Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Why is 23.976 and 25 still around?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
4 replies to this topic

#1 of 5 OFFLINE   Judgment

Judgment

    Auditioning



  • 4 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 19 2011

Posted November 19 2011 - 01:52 AM

I play bluray on the PC and run at certain refresh rate to avoid jitter. When I play an import from Europe, some are 25 fps and that strategy goes out the window unless I switch the refresh rate. I don't think 23.976 should be around for new releases, either. Do you think it's really necessary for these different frame rates to exist in the age of bluray? I would have hoped bluray would have been standardized to 24 for movies for all regions. Who made the decision for this? IMO it was biased and self serving. What do you think? Should we get rid of the legacy NTSC/PAL junk?

#2 of 5 ONLINE   Yorkshire

Yorkshire

    Screenwriter



  • 1,316 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 22 2009

Posted November 19 2011 - 04:37 AM

I can tell you why 1080i/50 is still around. In the UK many stations simulcast in SD and HD. These boadcasts have to run at identical times. It'd be no good if Aunty broadcast The Great Escape on BBC1 in PAL and on BBC1 HD in 24fps (all be it interlaced). The 5% speed up of PAL would result in these broadcasts going out of synch. Steve W
Correct a fool and he will hate you, correct a wise man and he will thank you.

#3 of 5 OFFLINE   Judgment

Judgment

    Auditioning



  • 4 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 19 2011

Posted November 19 2011 - 05:20 AM

That I understand. TV is different and needs to be backwards compatible. It's the same thing with 29.97 (NTSC), but I guess I should have framed it more clearly. I am only talking about blurays of theater releases, which are pretty much all meant to be presented in 24. And 24p seems to be part of the bluray spec, so I'm not getting why they continue releasing theater releases NTSC and PAL compatible, other than as another artificial excuse to restrict region.

#4 of 5 OFFLINE   Brian Kidd

Brian Kidd

    Screenwriter



  • 1,717 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 14 2000

Posted November 19 2011 - 08:15 AM

Will, it's because there are still a huge number of SD television sets in use. Blu-ray players are so cheap, now, that many people use them as their primary DVD player, even if they don't yet have a digital set. Since the studios want Blu-ray to be attractive to the widest-possible customer base, they need to make it compatible with older televisions. Since it's easy to convert a 23.976 signal to a standard NTSC signal, it makes sense to go ahead and do that. It will be interesting to see what happens once SD televisions are finally replaced completely by digital sets.
---------------------------------------------
Support Film Preservation before it's too late!
---------------------------------------------

#5 of 5 OFFLINE   Judgment

Judgment

    Auditioning



  • 4 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 19 2011

Posted November 20 2011 - 01:47 AM

Yes, there's that. I just wonder how many people somehow still stuck with SD televisions are buying bluray discs and the players to watch them. Personally I have not known or seen a single person that bought a bluray player before an HDTV, and I doubt that's rare. The priority of backward compatibility with an undetermined amount of SD users Vs. region-encumbered blurays with sync and sound issues already released seems off to me. Also, what would be the defining factor where SD televisions are considered fully replaced, and who's going to decide it? Like I said, my guess is that it's actually motivated by region control, and I don't think the shift will happen until they're ready to sell you yet another version of your favorite movies.