MediaCollege.com Blog

Frames per second: 24 vs 48

Dave — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 02:28:24 GMT

It's no secret that I'm not a fan of 24p, in fact I think it's the most glaring deficiency in modern filmmaking techniques. Frankly I find it hard to believe that we've done so much to make films so realistic and immersive in almost every way, yet we're still stuck with the jarring, unnatural flicker-fest that is 24p.

I honestly believe that within a couple of decades we'll look back on 24p with a condescending smile and wonder how audiences ever took it seriously.

Of course not everyone shares my enthusiasm for improved "temporal resolution". The most common argument against 48p or 60p is that it's "too real" (see my previous blog post for more on this and my rebuttal).

In a nutshell, I feel that the "too real" argument is no different now to when it was first used against sound and colour in movies. In any case, if filmmakers really want to lower the technical specs in return for improved artistic quality, they are free to do so (e.g. The Artist, The Elephant Man, etc).

Peter Jackson had a severe reality check after a preview screening of The Hobbit at CinemaCon, when about half the audience reacted negatively to the higher frame rate (48p). Jackson is a big fan of both 3-D and 48p, so it was probably a bit of a shock to see the bad press he's been getting over this screening.

However I maintain that it's all about getting used to it. 24p is very much the "film look" that we're all used to, and it's going to take some adjusting to adapt to a more realistic look. Just as a movie-goers took time to adapt to talkies, movie-goers will need time to adapt to 48p. I believe younger people (especially gamers) will adapt more quickly because they are less institutionalized.

Mark my words. It may take time but eventually some higher frame rate such as 48p or 60p will become the standard and it will appear completely appropriate for a film look. Before you die you'll have come to expect it in every film you watch. Trust me!

Premiere Pro CS6

Dave — Sat, 14 Apr 2012 04:25:33 GMT

As a release date approaches, Adobe has unveiled many more features in the CS6 lineup. As far as Premiere Pro goes, it looks like a decent upgrade. Nothing Earth-shattering but plenty of fairly important changes.

I like the look of the new interface. The old interface is still available and I assume you can still dynamically change windows and panels as before. I particularly like the way you can now re-organize and remove buttons in the monitor panels - I always thought they had a lot of empty space, and if you primarily use a keyboard or third-party controller, the buttons are a useless waste of screen space.

In the revamped Project panel you now have 16x9 thumbnails that are much more functional, including setting in-and-out points without having to open the file. And yes, thumbnails appear to have adopted Apple's famous direct scrubbing feature.

Other interesting new features:
- Improved Audio Meter panel.
- Improved Media Browser.
- Expanded multicam support (I'm interested in how this pans out, as I've never thought the multicam feature offered much advantage over traditional methods).
- Improved image stabilization with Warp Stabilizer, and rolling shutter repair.
- Adjustment layers (like After Effects).
- Flexible audio tracks (yay!).
- Many new marker features.
- Easily change sequence settings to match a new clip.
- Quicker method of applying effects.
- Enhanced 64-bit Mercury Playback Engine.
- Perform more functions in real time without interrupting video playback.
- Improved Media Encoder, with flexible render queues and improved presets.
- Improved ingest with Adobe Prelude (available separately).
- Improved color grading with Speedgrade (available separately, this is Adobe's answer to Apple's Color).

Premiere Pro CS5 concentrated on performance improvements more than the interface itself. PPRO CS6 seems to have gone the other way, picking up some slack on the interface and making it all easier and quicker to use. Although Adobe is still promising significant performance boosts, it looks like it's mostly about the interface.

Below: The new default interface, which I love because it's much more how I prefer to set things up anyway:

Download a PDF summary of Premiere Pro CS6:
http://success.adobe.com/assets/en/d..._WN_Reveal.pdf

Check out the Production Premium lineup:
http://success.adobe.com/en/na/progr...16108_nab.html

Conan O'Brien's Editors Back Premiere Pro

Dave — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 08:58:15 GMT

Almost a year ago, Conan O'Brien's editing team made a funny and rather "cutting" video about Apple Final Cut X. If you haven't seen that video watch it here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxKYuF9pENQ

Now those same guys have made a follow-up. Where did they go after becoming disillusioned with Final Cut? To Premiere Pro, and it seems they're surprisingly happy with it. Be cynical if you like but I think they speak for quite a few editors. There's one thing in this video that stands out for me, and that's when one of them recalls his last attempt at using Premiere. If, like him, you haven't used Premiere for many years then please do yourself a favor and at least give it a serious look. It's not the same program any more and it does deliver at a professional level.

