But this only applies if you shoot in 24fps. If you shoot in 25fps, 180° = 1/50, while 60 fps, 180° = 1/120. This was covered in the video. Edit: just realized you did mention 24fps
I enjoyed that. I find it always adds depth when you include interviews with cinematographers/directors -- because it takes an abstract fact of camera design and gives it a more practical 'character'.
5:58 It’s actually the opposite for me. I prefer setting the shutter speed instead of the shutter angle as we shoot a lot with household lights. When switching the frame rate while shooting on Arri, we end up doing the math and changing for the corresponding shutter angle for a flicker-free shot everytime which is a pain
You can convert between the two. Here are the conversion formulas: speed = angle / (fps * 360) Shutter angle = fps * 360 * speed Speed being shutterspeed in seconds Angle being shutter angle in degries Fps being the framerate of recording
This is fantastic content. However, there is something I'd like to point out. There is nothing inheritely natural about 180º. The motion blur is decided specifically by the shutter speed, and it happens that 1/50 or 1/60 seems to look the most natural. As demonstrated by Gerald Undone, increasing the shutter speed alongside the framerate only makes sense if you intend on slowing down said footage. When playing back at 1x speed, 1/50 will almost always look the most natural (in other words, you double it to get the equivalent to 1/50).
This! Exactly right, you can shoot at 1/50 at 50fps (360° shutter) and it will still have the same 'natural' motion blur. Although this only became possible when shooting on digital, as it would be physically impossible on film.
@@joaomellin I'm trying to do some test to determine how motion cadence is affected by shutter angle vs shutter speed. These test I've done seems to show 180° has more natural motion cadence.
@@contentm3893 the problem is that in 90% of cases they refer to the same thing, since the standard is 24 fps and therefore 1/50 shutter speed. the interesting discussion is regarding high frame rates, whether it's worth for example setting 1/120 in the case of 60 fps videos. if i recall correctly, gerald undone did some testing and concluded 1/60 (in this case 360 degrees) still looked natural. but i'd love to see more tests and more discussion. i'm very much open to change my mind, it's just that i'm very annoyed by how much the 180 rule is thrown around with no proper explanation or evidence.
@@joaomellin This might help. DPReview TV: Why Shutter Angle Is Better Than Shutter Speed (for video) is saying 180°is equal to 1/48th which makes sense because that's exactly double 24fps. Not 1/40th or 1/50th.
7:29 I think that is a point against shutter angle, it's much easier to set the shutter speed to 1/50 or whatever light frequency rather than have to dial "172.8" and not all the cameras have fractions
There are certain technical aspects of video that I've had a hard time really internalizing. Shutter speed has been one of those. I've heard all of this information before, but this video, with the clear explanations combined with visualizations and the often overlooked example footage, has been one of the best distillations on the subject!
This doesn't explain shutter speed, which doesn't need explanations other than 'photos per second' sort of, apart from the jazzy joys of syncing to lights if you have to do that. But then again, if we go massive pro baller we always use sunlight or candles. This was about shutter angle, which to be technical is a nothingburger in video since there is no shutter typically and therefore it cannot have an angle either. What video does have is 'scan speed'/'sync speed' to be finicky about it, grab a lab grade camera and shoot your electric frequency -2 shutter speed indoors with TL lights and you'll see what I mean, you'll get a band slowly running down the footage top to bottom if the camera actually runs it right. Or you should, if 'ISO' is high enough, ie the sensor completes the read pass fast enough. Many cameras for general use won't. My weekly allotment of useless nerd-factoid-dispensing-time has run out, so I'll have to go back to making sense.
Wow! So we that shoot on DSLRs are shooting the hard way with shutter speed, and professional cinematographers are doing it easy with shutter angle 🤔... Nice knowing this 👏
Now, I know that if in the future I decide to make a movie, I will definitely aquire a movie camera instead of a DSLR or mirrorless camera. Or get a table where I can calculate frame rate and shutter speed according to the effect I want to achieve. Excellent video!
Huge fan and there from the start of this channel. Thanks for all this free knowledge and practical insights. I hope to work with you one day. An aspiring Film maker
I'm sure you get this on every video, but you really are the best YT channel in this lane and super helpful to film people of basically every experience level.
The best video on this topic so far. Not sure about 7:44 though. You get flicker if your fps does not match the flight power frequency. Changing to 172.8 degree can help? How? Your 24fps is still out of sync with a 50hz light. Also I think that 6FPS conformed to 24FPS in the Gladiator film looked just bad. It is choppy as hell and hard on the eyes. What the feeling of battle? My brain was battling with the lag.
This is the most informative YT channel when it comes to film/movies & cinematography!!! I have a question: how are you able to get film footage on your posts? what app do you use? thanks! cheers!
