0

In reading to understand shutter speed better, I found a consistent claim that setting shutter speed to 1/(2×fps) makes "cinematic" motion and 1/fps makes "TV" motion. Example

That's great and all, if I knew what it's supposed to mean. I understand that a slower shutter will make more blur on individual frames, so a more natural motion. Is that all this cinema vs TV motion example meant to say?

  • It is a combination of frame rate, shutter speed and depth of field, and everyone has their own perception of what looks natural. Speaking generally, if you have more frames per second you have more freedom to either make them sharper or blurrier, smoother or stuttery compared to when you have fewer frames per second, where you have to obey established movie practices to avoid excessive stutter. – Rusty Core Feb 4 '19 at 18:49
1

I don't know where they have "TV motion" from as at least in my area we use 1/(2×fps) for TV too. Or higher for sports.

1/(2×fps) simply has a "natural" motion blur to it which is often used in cinema as it is often the best choise.

A shutter slower than that has much more shutter, I describe it as dream like. A shutter faster than that often looks like a robot, with each image being sharp and jumpy.

The first can be used in slow scenes as it won't be really notable. The seconde one can be used in for example sports TV so you can really see each detail and it isn't blured out

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.