Your brand new 1080p home theater rig is finally installed and ready to go. You're all set to sit back and watch your favorite classic, Casablanca, like you've never seen it before, with stunning clarity and contrast. Your Blu-ray player outputs 1080p/24, the signal format everyone is raving about. You've got the Blu-ray edition of Casablanca. Your 1080p projector displays the Blu-ray signal in native 24 fps format--everything is as pure and pristine as it can get.

So, you hit the play button. The Warner Bros logo splashes onto the screen. The globe rotates slowly. The map of the Mediterranean is rendered in breathtaking sharp detail. You smile in deep satisfaction with your new system. And then it happens. At two minutes and 3 seconds into the film, the camera holds the skyline for a moment, then pans slowly down to street level. You recoil in horror as the picture comes completely unhinged. It stutters and shakes like a delirious madman. The buildings are seemingly in the throes of a bizarre earthquake. It hurts to watch it. You blink repeatedly in disbelief. How could your brand new state-of-the-art 1080p projection system with pure, native 24p transmission come so dramatically unglued?

Welcome to 24p. What you just experienced was motion judder, an extremely annoying artifact that derives from the fact that movies are filmed at 24 frames per second (fps). The 24 fps sampling rate was adopted as a de facto standard in 1926 when the budding film industry recognized they needed a sampling rate fast enough to support a coherent audio track. (The first talkie, The Jazz Singer, was released in 1927). Prior to audio-enabled movies, they were filmed at even slower speeds, in part to save film, and in part because film exposure speeds were a lot slower back then.

The industry standard 24 fps film rate is an albatross that we've been stuck with ever since. As it turns out, it is way too slow to resolve camera panning motion cleanly. So when a movie camera pans at an unfortunate speed, you get motion judder. Sometimes you get it in spades. The sad fact is, your high resolution 1080p/24 system is simply showing you the picture as encoded on the Blu-ray disc in its authentic naked form. We just never saw it in our homes quite as naked before the advent of Blu-ray and HD DVD.

Actually, we've never seen 24 fps film quite this naked even in a commercial movie theater since the double shuttering action of the movie theater's projection system reduces the experience of judder and flicker. You can see some judder in the movie theater, but it is not as pronounced as it is on a digital home theater projector playing Blu-ray or HD DVD at 24p.

But wait, wait, wait, you say...... "I thought these judder problems were related to this 3:2 pulldown thing, and once we went to 24p, we'd have a clean picture." Well, a lot of people anticipated that, because all we've seen in the NTSC world until recently is 24 fps film converted to 30 fps display. That conversion from 24 fps to 30 fps (typically referred to as 3:2 pulldown) does indeed introduce a slightly different kind of judder, as well as some blur, when the camera pans. So it is perfectly natural to assume that a native signal that hasn't been compromised by this nasty 3:2 pulldown conversion process would look better.

As it turns out, the opposite is often the case. The motion judder in native 24p can be atrocious. You can test it yourself if you have the equipment to do it. We'll assume that if you have a Blu-ray player, you are more likely to have a copy of Casino Royale than Casablanca. If you do, find a messy panning scene in Casino Royale. There are lots of them, but there's a real beauty in the 9th chapter, starting at 1 hour, 11 minutes and 13 seconds. The dealer is dealing, and the camera pans slowly around the table.

In 24p playback, this scene is a pure, unmitigated disaster. The people seated at the table come apart at the seams, the tuxes flash and strobe, the Casino Royale logo on the card table blinks like a neon sign. Once you've replayed this travesty a few times, switch your Blu-ray player to 60p output and run it again. Yes, it is still a mess. But look at it closely ... the juddering effect is actually reduced. That is because the 3:2 pulldown is blurring and masking some of the latent motion judder in the film. There is certainly a separate conversion judder that is added to the visual stew with 3:2 pulldown, but oddly enough it works in contravention of the latent 24p judder. The net effect is that the image is a bit blurred, and the overall judder is noticeably reduced. Scenes like this do not look great in 60p, but they look worse in 24p. After all the hype over 24p (the benefits of which we eagerly anticipated as much as anyone), it must be admitted that 60p playback can, in the final analysis, be less distracting for many people.

Having been told that 3:2 pulldown judder is the scourge of humanity, it may be shocking to hear that it is not the worst fate that can befall the home theater enthusiast. But the fact is, the antiquated 24 frames per second sampling rate is the more onerous problem. And this is no secret. Professional cinematographers are acutely aware of the limitations of 24 fps capture rates. They go to great lengths to control the camera in such a way that juddering effects are minimized, because directors don't like it any more than we do. One common technique is to put the camera on a track and move the camera at the same pace as a moving subject, so that the subject remains stationary in the frame. If the subject does not move across the screen, the subject does not judder. However, if the background is moving behind the subject, the background will indeed judder.

