|
|
24p is 23.976 frames per second
30p is 29.97 frames per second
60i is 59.94 fields per second. Each field is 1/2 a frame giving a final frame rate of 29.97 frames per second just like 30p.
PF30 and PF24 are shot in their respective frame rates but stored in a 60i format. So they will all say 29.97fps since that is the speed of 60i.
30p will look slower than 60i since it will capture less motion. In a way 60i is double the frame rate but 1/2 the frame resolution of 30p. I think any progressive mode will look better than interlaced when it is paused.
|
|
|
I just found out that sadly, my Canon does not put the shooting mode on the video. So all my videos say 29.97fps because they are all formatted for 60i. Even though within they may in fact be 24p or 30p. Is there any way for me to tell what the actual hidden rate is of the video?
Also, is there a specific format deinterlacers are trying to get the data into? Are they going for 24p, or 60p, or does it not matter to them so long as it is a p? Or do they try to hit a native rate of the playback device?
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
I read the video look was more from the aperture. Try PF30 with the "movie mode" or whatever its called on the canon.
|
|
|
I don't mind the pixel loss. Looks way better than the jumpy camera...
FYI PF24 is actually 24p formatted as 60i. PD understands this though and can rework it into its proper 24p. 24p is good for digital mediums like computers and digital TVs. Might need to tell PD to use 24p instead of 60i or whatever its producing to. 60i is mainly analog TVs.
|
|
|
|
The Canon stabilization works but it can't compensate for the bounce of riding a bike. The Cyberlink compensation performs much better there.
|
|
|
|
Yes, FAT can not support that large a file size. Might even google around for specific ways to format your drive to facilitate use of large files. But NTFS should be enough. Glad you finally got a sensible error message.
|
|
|
|
Have you tried mp4?
|
|
|
I tried out the camera shake smoother and its pretty good. With that in mind I wonder if I shouldn't stop using Canons in-camcorder image stabilization algorithms? They still have the physical kind but they say that is for when zoomed way in.
Opinions?
|
|
|
|
What version do you have? How much RAM?
|
|
|
My PD9 crashes at boot so I thought I would give PD11 a shot. This also crashes at boot. I figured I should downgrade my driver since it actually used to work. Still crashes.
I can get it to work in dual monitor mode if I completely uninstall AMD Catalyst and let windows just use its default drivers. But if Catalyst is installed, PD will crash unless I disable my onboard graphics card (in windows).
I'm using the trial version of PD11 and right now Catalyst 12.10.
Windows 7 Pro 64, 4GB RAM.
Quite frustrating. I used to enjoy bug hunting but its just an annoyance now.
Is anyone working with two monitors and using AMD Catalyst?
|
|
|
Yes I know. That is why I suspect driver incompatibility. Though drivers are supposed to be backward compatible I guess there is only so much you can do. Especially since windows itself changed.
I'll probably give it a go since there is a free trial version.
|
|
|
|
This is sad. I could never run the final release of v9. Now the one that ran stopped I believe from a graphics driver update. Good software would be immune. I considered upgrading but with you downgrading from v11 I may just go mainstream with adobe or someone. My time is worth more than a few $100...
|