Note that there's supposedly a sneak preview of the next version of Premiere Pro in this video. Technically that's true but don't get excited, it doesn't show or tell anything very useful.

Here's the new video:

The Cost of Piracy

Dave — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 07:40:03 GMT

A humorous video is doing the rounds, in which Rob Reid takes a sarcastic look at the losses claimed by the entertainment industry as a result of piracy.

Just to be clear, our official position at MediaCollege.com is that piracy is bad. We actively police our forums to remove any links to pirated content.

Regarding the way piracy is being confronted by the entertainment industry, our opinion is that it could hardly being doing a worse job. For starters, anti-piracy lobbyists are outright lying about the losses incurred. The figures they quote are patently absurd, as Rob Reid illustrates. One obvious flaw in their figures: They assume that every illegal download (and share between friends) replaces a legitimate purchase. This makes no sense - if I copy a hard drive containing 1000 albums, has that stopped me from purchasing those 1000 albums? No, I was never going to be a purchaser in the first place. From what I've observed, the vast majority of all pirated music is never even listened to, and it's certainly not replacing purchases.

More importantly, the entertainment industry itself is the worst cause of piracy. For example, I love to buy music, movies and TV programs. I have disposable income and I want to spend some of it on digital entertainment. Unfortunately I can't.

I can't download Blu-ray movies. If I buy a Blu-ray disk I have a nightmare trying to play it on my computers due to licensing issues with playback software and region compatibility problems with hardware. In fact I recently gave up on Blu-ray altogether for these reasons. Dear Sony, what was the point of winning the HD war if you refuse to provide a usable product?

I want to rent or buy movies online, but I can't. "Not available in your country" say all the legal websites I visit. Well actually it is available in my country but only from pirates! Why won't you sell it to me legally? I'd rather pay for it but you won't let me.

I want to buy music online so I tried it through iTunes. What a disaster. Nothing is easy with iTunes - I can't transfer music to other devices, I can't play it on my stereo and everything about it is difficult. The only way I can put my music on my electronic drums' headphones is to rip it. I don't have any of these problems with a simple wav or mp3 file.

And how about Hollywood's movie release schedule? What do you think will happen if you advertise a film in Europe but don't make it legally available for another six months? If you guessed "You'll encourage piracy", congratulations, you have more brains than Hollywood's distributors.

The list of incredibly stupid self-sabotaging decisions coming from the entertainment industry goes on. They are their own worst enemies. My message to them is: "Shut up, provide me with a usable product and take my money! I want to support you. I want to stop piracy. I want a legitimate trading system for my entertainment. But you make it too difficult and then blame pirates."

Anyway, Rob's video is below. You can also find many infographics on the web showing the idiocy of the anti-piracy lobbyists (here's one example: http://bit.ly/AubyxD).

Why videos go viral

Dave — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 01:04:00 GMT

Here's an entertaining and informative video from Kevin Allocca, YouTube's trends manager, about how and why videos go viral. In a nutshell it comes down to three things:
(1) Tastemakers
(2) Communities of participation
(3) Unexpectedness

I'll let Kevin explain....

MediaCollege.com on YouTube

Dave — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:17:02 GMT

At last I've made a start on our YouTube channel. It's a very slow start, but it's a start.

One of the reasons I've been putting this off is that I really don't like being in front of the camera. I'll take just about any position behind the camera but I can't get happy in front of it. Still, we can't (yet) afford a professional presenter so for now you're stuck with me fronting the videos.

You can subscribe to the channel at www.youtube.com/user/MediaCollege.

Editors Keys

Dave — Mon, 24 May 2010 00:57:56 GMT

This week we're taking a look at an interesting company called EditorsKeys.com. They're the company behind those coloured shortcut keyboards you may have seen in studios all around the country.