If you've still got your Casino Royale disc in the Blu-ray player, you can see a good example of this. Go to chapter 9 again, and to 1 hour, 9 min, 6 seconds. Here Bond is walking through the hotel. Notice that the cinematographer places Bond in the right half of the frame, and the camera retreats as Bond approaches to keep him in a stationary position while the background pans. Bond turns to his right, and the cinematographer continues to hold him in the right half of the frame. When this scene is played in 24p, Bond remains stable and in focus while the background judders like crazy. When you play it back in 60p, the juddering effect in the background is still there, but it is reduced--it is easier to live with.

Notice further that the background in this scene is somewhat out of focus. In situations like this, cinematographers can use larger apertures to minimize the camera's optical depth of field. By doing so, they can focus on the foreground subject and intentionally throw the background out of focus. This causes the motion judder in the background to become less apparent to the viewer. In this particular scene they did not fully accomplish the objective, but it helps.

Therefore, there are two basic conclusions we can draw. First, motion judder is a natural byproduct of the 24 fps film rate. You will see it if you play a Blu-ray or HD DVD movie in native 24p transmission. How much of it you see will be directly related to how much moderate speed camera panning there is in the movie. Second, 3:2 pulldown conversions are a secondary source of judder. However, they tend to blur and soften the more aggressive instances of motion judder that you'd see in native 24p display. Leaving conventional wisdom aside, if you have the option to play your Blu-ray movies in either 24p or 60p, don't be surprised if you prefer the relative stability of 60p.

So, is there any way to get rid of judder?
Absolutely. One solution to the problem is called frame interpolation. But before we get to that, let's get clear on the root problem: the reason the picture judders when the camera pans is because the standard sampling rate of 24 frames per second is not fast enough to fully resolve the motion. If we captured movies at 60 fps and played them back at 60p, juddering artifacts would be pretty much nonexistent.

Frame interpolation is a process by which the projector (or video processor) approximates what a film would have looked like if it had been captured at a much faster sampling rate to begin with. What it does it this: It buffers two or more sequential frames of the film, and evaluates the motion shifts between them. Then it uses this information to create interim frames that are partial steps in the motion sequence between each real frame. For example, the Panasonic AE3000's "Frame Creation" system will look at either two or three prior frames (depending on the mode you select), and create three interim frames that are each 25% incremental steps in the motion between two real frames. These are fed out at the rate of 96 Hz each. So in reality, in each 1/24 second, what you are actually seeing on the screen is one original frame from the Blu-ray disc, and three subsequent "motion adjusted" interim frames, all four of which are being displayed in sequence at 96 Hz. To put it another way, when using the AE3000's Frame Creation mode, a total of 75% of the image information on the screen is not on the Blu-ray disc at all, but rather is being created by the projector!

The result is this: When you watch Casablanca, and you get to the point where the camera pans down from the skyline to street level, the picture is smooth, stable, and clear with no hint of motion judder. After seeing conventional 24p playback side by side with this, it is no contest. One delivers a visual nightmare, the other gives you a smooth, clear image.

Panasonic is not the only vendor to have included frame interpolation on its home theater projectors this fall. Several others will have it also. These include the Sanyo PLV-Z3000, and several of the Epson home theater models. Each vendor has a different implementation of frame interpolation. But they all address the basic problem of film judder by creating interim frames that represent small steps in the motion sequence. One way or another, they will enable you to experience the film pretty much as if it had been captured at 60 fps to begin with.

As a caveat, we should point out that frame interpolation is a brand new feature on home theater projectors. As such, it might introduce artifacts of its own until the wrinkles are ironed out. The only model we've seen to date with this feature is the Panasonic AE3000, and we have not seen any artifacts that could be attributed to the Frame Creation system. However, frame interpolation does increase video delay on the AE3000, and we expect it will do so on every model. So users will want to incorporate an audio delay into the system in order to resolve lip-synch issues.

Now, before we conclude, it is important to acknowledge that many videophiles today prefer the judder of the 24 fps film experience. To some film buffs, tampering with the natural judder is a sin, because it just doesn't look like authentic film if it lacks the inherent instability of the low sampling rate. And indeed, they are right, it doesn't. Frame interpolation techniques can make the picture look too clear, too stable, to the point that it can be unnerving if you are not used to it. (For this reason, the AE3000 gives it to you as an option, and you can turn it on or off as you see fit.)