That's interesting, I didn't know that. Makes sense though, that you wouldn't have to worry as much about sensor readout speed if the shutter angle is being mechanically determined by something other than the sensor
so basically, shutter angle is another way of measuring shutter speed, except it is now synced with your frame rate. One disc rotation equals one frame, so increasing your fps will also increase your shutter speed (because the disc spins faster with the higher frame rate). As opposed to using shutter speed, where increasing the fps doesn't change the shutter speed value.
Big fan here, but in this one I disagree a little. Same shutter angle doesn’t maintain the same motion blur when you change frame rate, the motion blur depends on the exposure time, if you double the frame from 24 to 48 for example and you want same motion blur that the 24fps you have to set a 360 degree shutter angle
Some cameras account for this automatically, for example the Sony Venice changes what 180 degree means based on the frame rate, so at 24fps it is 1/48 but if you change to 48fps it changes to 1/96.
@@nomadben the key difference is that the shutter angle you set is always paired to the proper shutter speed [exposure time] in relation to the given frame rate. Not all digital cameras do that, since some do not have a shutter angle option (older reds) or their shutter angle defaults to 180 being 1/48 in all frame rates (Arri alexa cameras, though I haven’t checked the newer LF models.) Not all cameras “do that” because no digital cinema camera (except the old alexa studio) has a physical rotating disc, therefore the shutter angle displayed is not as standardized as one would hope. (As the shutter angle is simply a shorthand, the actual thing being changed is exposure time off the sensor, which as I stated is not uniform across brands.)
My understanding is that the disk existed primarily so that light entering the camera was blocked while a gear advanced the film to the next blank space that will become a frame. Because the film doesn't flow smoothly through the camera, it is advanced X number of perforations at a time.
Yes, one of the other tricks Kaminski used in 'Saving Private Ryan' was to desynchronise the shutter so that it stayed open slightly into the pull-down process of each frame, resulting in vertically smeared highlights that appear from the film frame moving through the aperture during part of its exposure.
When shooting video, I've noticed that the higher the frame rate for playback, the less the impact of shutter speed. When shooting 24P, a 1/96 shutter (90 degrees) is more noticeable than when shooting 60P at 1/240 (90 degrees).
small shutter angle means more gap between images, faster FPS means your eye sees more images in the same amount of time, or to say another way, less blank gap between images, your eyes/brain has a harder time registering the blank gaps with the faster the FPS
I hear people say all the time how important it is to shoot in 24p or 23.976. for that "cinematic look" But from my years of filming I've realized that shutter angle plays a way larger roll in a filmic look than frame rate. Also 60p or 30p can be converted into 24p in post to the same effect. So just shoot 60p or 30p and you can decide later, seriously people!
Frame rate conversions that can't be achieved just by dropping frames involve a lot of image processing and aren't necessarily going to come out looking right.
you did mention the angle being able to avoid flicker, mirrorless cameras at least the modern ones can do that like sony’s with anti flicker, around 50.7 and 99.7 are the shutters that remove most flicker
In the film days, almost noone paid attention to the shutter angle because it was physically set at 180, but when transitioning to digital, many so called experienced DPs never actually paid attention to the camera settings on new digital cameras, so even oscar winning DPs would make the most embarassing streaky video looking shots whenever they switched over to digital, because the shutter would be set at 360, further stigmatizing digital cameras. In the industry we know these were mistakes, but in post and after release, many of the DPs learned their hard lesson on this, so in hindsight they started justifying bad choices in interviews. I'm not just talking about Collateral, there's Apocalypto, Public Enemies, 2012, Birdman, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, Once Upon a Time in Mexico... Notice how you just don't see 360 degree shots anymore in movies, they never were deliberate. Again, in the industry we know they were mistakes.
Most modern Panasonic cameras can apply shutter angle or speed. The company have done more to put cinematic controls into consumer cameras than anyone else. However, as hybrid cameras are more often used as one-person vlogging devices than cinematic tools, their adherence to contrast detect systems kept Panasonic out of the mainstream. This didn't apply to serious videographers who would have used manual focus anyway.
If you want to maintain the same smoothness you should NOT use shutter ANGLE but instead rely on shutter SPEED to maintain the same amount of motion blur not matter the framerate. Problem is (if you have only one image processor behind the sensor and I don't know of any camera where this is different) you can't use a shutter speed that is longer than your frame rate. Because if you want to have 30 fps, each frame can only be exposed for 1/30 of a second. If you want to have a 60 fps movie with the same intensity in motion blur, you would need a 720° shutter ANGLE. And that's not possible if you can only capture and process one image at a time. But this is why 360° feels so choppy. The motion blur from one image doesn't overlap with the motion blur from the next image. And this logically feels unrealistic to our eyes. And this becomes even more noticable the lower the fps goes.
There should be a better narrative middle ground or some context that In Depth Cine can strike when claiming that solving a division/multiplication problem expected of many rich and middle-income 4th graders is too complex for accomplished cinematographers/directors. The answer is that they have a lot of social power and there is good use in things responding to one's habituated/cultured intuition, that means they have the ability to place the onus of their mental laziness on someone else (arri in this case). And I agree with some comments, like Surya Teja, that shutter speed provides a more useful term especially when dealing with lights connected to AC power sources and plenty of other similar factors that come up in real life.