Editors Keys specialise in shortcut keyboards for a range of programs such as Avid, Final Cut, Premiere, Pro Tools and Photoshop. The company offers a guarantee that if the shortcut keyboards don't speed up your editing by up to 40%, they'll offer a full money back promise! They work by showing all of the keyboard shortcuts on your keyboard to save you time trailing through all the menus and tool bars.

More interestingly they've just launched a range of recording gear which includes new studio quality USB Microphones and portable vocal booths to help record some great voiceovers in your home studio.

I've just received some keyboard sets in the mail (see photo below) and I'll try to have a go with them ASAP. We've requested some more products from the company, so look out for a review coming soon!

For more information check out the link below:
http://www.editorskeys.com

Attached Images

Free Video Background Loops

Dave — Wed, 05 May 2010 01:10:27 GMT

Recently I received a selection of video background loops from a company called Footage Firm. The videos are well-made and come on DVD with both SD and HD versions. Footage Firm is running a free giveaway promotion where all you have to pay is the postage and they'll send you the DVDs free. I doubt whether you'll find a better deal than that, so check it out here: Free Video Backgrounds

Media Personality Profiles

Dave — Sat, 01 May 2010 00:04:16 GMT

In what we hope is the start of an ongoing series, we're introducing a new "Industry Profiles" section featuring interviews with successful media personalities. If you want to know what it's like to be a radio host, a video game designer or a TV program developer, check it out. Over time we hope to add many more interviews, providing lots of variety and interesting insights into different types of media careers.

Thanks to our new contract writer Antonia Anderson for conducting and compiling these interviews.

www.mediacollege.com/profile

Free Music Files

Dave — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 09:59:52 GMT

New to our download section is a small selection of free music downloads. We've only got a couple of tracks so far (with several versions each), but if there's enough interest we'll look at commissioning more soon.

We're paying a local muso to compose and record these files, so:
(1) Feel free to make a donation.
(2) If you think you can do better and you'd like to contribute, please contact us.

Does 3-D Affect Your Health?

Dave — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 04:36:43 GMT

We've seen the 3-D hype, now we're moving into the backlash phase. More and more people are expressing concern/indignation about the onslaught of 3-D content.

Typical is this article from CNN that worries about short and long-term health effects of watching 3-D. There are some good points made, especially the fact that we really don't know what effect prolonged 3-D exposure has since people have traditionally only watched the duration of a movie in one sitting.

Also significant is the trend of 3-D hardware manufacturers to add health warnings to their products. Samsung's warnings about epileptic seizures, stroke, motion sickness, perceptual after-effects, disorientation, eye strain and decreased postural stability sound ominous indeed. However it's probably safe to assume that the warnings are based on worst-case speculation as much as actual research, in order to mitigate against any possible legal action in future.

If 3-D is to progress, this is a topic that needs to be investigated. Hopefully the major manufacturers will see the benefit of getting the research underway as soon as possible so this won't drag on forever.

RIP Margaret Moth

Dave — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 02:01:08 GMT

Internationally renowned photojournalist Margaret Moth (Wikipedia page) has died of cancer aged 59.

She initially wanted to be a mechanic but could not get an apprenticeship.

Instead she became New Zealand's first female television news camera operator.

Wanted to change her name to Tiger Moth but wasn't allowed.

Covered the Persian Gulf War, the rioting that followed Indira Gandhi's assassination, the civil war in Tbilisi, Georgia, and the war in Sarajevo.

Almost killed (and lost much of her face) when she was shot in the face covering the war in Sarajevo in 1992.

A fearless skydiver and an enthusiastic bell ringer.

Quote: Margaret Moth

I would have liked to have gone out with a bit more flair but I feel I can die with dignity. I don't think it matters how long you live, so long as you can say: 'I've got everything out of life'.

What's So Great About 24P?

Dave — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 22:29:56 GMT

24P means 24 frames per second, which is the traditional frame rate for film. It's lower than modern video but many videomakers choose to use it because they like the effect.

If, like me, you wonder why anyone would purposely downgrade their video in this manner, you might like to watch this video from MacVideo.tv in which respected filmmaker Stu Maschwitz makes the case for 24P. It takes him a long 10 minutes but it's very eloquent and one of the best explanations I've ever heard. In essence he's saying it's an artistic choice similar to other techniques that involve removing information. He wants the audience to work to experience the narrative, and he feels that providing "too much information" is undesirable.