But think about this. Back in the early days of silent films, there was no standard frame exposure rate. The cinematographer manually turned the crank on the camera and exposed film at anywhere from 12 to 24 frames per second or more. The ideal goal of the professional projectionist in a movie theater was to play back that film at the rate at which it had been exposed, in order to make motion look natural. But all too often, theater management wanted it played back faster than it had been exposed. After all, time was money, even back then. And truth be known, some of those films did in fact have better entertainment value when they were showed at modestly accelerated projection speeds. Artificially rapid motion was an aesthetic that many movie viewers came to enjoy. Sometimes, when action and comedy movies were projected at the rate they were filmed, people would complain that they were too slow. Romantic films, on the other hand, looked absurd when played back faster than the rate they were filmed. But the point is that people back then had their own ideas about what film should look like.

Today, the 24p sampling rate defines our own aesthetic reality about what a film should look like, judder and all. However, we are in a period of rapid technological transformation. Someday, in the not too distant future, films will be made at 60 fps. The generations to follow us will experience films captured at 60 fps as the aesthetic norm. They will be accustomed to the crystal clear motion that high resolution 60 fps capture will deliver (and that frame interpolation can give us a glimpse of today). When they look back at the 20th century and early 21st century films produced in the old 24 fps format, they will think it quaint that we could have lived with the juddering limitations of our technology. That is worth bearing in mind as we think back with bemused nostalgia on the era of the silent films.

Comments (26) Post a Comment
your reader Posted Feb 2, 2012 7:04 AM PST
hi Evan,

i bought a sony ex520 32" led tv. it has 24p and a refresh rate of 60hz. i have read that this model has blu-ray judders. i don't have a bluray player yet, but i was planning to buy one. will i be greatly disappointed? will my movies shake, tremble and stutter?

and is there a solution to this problem? please reply.
Amazing Posted May 14, 2012 6:43 AM PST

Pro tip: If you think you've figured out something that is contrary to what all of the experts/informed people think and you've never seen anyone draw the same conclusion as you: you're wrong. Or at least 99.999999999999999% likely to be wrong.

"Judder", as it is poorly being described here, is not judder at all. Judder is ACTUALLY a disconcerting difference in display time on alternating frames, as is seen in 3:2 pulldown. One frame will stay on the screen for 50 ms, the next for 33 ms, the next for 50 ms, and so on. Some people notice it, others have no issues.

What is being described here is, again, NOT judder in any form or fashion. The author is taking 3 pages to describe the visual effects of a mismatch between the low frame rate of film and the exposure time of each individual frame (which I certainly have no issues with, outside of the misleading and incorrect usage of a well established term).

If the film exposure were actually 1/24 second, then the screen would be a blurry mess any time something moved. The actual exposure time is typically 1/48 or faster. This introduces a gap in visual information that the brain finds disturbing. It is present in any perfectly displayed/projected 24 fps film due to (as the article appropriately points out) film industry idiots failing to update their standards to even 1950's/60's technology. At this point, all films should be 4k/60 fps. NO excuse except for film industry "stuck in their ways" stupidity and some "critics" find >24 fps to be "soap opera-ish" and disturbing. I think those people should be forced to stare at 24 hz of alternating black and white frames for eternity.

Hopefully Peter Jackson kicks the industry in the teeth with his 48 fps Hobbit films and we start getting more films coming down the pipe that aren't a flickery vomit inducing mess.
Brian berneker Posted May 19, 2012 11:36 AM PST
The judder you describe can also probably be eliminated by setting your television to 120Hz and thereby bypassing telecine frame duplication by using 5:5 pulldown and having a consistent stedy frame rate.
Cassiel Posted Jun 9, 2012 8:51 AM PST
I have a blu ray player capable of 24p output and a plasma monitor able to display 24p (or better 23,976p) Once the 24p signal arrive the internal scaler is set to 96p, meaning each 1/24th of a second one frame is repeated 4 times. Blade Runner, Casablanca, you name it looks INCREDIBLE FILM LIKE. Just WATCH the begining credits of Blade Runner how smoth the glide on screen as other but particularly those ones.
stephen Posted Oct 8, 2012 4:39 PM PST
Frame interpolation looks like crap. I will say it now, there is something magical about 24 frames even with it's limitations. If you've ever seen film at a higher rate (say 48fps) it looks like garbage. You argue that it is only because of our own paradigm but I disagree. I can't believe you would recommend frame interpolation to anyone who likes movies.
Filmsnob Posted Oct 20, 2012 8:40 PM PST
{Inappropriate remark delete} 1. Films are actually projected ON FILM with a 3 bladed shutter--not a 2 bladed shutter--giving 3x1/144 of picture and 3x1/144 of black for each frame. You just can't duplicate that on video because video technology does not incorporate those periods of black. If you watch films on FILM you won't ever see ANY "judder."

2. Film exposures are 1/48 fps for normal playback. The typical shutter on a motion picture camera is 180degrees (half of a pie). But that is not universal and many professional motion picture cameras have variable shutters, so the exposures can be longer or shorter than 1/48.

