA uses 23 and 29, PAL uses 24 and 25, but then you have the whole internet argument of 30 and 60 which is all for web based viewing. When you look at cinema you have two options, 24 and 48, 24 is used because that's how many drawings are in 1 second of animation, and some films have used the HFR such as the Hobbit trilogy, which show a huge difference.

What I'm trying to say is that unless you're making a movie for a cinematic release then there's no point in doing 60 FPS as it really doesn't make a difference, the only thing that matters is whether it's HD or not.

[Ann Bens]

Nexahs1138  wrote

PAL uses 24 and 25

PAL does not use 24, just 25.

[Meg The Dog · Accepted solution]

dmiraie  wrote

why is 30fps apparently considered "more cinematic"?

Because it is closer in appearance to the theatrical film standard, 24 fps.

Why might you choose one over the other?

Because of the look it gives your work. If you want your project to have a more cinematic appearance, you would want to use a frame rate as close to 24fps as possible. If you are not concerned about that, and want to have the smoothest motion possible, you would use a higher frame rate.

Does it depend on video content? 

Yes, but more about how you want that content to appear, the rendition you want that content to have.

File size?

Not so much, your file size is determined by the bitrate of the file, not the number of frames per second.

Website destination?

YouTube, Vimeo, etc. allow for most any frame rate source. It is possible you might have a webmaster that has certain preferred formats for video inserted on a particular site. It is my understanding that the current and earlier iPhones (while they can record 60fps video) always playback the file displaying at 30fps.

Are there some cases where one or the other is simply inappropriate?

Not that I can think of. Generally speaking, if the content is of sufficient interest, the frame rate is ignored by viewers.

MtD