It's a compelling argument but I don't buy it.

First of all I'll quickly address the test audiences cited by Stu: I'd like to see the same tests done with randomized audiences in a genuine double-blind test where people are immune to group-think (would you cheer a film in a room full of filmmakers who were booing it?). These anecdotal examples don't convince me of anything.

To be honest I've always had a bit of a smug attitude about 24P. I can't help thinking the real attraction is nostalgia - 24P looks like the films you loved as a child. It's also a way for film students to pretend they have some special artistic insight that lets them appreciate film in ways that normal people can't.

Sure there are cases where 24P looks great, in the same way that some films work well in black and white. That doesn't mean that all films should be B&W, or that B&W is inherently more artistic than colour.

My strongest reaction to 24P was in the first scene of Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. I had two reactions to that scene: The first was the enormity of the world Peter Jackson had created. The second was that I couldn't follow the action for all the flickering. I was almost overcome with sympathy for filmmakers restricted by this archaic frame rate. I was trying my best to immerse myself in Middle Earth but I kept getting pulled back to reality by the horrible stuttering pseudo-motion of 24fps.

To me it's important to feel that I'm part of a movie. A lot of effort goes towards achieving that effect, from continuity specialists to colour-correctors all working to keep the illusion intact. When I watch a film the cinema has a big screen, the room is dark, the sound surrounds me, other people (should) stay quiet, and the whole thing is set up to keep me in the alternate reality.

Anything that yanks me from the world of the movie to the real world is annoying, and 24P does exactly that - it reminds me that I'm watching a film and this isn't real. It's like seeing a boom mic in shot.

Stu Maschwitz feels that super-smooth motion is too much information, and that films shouldn't be too realistic. I say that if the same logic was used by all filmmakers, we'd still be watching 16fps, 4x3 black & white movies with no sound.

Filmmakers would generally agree that for most projects, creating a realistic-looking environment is desirable. We have the technology to do it. Let's not deny ourselves the opportunity by staying stuck in the past. Many people thought that "talkies" heralded the end of artistic filmmaking. They were wrong, and so are those who resist better frame rates.

60P for me thanks!

The Future of Flash Video

Dave — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:14:52 GMT

Whenever I get the chance (like now) I like to boast about how I predicted the success of Flash video back when it was widely considered a non-starter. As soon as it was possible to construct a viable Flash player I did so. My first attempt was in Flash 5 and it eventually became the MC Media Player. Unfortunately I wasn't aggressive enough with my development or marketing (and my mediocre coding skills probably didn't help), so I watched as others took the idea much further and did much better than I did. I cry when I think about it. But that's another story.

Importantly, my faith in Flash had nothing to do with video quality. Flash was a dramatic improvement for webmasters - it allowed us to easily add a single video player that worked equally well on all major platforms. It also provided much more flexibility and customization options than any other format. Of course, to succeed it also had to be better for end users and it was - videos just appeared on the web page and users no longer needed to care about formats and plugins.

In short, the player is more important than the video quality.

Of course Flash went on to became the dominant web video format, thanks largely to support from sites such as Youtube. The old days of the "big three" being Windows Media, Quicktime and Real Media are ancient history.

Now, in 2010 I find myself having come full circle and wondering if Flash video is nearing the end of its era. This time I'm not in the minority though and here's why...

Flash is proprietary. This isn't a show-stopper (most other major web formats are proprietary) but it does attract a lot of resistance from both open-source advocates and commercial competitors. No-one likes paying licence fees and free alternatives obviously have an advantage. This will become more of an issue with HTML5...

HTML5 is coming. Most of the big browsers are backing HTML5, which was originally planned to include a standardized video specification. Unfortunately no suitable codec was settled upon and HTML5 is going ahead, at least for now, without defining a specific video format. However it does include a element that allows embedded videos without the hassle of using a player (as you have to with Flash video). The player is instead built using HTML and CSS.

When it comes to video, HTML is moving towards more standards-compliance with a strong preference for open-source/patent-free. That's not good for Flash, WinMedia, Quicktime or any of the others.