So it's exposure time - just a different math?? I assume when using a telephoto lens you would want to decrease your exposure to maintain the same "blur" ?? Example 1/48th for a wide angle shot and 1/100th for a 100mm equivalent ??
but wait, if the frame rate is sped up, does that not alter the amount of light hitting the sensor/film (since shutter angle is a relative value, not an absolute value like shutter speed), thus altering motion blur? as in, with shutter angle on film the shutter spins faster as the frame rate goes up, versus shutter speed being independent of frame rate? how does shutter angle staying the same with framerate changes achieve a consistent "look" when the thing that the shutter affects is being changed?
Yes motion blur does overall decrease with a higher frame rate. What they mean when they say the motion blur is constant across different frame rates is that the ratio of blur to gaps between frames is constant. A 360 degree shutter has no gaps between motion blur because the camera is continuously recording. This is different from a 180 degree shutter angle in which there is a one to one ratio between motion blur and the gaps that separate them across frames. The camera is only capturing light half of the time, so only half of the blur is ever recorded. This means that an object will move twice the length of its motion blur trail between frames. The lower the shutter angle, the smaller the motion blur trail will be, and the larger this ratio will become
All this time, I didn't know changing the frame rate had no effect on my shutter angle/motion blur. So I will always switch to shutter speed to ensure I have consistent motion blur by "doing the math". Though I don't consider it calculating anything. We all know what 60x2=s by memory. XD
The calculation at 5:32 is wrong. Before continuing, I just want to say that it's not the result I'm disagreeing with, but the description of the calculation. To get the shutter time [t] from frame rate [f] and shutter angle [θ], you divide the shutter angle by 360° and the frame rate. t = θ ÷ (360° × f) eg. f = 25Hz, θ = 180°, then t = 180° ÷ (360° × 25Hz) = 0.02s or 1/50 s. Now, I know that "doubling the frame rate" is what everyone uses, and it gives you the correct number, but it won't work for extremely low frame rates where shutter times isn't in a neat fraction. Also: θ = t × f × 360°, eg. θ = 1/50 s × 23.976Hz × 360° = 172.6°
Small shutter angle is only stuttery if it's also low frame rate. If the world of cinema can let go of dogmatic 24p, we can move into a buttery smooth and sharp world of 60p. 180 degree shutter doesn't look natural "to the human eye", it's just what people are accustomed to after decades of it being the norm.
There's a cultural, aesthetic and a technical component to frame rates. Fast frame rates are associated with gaming and sports, which have a lower cultural value than cinema. Also, technical implications of a fast frame rate require high illumination levels, other factors being equal. 24 fps is an agreed norm around which shutter *effect* speeds can orbit.
Instead of just saying 180º provides the most natural effect, I would like you to give the same movement such as a ball bouncing or something that is easily repeatable at the same frame rate but at different shutter angles. It looked to me that the examples you gave were not allowed to play normally.
we really shouldn't uphold old and outdated standards simply out of nostalgia. having a second exposure setting (where shutter angle currently sits in cine cameras) is great, but should be a fraction of how much of the framerate you want exposed. we should update the terminology to reflect simple fractions instead of theoretical angles. 180* should become 1/2, 45* becomes 1/8, and so on. shutter:frame ratio would be a more accurate term.
Most natural to the human eye is indeed a 360° shutter since as long as you don't blink, your "shutter" is always open. The real "problem" here that you have to compensate for is having "only" 25 images per second. Because your brain doesn't see in framerates it would be best to create a camera where the motion blur can be carried over to the next image. This would be possible if you use a camera with two image processor chips behind the sensor. That way you could set both processors at half the frame rate and therefor left them capture each image for twice as long. Or in other words have a shutter that can be open for up to 720°.
