An Interesting Frame Rate Observation

[happyfilmluvguy]

First the technical stuff:

In the entertainment business, there's a term used often known as frame rate. The frame rate is basically the amount of frames per second in a film or video. Imagine a reel of film. Each individual square is a frame, and every 24 frames is an individual camera shot. Actual film is 24 frames per second (24p). In the 80s, when video camcorders first appeared, their frame rate was 60i, or more oftenly 30 frames per second. Full House was filmed at 60i, which is still used in most consumer camcorders today.

Now for the observation:

There's something I've seen in the frame rate of certain films, mostly in the late 40s and 50s. In the film, "Pride Of The Yankees", the speed of the film seems a lot more different than any other film I've seen, almost like it was filmed with a televison camera. Here's a CLIP
Notice how Gary Cooper moves his head, whereas in the Phildephia Story, their movement is a lot different, much more slower. I hope there's someone who can answer this question. What was different about the camera they might have used during these times?

 

[herringbonekid]

no difference. they would have both been shot at 24 fps.
you can't use youtube as a guide because the film could have been captured at any frame rate onto video.

you're seeing things.

 

[happyfilmluvguy]

The actual film looks the same. Youtube isn't my guide.

 

[herringbonekid]

i don't see anything.
how would you describe the movement/effect of the Gary Cooper film ?

 

[happyfilmluvguy]

The movement of the people in the film itself is much more quick than in most classic films I've seen. It's more like how a television show moved in the 50's. Live cameras rather than film cameras. [huh] and I am seeing things. A different movement than what I've seen elswhere.

The clip of Gary Cooper isn't the best example. If there was one while the camera was in motion, you might see what I saw.

 

[herringbonekid]

there shouldn't really be any difference between the way movement looks shot on 24 fps film or a tv (video) camera.

things might look jumpier if the footage has a LOWER frame rate than 24 but is projected slower to even out the difference. e.g a lot of early silent film was shot at around 18 fps, which is why it looks too fast.

likewise if you shoot on low quality video which skips frames you get a slightly 'edited' look as you are missing information. and the result is jumpier.

 

[happyfilmluvguy]

there shouldn't really be any difference between the way movement looks shot on 24 fps film or a tv (video) camera.

things might look jumpier if the footage has a LOWER frame rate than 24 but is projected slower to even out the difference. e.g a lot of early silent film was shot at around 18 fps, which is why it looks too fast.

likewise if you shoot on low quality video which skips frames you get a slightly 'edited' look as you are missing information. and the result is jumpier.

Maybe it's just the transfer. When TCM showed it a while ago, it looks a bit different than what they show most of the time. I haven't seen it projected so I can't really say it moves the same way on the big screen. There are a few other films I've seen that move this was as well. Can't really explain it properly unless I have the proper examples.