Q for all the NTSC users

[africanmarty]

hi i live in PAL country ( australia ) and as most of you konw dont have to worry about 24p or pull down... but i was curious what 24p footage looks like before and after it has been done properlly ( with pulldown removed ). can i see a clip of 24p before pull down and a clip of 24p properly done with pull down and everything... can you tell a difference in footage ( apart fromthe frame rate ) between the 2 ???

regards Marty.

[directore]

check for example these two:
(original transport file that is Canon HV20 24p/60i as captured)
http://disk.dvinfo.net/public/media/canonhv20/hv20-raw.m2t
and what you get after the pulldown removal
http://disk.dvinfo.net/public/media/canonhv20/hv20-H264-24p.mov

~60MB each

Basically the difference is in interlacing artifacts, I'm alergic to them, you may not be.

[africanmarty]

tanks so much for that footage much appriciated. Man that must be annoying to get interlaced lines when you guys shoot progressive.... what would happen if you simply deinterlaced it ? by that i mean without pulldown, it would get rid of the lines woudnt it ? man am i glad i live in PAL country.

[SenorKaffee]

Deinterlacing is never a "pretty" process because no deinterlacer is perfect. And in the end you would get 30p or 60p footage, not 24p.

There would be no problem if Canon would write the right flags in the MPEG stream.

[mik]

man am i glad i live in PAL country.

me too, i think this camcorder is much more easy to use in progressive mode if it's on pal :hv20-smilie03:

[TeamToken]

africanmarty, i too live in australia and am wondering what justifies the extra $1000 ($880 USD) for the PAL model.

the ntsc models are painfully cheap and with our good australian dollar exchange rate to US dollars its seems almost absurd to buy the pal version. however it seems with the workload and pulldown issues that it may be a worthwhile investment.

judging from a lot of the US footage ive seen it looks really good (well good enough - cant see anything bad) and is just what im after.

hmm decisions decisions...

[africanmarty]

africanmarty, i too live in australia and am wondering what justifies the extra $1000 ($880 USD) for the PAL model.


not sure if this is a stab towards me ? but i would sugguest get the camera that would be native to your coutry ( if you in ntsc land get the ntsc same goes for pal ) but i am glad i am in pal land becuase i have read alot of issues regarding flag issues with the 24p pulldown, wich i dont have to worrie about.... if any case i wanted ntsc footage it easier for pal users to convet to ntsc format wether it be 60i or 24p from footage from their pal hv20.

[Ian-T]

Hey marty.....It don't think it was a stab at you. It was a question that a lot of us ask ourselves in regards to price difference between PAL and NTSC cams. You're right..typically it's smarter for one to stick with the format made for their particular region. But I think things are "not quite" the same when it comes to high definition (as opposed to Standard Def).

Edit: This "issues" with NTSC are not really issues (at least to me). It's just pulldown removal. Most people are going for the 24P (even in PAL land). Here's my take on it...as an NTSC user wanting 24P...then they have to remove Pulldown. For a PAL user who wants 24P they will have to slow down their footage 4%...this in turn causes audio to be off sync. If you just slow th audio down then you are out of pitch (which being a musician I can hear plain as day) so theat means you would have to time compress the audio to slow down but stay in the correct pitch. So to me...whether you're a PAL or NTSC user trying to get to 24P...there are quirks on both sides. It's just a balancing act on which way you want to go.