Then the motion blur would overlap itself between frames and would look very unnatural. This occasionally happens in video games and it looks terrible. A better solution would be to just shoot at such a high frame rate that your eye in unable to distinguish the video from real motion. Motion blur would then just happen naturally in your brain due to persistence of vision. You would need to have a very high frame rate for this to work though. Even at frame rates as high as 120 fps, there is still enough of a gap between frames for the object to be appear unusually sharp, which will cause our brain to interpret the object as moving in a strobe-like stuttering path instead of one continuous blur of movement. This is why high frame rates can sometimes make people feel sick while looking at them. The frame rate is fast enough for us to not be able to see the individual pictures, but not fast enough for our brains to add motion blur to what we are looking at. So you end up getting this weird uncanny effect where the footage looks super smooth yet also unnaturally sharp
@@andrewparker318 we are used to 25-30 in movies. (which to my eyes is an obviously low frame rate and I need to concentrate to follow fast actions.) Everything below that is not a smooth motion. (BTW did you know that old projectors where a film role had to be played, actually flickered the lights at double the frame rate? The was to hide the ugly effect of transitioning to a new frame. Tldr old Projektor played at 50 FPS and displaying movies on twos.) but back to motion blur. Just wave your hand infront of your eye. It's not much motion blur and it also seems not really blury too. But you can make out a swoosh effect like a tail, that drags behind. And that swoosh tail is longer than then just one "frame". Means we need both. A higher frame rate AND a 720 degree shutter. Without higher framerate it looks ugly because nothing is sharps anymore. But with higher frame rate and no change in motion blur settings (because 180 shutter at higher FPS means less blur) it's also unnatural since we don't see motions THAT sharp too. But on "low" 25-30 FPS a shutter of 180 seems to be the sweet spot. (but don't forget to change it 360 when switching to 50-60 FPS.) A sudden change in blur is always unplesent to look at. In games which have to additional compute the blur this uglyness just increases. Lag spikes and frame drops just mess everything up. But the real limit to that is always the frame itself. You can train your eyes to easily see individual frames at 140 and higher. Jet pilots for example or race car drivers need to be able to identify details that quick. The best solution would be to not have individual frames at all but save each pixel individualy and just set a time key when the light intensity of one of the 4 values (rbg and brightness) changes for that Pixel. I don't know how realistic this would be but this would also automatically come with its own compression rate. Since when nothing changes no new information is saved. (but you can still increase the compression by grouping pixels of same values together like it's done now.) And you can tweak the threshold which needs to be reached to see something as a change in value. Means the highest frame rate possible is the rate at which your processor can compute these changes and write it to a drive.
BTW, this is why a 360 shutter feels so choppy and unnatural and why 180 is the sweep spot. The motion blur from one image doesn't overlap with the motion blur from the next image. And this logically feels unrealistic to our eyes. Means we should maintain this 180 shutter, aka somewhere around 1/50~1/60 of a second to be precise, for a natural looking blur but raise the frame rate as much as possible. Mean there is not rely a way around but to breake this 360 shutter limitation. Even if we never use this technique then, should we at least be able to do it.
![[DRAGON BALL LEGENDS REVEALS ＆ STUFF] LEGENDS FESTIVAL 2024 Special Edition Part 1](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mV5bGIswTtQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![BRASIL vs. URUGUAY [1-1] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 12](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-hWBAuxF1eY/mqdefault.jpg)
Great video 😁 You could add a conversion in the description
24 FPS:
🎬360°= 1/24
🎬180°= 1/48
🎬 90° = 1/96
🎬 45° = 1/192
But this only applies if you shoot in 24fps. If you shoot in 25fps, 180° = 1/50, while 60 fps, 180° = 1/120. This was covered in the video.
Edit: just realized you did mention 24fps
THANK YOU!
@@3dchick you are welcome
What if I shoot in 60fps ?
@@Pcpro047Tkgeekyteenagers just double the shutter.
At 60 fps with 180° rule you have to set 1/120
At 120fps 1/240 and so on.
One of the best and most helpful channels on YT. Keep up the good work, you make film and filmmaking more accessible!
I enjoyed that. I find it always adds depth when you include interviews with cinematographers/directors -- because it takes an abstract fact of camera design and gives it a more practical 'character'.
I love how you keep on making videos on topics rarely covered by other channels!
5:58 It’s actually the opposite for me. I prefer setting the shutter speed instead of the shutter angle as we shoot a lot with household lights. When switching the frame rate while shooting on Arri, we end up doing the math and changing for the corresponding shutter angle for a flicker-free shot everytime which is a pain
I love Ashes of Time, my favorite Wang Kar wai film, glad you included it
4:53 is really the most relevant portion for anyone arriving at this vid thinking that shutter angle applies to consumer-grade video cameras.
You can convert between the two. Here are the conversion formulas:
speed = angle / (fps * 360)
Shutter angle = fps * 360 * speed
Speed being shutterspeed in seconds
Angle being shutter angle in degries
Fps being the framerate of recording
The most efficient class ever thank you sir!
This is fantastic content. However, there is something I'd like to point out. There is nothing inheritely natural about 180º. The motion blur is decided specifically by the shutter speed, and it happens that 1/50 or 1/60 seems to look the most natural. As demonstrated by Gerald Undone, increasing the shutter speed alongside the framerate only makes sense if you intend on slowing down said footage. When playing back at 1x speed, 1/50 will almost always look the most natural (in other words, you double it to get the equivalent to 1/50).
This! Exactly right, you can shoot at 1/50 at 50fps (360° shutter) and it will still have the same 'natural' motion blur. Although this only became possible when shooting on digital, as it would be physically impossible on film.
@@contentm3893 care to explain? cause this video sure didn't and neither does any other i've seen. all tests sugest what i said🥸
@@joaomellin I'm trying to do some test to determine how motion cadence is affected by shutter angle vs shutter speed. These test I've done seems to show 180° has more natural motion cadence.