Google likes HTML5 and open source, and has moved into the video codec business. Google now owns On2, the company behind many successful video codecs (ironically including VP6 - the codec that was adopted by Adobe and made Flash video what it is).

Interestingly, back in 2001 On2 released their VP3 codec as open-source after losing a battle against H.264. VP3 went on to become one of the current leading open-source video formats in OGG/Theora, and is currently the leading open-source option for HTML5. There has also been some speculation about Flash supporting OGG and a few interesting projects to make it happen.

Anyway, I think it's reasonable to expect Google to start using its own codec on YouTube with HTML5 (supported by Chrome and maybe other browsers). I also expect Google to release a codec (e.g. VP8) as open-source in the hope that it will do better than Theora and be accepted into the HTML5 spec. If that happens it's hard to imagine how Adobe/Flash could respond. They will certainly need to include support for the codec in Flash. Perhaps Adobe's best strategy is to forget about promoting their own preferred formats (flv, f4v, etc) and instead concentrate on providing a platform to make advanced players. To some extent they've already done this by supporting H.264. In future, webmasters who want a simple option can use the element; those who want bells and whistles in their video players can still use Flash.

However I'm not sure how far that approach can work either. I've had a look at YouTube's experimental HTML5 player and I'm impressed. At first glance it appears very similar to the Flash player and most users would probably not notice the change. Vimeo has also rolled out an HTML5 player which is virtually indistinguishable from the Flash version.

On the downside, video playback is a little shonky and the video quality often seems poor compared to Flash. However I think these are only a temporary problems.

Flash isn't welcome on iPhone, iPad & other devices. As if the situation wasn't already bad enough for Flash, there seems little hope that it will work on many mobile devices (some say impossible). That's a very serious problem for Flash, arguably the killing blow.

So in summary I think it's safe to say that Flash's native video formats (flv etc) are terminally ill. Flash is likely to remain an option for advanced webmasters needing customization beyond the capability of HTML5, or who want to keep their applications closed-source. For most webmasters though, HTML5 players will eventually become the standard way to deliver online video.

When will this happen? When Internet Explorer begins supporting the element. (The other big browsers already do.) There's still no official announcement from Microsoft but a launch target for IE9 should be announced in 2010. Although I wouldn't put anything past Microsoft, I don't think they can ignore the element, so I expect HTML5 video to gain a lot of momentum in the second half of 2010 and become the preferred option for most new applications in 2011.

Website Update, Feb 2010

Dave — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 03:37:46 GMT

It's been a busy week at MediaCollege.com. If you've visited the forum you'll have seen that we've had a major upgrade - you can read about it in this thread. I'm personally quite excited about the new possibilities.

The Newsroom is starting to take shape. So far I've posted a few quick stories to help get the system working and I'm still fine-tuning it. I'm aiming to post at least a few stories most weeks but we'll see how it goes.

We've been commissioning a few more articles and tutorials for the website. To be honest we're having trouble finding top-class writers who can write about electronic media production. If you think you have the chops to write for MediaCollege.com, let me know. We can only pay per-article on a part-time basis (we don't have enough money for full-time staff - yet). Please, only serious writers with a solid command of written English.

Here are a few recent examples from different writers:

Video:
Create a Video to Sell Your Home

Audio:
How to Prepare for Studio Recording with a Click-Track

Photography:
Quick tips for photographing a wedding

Computers:
Extend Your Wireless Internet Range
What is "virtualization"?
What is SQL?
What is XML?
Why Choose Linux?

The plan for 2010 is for me to be working pretty much full-time on MediaCollege.com. My first task will be to figure out where to go with the MC Media Player (any Flash video gurus out there?). After that, the next priority is to tidy and update parts of the website that are looking old and tired (big job). At the same time I'll be plugging away writing and commissioning new tutorials, so I hope to see a lot of development this year.

One area we want to develop is our YouTube channel (still empty so there's no point linking to it). I wanted to wait until we had a good system for easily posting Videos in the forum and newsroom. Now that we have it, look out for more video tutorials and other stuff.

The website is now averaging around 30,000 unique visitors per day. It goes from strength to strength and we're all very grateful to each and every one of you.

Cheers,
Dave