@@contentm3893 the problem is that in 90% of cases they refer to the same thing, since the standard is 24 fps and therefore 1/50 shutter speed. the interesting discussion is regarding high frame rates, whether it's worth for example setting 1/120 in the case of 60 fps videos.
if i recall correctly, gerald undone did some testing and concluded 1/60 (in this case 360 degrees) still looked natural. but i'd love to see more tests and more discussion. i'm very much open to change my mind, it's just that i'm very annoyed by how much the 180 rule is thrown around with no proper explanation or evidence.
@@joaomellin This might help. DPReview TV: Why Shutter Angle Is Better Than Shutter Speed (for video) is saying 180°is equal to 1/48th which makes sense because that's exactly double 24fps. Not 1/40th or 1/50th.
7:29 I think that is a point against shutter angle, it's much easier to set the shutter speed to 1/50 or whatever light frequency rather than have to dial "172.8" and not all the cameras have fractions
There are certain technical aspects of video that I've had a hard time really internalizing. Shutter speed has been one of those. I've heard all of this information before, but this video, with the clear explanations combined with visualizations and the often overlooked example footage, has been one of the best distillations on the subject!
This doesn't explain shutter speed, which doesn't need explanations other than 'photos per second' sort of, apart from the jazzy joys of syncing to lights if you have to do that. But then again, if we go massive pro baller we always use sunlight or candles. This was about shutter angle, which to be technical is a nothingburger in video since there is no shutter typically and therefore it cannot have an angle either. What video does have is 'scan speed'/'sync speed' to be finicky about it, grab a lab grade camera and shoot your electric frequency -2 shutter speed indoors with TL lights and you'll see what I mean, you'll get a band slowly running down the footage top to bottom if the camera actually runs it right. Or you should, if 'ISO' is high enough, ie the sensor completes the read pass fast enough. Many cameras for general use won't. My weekly allotment of useless nerd-factoid-dispensing-time has run out, so I'll have to go back to making sense.
02:59 RIP Tom Sizemore. Your contribution was immense.
This is the best explanation of this concept I have seen
Wow! So we that shoot on DSLRs are shooting the hard way with shutter speed, and professional cinematographers are doing it easy with shutter angle 🤔... Nice knowing this 👏
Unless you shoot on a Panasonic. They actually give you the option
Very helpful. It's the first time I truly get the what degrees are.
Great!!! Some important topics are treated as if they were secrets instead of being the object of healthy sharing.
Now, I know that if in the future I decide to make a movie, I will definitely aquire a movie camera instead of a DSLR or mirrorless camera. Or get a table where I can calculate frame rate and shutter speed according to the effect I want to achieve. Excellent video!
Huge fan and there from the start of this channel. Thanks for all this free knowledge and practical insights. I hope to work with you one day.
An aspiring Film maker
Great video. Clearly explains the concept. Learned a lot from it.
Its very easy to understand you explanation. Great channel for film-makers. Thank you for this
this was a very interesting lesson for those of us new to all this technical stuff...mighty thanks ...
Amazing video. A master class on tecnical aspects for filmmakers and cinema lovers.
Pls do a video about rolling shutter
I'm sure you get this on every video, but you really are the best YT channel in this lane and super helpful to film people of basically every experience level.
This is the one video I’ve been looking for and no one talked about
this video just made sooooo many things make more sense
You provide first-class videos, invaluable information for aspiring filmmakers. Thank you.
i´ve nevert herd such a good explanation for Shutter!
Shutter speed finally demistified! The best tutorial up to date. Great job!
Very easy explained..thanks
Amazing! Cleared up something i had no idea about in such a easy to digest manner and kept it interesting. Thank you!
Big, big plus for this channel
Thank you, i totally get it now. 🙏
Great job - well explained and concise. Thanks.
so easy to understand, thaaankssss
Super interesting and very well explained! Thanks a lot!
THIS IS PAID GRADE OF INFORMATION!!! Thank you man you just taught everything I wanted to know about shutter angle!!!
thank you best video on youtube about this topic
Didn't know this, thank you!
The best video on this topic so far. Not sure about 7:44 though. You get flicker if your fps does not match the flight power frequency. Changing to 172.8 degree can help? How? Your 24fps is still out of sync with a 50hz light. Also I think that 6FPS conformed to 24FPS in the Gladiator film looked just bad. It is choppy as hell and hard on the eyes. What the feeling of battle? My brain was battling with the lag.
Thank you , this is better explanation been searching. Need more content
This is the most informative YT channel when it comes to film/movies & cinematography!!! I have a question: how are you able to get film footage on your posts? what app do you use? thanks! cheers!
Best video ever, thanks so much for explaining this so good!
So well explained!
Great informative video. A useful inclusion, that rolling shutter jello effect more likely to be removed with rotating shutter cameras.
That's interesting, I didn't know that. Makes sense though, that you wouldn't have to worry as much about sensor readout speed if the shutter angle is being mechanically determined by something other than the sensor
Amazing video!! Thank you
Great explanation
Fantastic video! Great explanation on what is the shutter angle and its uses! Required watching for today's movie camera operators.
this video was so helpful, thank you.
Very Informational Video. Learned a Lot from it.
thank you for your video
thanks a lot for providing very clear information
so basically, shutter angle is another way of measuring shutter speed, except it is now synced with your frame rate. One disc rotation equals one frame, so increasing your fps will also increase your shutter speed (because the disc spins faster with the higher frame rate). As opposed to using shutter speed, where increasing the fps doesn't change the shutter speed value.
Well made! Thanks
Very good explained.
Thanks, as always!!
Big fan here, but in this one I disagree a little. Same shutter angle doesn’t maintain the same motion blur when you change frame rate, the motion blur depends on the exposure time, if you double the frame from 24 to 48 for example and you want same motion blur that the 24fps you have to set a 360 degree shutter angle
I feel like they had the same problem understanding this with avatar 2.
Hmm
Some cameras account for this automatically, for example the Sony Venice changes what 180 degree means based on the frame rate, so at 24fps it is 1/48 but if you change to 48fps it changes to 1/96.
@@C.C.Cope220 You just described shutter angle. All cameras do that
@@nomadben the key difference is that the shutter angle you set is always paired to the proper shutter speed [exposure time] in relation to the given frame rate. Not all digital cameras do that, since some do not have a shutter angle option (older reds) or their shutter angle defaults to 180 being 1/48 in all frame rates (Arri alexa cameras, though I haven’t checked the newer LF models.)
Not all cameras “do that” because no digital cinema camera (except the old alexa studio) has a physical rotating disc, therefore the shutter angle displayed is not as standardized as one would hope. (As the shutter angle is simply a shorthand, the actual thing being changed is exposure time off the sensor, which as I stated is not uniform across brands.)
My understanding is that the disk existed primarily so that light entering the camera was blocked while a gear advanced the film to the next blank space that will become a frame. Because the film doesn't flow smoothly through the camera, it is advanced X number of perforations at a time.
Yes, one of the other tricks Kaminski used in 'Saving Private Ryan' was to desynchronise the shutter so that it stayed open slightly into the pull-down process of each frame, resulting in vertically smeared highlights that appear from the film frame moving through the aperture during part of its exposure.
brilliant - thank you
very helpful! THX💥
When shooting video, I've noticed that the higher the frame rate for playback, the less the impact of shutter speed. When shooting 24P, a 1/96 shutter (90 degrees) is more noticeable than when shooting 60P at 1/240 (90 degrees).
small shutter angle means more gap between images, faster FPS means your eye sees more images in the same amount of time, or to say another way, less blank gap between images, your eyes/brain has a harder time registering the blank gaps with the faster the FPS
This is epic. Thanks!
Another great smart and entertaining video!! Keep it up!!
Now I understand why I didn't like Collateral! 😊 Gladiator as well.
Considering 50Hz flickering, it is much easier to set the shutter speed than an angle. When you have 50 Hz - 1/50 s, 60 Hz - 1/60Hz
What about close to 360° shutter angles. Are they ever used when shooting 24/25/30 fps? Do you have any examples?
Fantastic
Excellent 👌 explaination
I hear people say all the time how important it is to shoot in 24p or 23.976. for that "cinematic look" But from my years of filming I've realized that shutter angle plays a way larger roll in a filmic look than frame rate. Also 60p or 30p can be converted into 24p in post to the same effect. So just shoot 60p or 30p and you can decide later, seriously people!
Frame rate conversions that can't be achieved just by dropping frames involve a lot of image processing and aren't necessarily going to come out looking right.
@@ericssmith2014 Agreed, but the differences are so negligible
Terrible advice. Shoot for what you want
RIP Tom, he was great on that film
I was just wondering how does the shutter angle on premiere pro works last night! Thanks a looooooot
School is in session, learn something everyday thanks
you did mention the angle being able to avoid flicker, mirrorless cameras at least the modern ones can do that like sony’s with anti flicker, around 50.7 and 99.7 are the shutters that remove most flicker
In the film days, almost noone paid attention to the shutter angle because it was physically set at 180, but when transitioning to digital, many so called experienced DPs never actually paid attention to the camera settings on new digital cameras, so even oscar winning DPs would make the most embarassing streaky video looking shots whenever they switched over to digital, because the shutter would be set at 360, further stigmatizing digital cameras.
In the industry we know these were mistakes, but in post and after release, many of the DPs learned their hard lesson on this, so in hindsight they started justifying bad choices in interviews. I'm not just talking about Collateral, there's Apocalypto, Public Enemies, 2012, Birdman, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, Once Upon a Time in Mexico...
Notice how you just don't see 360 degree shots anymore in movies, they never were deliberate. Again, in the industry we know they were mistakes.
I have a Panasonic BS1H and I can use shutter angle. I believe this feature has made its way into other mirrorless systems as well?
Most modern Panasonic cameras can apply shutter angle or speed. The company have done more to put cinematic controls into consumer cameras than anyone else. However, as hybrid cameras are more often used as one-person vlogging devices than cinematic tools, their adherence to contrast detect systems kept Panasonic out of the mainstream. This didn't apply to serious videographers who would have used manual focus anyway.
If you want to maintain the same smoothness you should NOT use shutter ANGLE but instead rely on shutter SPEED to maintain the same amount of motion blur not matter the framerate.
Problem is (if you have only one image processor behind the sensor and I don't know of any camera where this is different) you can't use a shutter speed that is longer than your frame rate. Because if you want to have 30 fps, each frame can only be exposed for 1/30 of a second. If you want to have a 60 fps movie with the same intensity in motion blur, you would need a 720° shutter ANGLE. And that's not possible if you can only capture and process one image at a time.
But this is why 360° feels so choppy. The motion blur from one image doesn't overlap with the motion blur from the next image. And this logically feels unrealistic to our eyes. And this becomes even more noticable the lower the fps goes.
There should be a better narrative middle ground or some context that In Depth Cine can strike when claiming that solving a division/multiplication problem expected of many rich and middle-income 4th graders is too complex for accomplished cinematographers/directors.
The answer is that they have a lot of social power and there is good use in things responding to one's habituated/cultured intuition, that means they have the ability to place the onus of their mental laziness on someone else (arri in this case).
And I agree with some comments, like Surya Teja, that shutter speed provides a more useful term especially when dealing with lights connected to AC power sources and plenty of other similar factors that come up in real life.
Hi! I don't understand why in shutter angle You don't need to change de shutter if i use 60 fps for example
Благодарности 🎉
So that explains why some movies, like Collateral (2004), Bedtime Stories (2008) and 2012 (2009) look the way they do.
So it's exposure time - just a different math??
I assume when using a telephoto lens you would want to decrease your exposure to maintain the same "blur" ?? Example 1/48th for a wide angle shot and 1/100th for a 100mm equivalent ??
So your saying a lower frame-rate (6fps) blurs movement?
can we make slow motion with 60 fps and 1/30 sutter speed?
but wait, if the frame rate is sped up, does that not alter the amount of light hitting the sensor/film (since shutter angle is a relative value, not an absolute value like shutter speed), thus altering motion blur? as in, with shutter angle on film the shutter spins faster as the frame rate goes up, versus shutter speed being independent of frame rate?
how does shutter angle staying the same with framerate changes achieve a consistent "look" when the thing that the shutter affects is being changed?
Yes motion blur does overall decrease with a higher frame rate. What they mean when they say the motion blur is constant across different frame rates is that the ratio of blur to gaps between frames is constant. A 360 degree shutter has no gaps between motion blur because the camera is continuously recording. This is different from a 180 degree shutter angle in which there is a one to one ratio between motion blur and the gaps that separate them across frames. The camera is only capturing light half of the time, so only half of the blur is ever recorded. This means that an object will move twice the length of its motion blur trail between frames. The lower the shutter angle, the smaller the motion blur trail will be, and the larger this ratio will become
All this time, I didn't know changing the frame rate had no effect on my shutter angle/motion blur. So I will always switch to shutter speed to ensure I have consistent motion blur by "doing the math". Though I don't consider it calculating anything. We all know what 60x2=s by memory. XD
The calculation at 5:32 is wrong. Before continuing, I just want to say that it's not the result I'm disagreeing with, but the description of the calculation. To get the shutter time [t] from frame rate [f] and shutter angle [θ], you divide the shutter angle by 360° and the frame rate. t = θ ÷ (360° × f) eg. f = 25Hz, θ = 180°, then t = 180° ÷ (360° × 25Hz) = 0.02s or 1/50 s.
Now, I know that "doubling the frame rate" is what everyone uses, and it gives you the correct number, but it won't work for extremely low frame rates where shutter times isn't in a neat fraction. Also: θ = t × f × 360°, eg. θ = 1/50 s × 23.976Hz × 360° = 172.6°
Marvellous
Is it able to Mix up Differenz frame rates in a PR Sequence? :D
I did not know shutter angle was even a thing..lol, though watched so many tutorials 😊
1:10 what movie is it?
If I am out shooting and forget an ND filter, is there an ideal shutter speed for a 30fps editing timeline that will not be choppy?
4:16 i just put my Arri Master Prime onto my FX6, now both of them stopped working at any shutter speed :(
Still no one can measure it by percent? This makes Feet, Miles and Furlongs look logical by comparison.
Exactly what I was thinking. This is the first time I hear about shutter angle coming from photography
Small shutter angle is only stuttery if it's also low frame rate. If the world of cinema can let go of dogmatic 24p, we can move into a buttery smooth and sharp world of 60p.
180 degree shutter doesn't look natural "to the human eye", it's just what people are accustomed to after decades of it being the norm.
There's a cultural, aesthetic and a technical component to frame rates. Fast frame rates are associated with gaming and sports, which have a lower cultural value than cinema. Also, technical implications of a fast frame rate require high illumination levels, other factors being equal. 24 fps is an agreed norm around which shutter *effect* speeds can orbit.
Can someone please help me understand how a shutter angle of 172.8 prevents flickering with 50 Hz frequency and in other occasions?
Instead of just saying 180º provides the most natural effect, I would like you to give the same movement such as a ball bouncing or something that is easily repeatable at the same frame rate but at different shutter angles. It looked to me that the examples you gave were not allowed to play normally.
So there's no special button for shutter angle. It's just shutter speeds relativity to frame rate correct?
we really shouldn't uphold old and outdated standards simply out of nostalgia. having a second exposure setting (where shutter angle currently sits in cine cameras) is great, but should be a fraction of how much of the framerate you want exposed. we should update the terminology to reflect simple fractions instead of theoretical angles. 180* should become 1/2, 45* becomes 1/8, and so on. shutter:frame ratio would be a more accurate term.
Nice channel about China & white snakes, like that. Very useful & helpful.
Most natural to the human eye is indeed a 360° shutter since as long as you don't blink, your "shutter" is always open. The real "problem" here that you have to compensate for is having "only" 25 images per second. Because your brain doesn't see in framerates it would be best to create a camera where the motion blur can be carried over to the next image.
This would be possible if you use a camera with two image processor chips behind the sensor.
That way you could set both processors at half the frame rate and therefor left them capture each image for twice as long. Or in other words have a shutter that can be open for up to 720°.
Then the motion blur would overlap itself between frames and would look very unnatural. This occasionally happens in video games and it looks terrible. A better solution would be to just shoot at such a high frame rate that your eye in unable to distinguish the video from real motion. Motion blur would then just happen naturally in your brain due to persistence of vision. You would need to have a very high frame rate for this to work though. Even at frame rates as high as 120 fps, there is still enough of a gap between frames for the object to be appear unusually sharp, which will cause our brain to interpret the object as moving in a strobe-like stuttering path instead of one continuous blur of movement. This is why high frame rates can sometimes make people feel sick while looking at them. The frame rate is fast enough for us to not be able to see the individual pictures, but not fast enough for our brains to add motion blur to what we are looking at. So you end up getting this weird uncanny effect where the footage looks super smooth yet also unnaturally sharp
@@andrewparker318 we are used to 25-30 in movies. (which to my eyes is an obviously low frame rate and I need to concentrate to follow fast actions.) Everything below that is not a smooth motion. (BTW did you know that old projectors where a film role had to be played, actually flickered the lights at double the frame rate? The was to hide the ugly effect of transitioning to a new frame. Tldr old Projektor played at 50 FPS and displaying movies on twos.) but back to motion blur. Just wave your hand infront of your eye. It's not much motion blur and it also seems not really blury too. But you can make out a swoosh effect like a tail, that drags behind. And that swoosh tail is longer than then just one "frame". Means we need both. A higher frame rate AND a 720 degree shutter. Without higher framerate it looks ugly because nothing is sharps anymore. But with higher frame rate and no change in motion blur settings (because 180 shutter at higher FPS means less blur) it's also unnatural since we don't see motions THAT sharp too. But on "low" 25-30 FPS a shutter of 180 seems to be the sweet spot.
(but don't forget to change it 360 when switching to 50-60 FPS.)
A sudden change in blur is always unplesent to look at. In games which have to additional compute the blur this uglyness just increases. Lag spikes and frame drops just mess everything up.
But the real limit to that is always the frame itself. You can train your eyes to easily see individual frames at 140 and higher. Jet pilots for example or race car drivers need to be able to identify details that quick.
The best solution would be to not have individual frames at all but save each pixel individualy and just set a time key when the light intensity of one of the 4 values (rbg and brightness) changes for that Pixel. I don't know how realistic this would be but this would also automatically come with its own compression rate. Since when nothing changes no new information is saved. (but you can still increase the compression by grouping pixels of same values together like it's done now.) And you can tweak the threshold which needs to be reached to see something as a change in value. Means the highest frame rate possible is the rate at which your processor can compute these changes and write it to a drive.
BTW, this is why a 360 shutter feels so choppy and unnatural and why 180 is the sweep spot. The motion blur from one image doesn't overlap with the motion blur from the next image. And this logically feels unrealistic to our eyes.
Means we should maintain this 180 shutter, aka somewhere around 1/50~1/60 of a second to be precise, for a natural looking blur but raise the frame rate as much as possible.
Mean there is not rely a way around but to breake this 360 shutter limitation. Even if we never use this technique then, should we at least be able to do it.
@@FelanLP very interesting. However I personally think a 360 degree shutter looks more natural than a 180 degree shutter. But that’s just me though