3. At 1/48 exposures, you get some motion blur in a tracking shot; that's what prevents "judder" when watching projected film on FILM. I don't have Casino Royale in front of me so I won't comment, but for comparison, look at the film, then the 23.976 video then the other flavors of video to understand the translation problems and their successes and failures. Taking any electronic representation of a film frame and then making inferences about the original is hopeless.

4. People who know nothing about film technology should should refrain from spreading misinformation based on inference from another technology, i.e. video. It's like apples and oranges.
Darryl G. Jones Posted Nov 15, 2012 6:10 PM PST
As to the three blade shutter comment: I have worked as a theatre projectionist since 1968. Rarely do theatre film projectors use three blade shutters. The reason is that they reduce the light output too much. The typical theatre uses 2 blade shutters. Three blade shutters are used in industry screening rooms; the main reason for this is to reduce the flicker to almost nothing. I was never bothered by "judder" until IMAX came along. The large 70mm frame greatly enhanced clarity due to less magnification and less apparent grain. The clarity of IMAX unfortunately made the judder much more apparent than what it had been before. Showscan developed by Doug Trumbull captured images at 60fps and projected them at that rate. The system used 65mm negative stock which was contact printed to 5-perforation 70mm. The result was the screen was more of a "window' than a screen and the result was breath taking. The system was never adapted for feature release due to cost but the end result made 3D simply look silly by comparison. Digital capture and projection will eventually offer higher frame rates in the future.
RNMills Posted Dec 31, 2012 6:40 PM PST
just in reply to 'your reader' regarding the Sony Tv and judder.

I have had a Sony 40" lcd Tv for a while, and it has a function called 'film mode', which is different to the nasty motionflow (turn all that off), and seems to be there to eliminate judder from 24p and/or 3:2 pulldown. Set to Auto1, it worked brilliantly.

I recently upgraded to a newer Sony 40" led 3D Tv, which also hzs the same feature. Unfortunately, there is something wrong with it in the newer set. With it turned on, it still smooths out the judder, but for some reason causes the picture to also frequently 'pause' on frames. It's infuriating, and i had to turn it off in the end, and just put up with tne inherent judder. So i am not happy here, the tv is in this sense a step backwards, and also interlaces really badly on standard def footage, another problem that the previous model didn't have. Sony do periodically system updates for the set, and i'm hoping that there may be fixes for both problems in time.

Basically it's best to just experiment with your tv. try auto1 on filmmode, with motionflow turned off (especially if it's 3d, where motionflow vastly increases judder), and if that doesn't work, just tyrn filmmode off (not Auto2), and make the best of it... :/
SOTIRIOS Posted Jun 12, 2013 2:10 PM PST
Dear all, I am not an expert, yet I need an advice. I bought a Harman Kardon BDT 30 blue ray. When I watch a film periodically seems that the film speed slows down and after few seconds catches up. My tv is 120hz. What do I have to do in order to watch my discs without any visual problem. Change my tv. And if yes what do I need to know in order to buy one for maximizing my blue ray performance. Thank you in advance.
linto Posted Mar 14, 2014 7:59 AM PST
very informative article...
Kelvin Posted Apr 2, 2014 4:07 AM PST
This article is now out of date. TVs like Samsung have "Cinema Smooth" for 24Hz mode which doubles or quadruples the frame rate *without* interpolation (so you don't get the soap opera effect). It looks exactly like what you see in the cinema and it's a lot better than 60Hz.
Pete Posted Apr 29, 2014 8:43 AM PST
Films even judder at the movie theaters, even the ones boasting about 4K digital. Everything looks like total [censored] these days, but the majority of people can't tell.
scar Posted Sep 30, 2014 12:18 AM PST
Dear "amazing"... How about you take your own advice and not talk about something you have no idea about. Judder is the apparent vibration of the scene and it happens when you track an object during panning. That object stays on screen for 1/24th a second then teleports some distance in some direction as it is displayed on a different location on screen for the next frame. During that time your eyes were moving across the screen following said direction. Consequently that image smears across the retina making a blurry mess out of the tracked object. That is judder. You dont get judder in cinemas. Frames are only illuminated for milliseconds as opposed to the full 1/24sec on a tv therefor dont smear as you move your eyes. That introduces flicker. It's still choppy though since it's only 24fps. What you described as inconsistency in time between frames is called jitter. Often reffered to as stuttering. Completely separate problem.
Miw Posted Apr 30, 2015 12:10 PM PST
Even in 2015 this is useful. I was watching the opening scene in Star Wars Episode III (not a great movie but the audio visual experience is stellar) and was shocked by the Judder on the pan down across the massive starship in the opening scene. I turned off 24 fps everywhere I could find the setting and the scene plays quite smoothly.
Dave Lavine Posted Jun 24, 2015 2:50 AM PST
Interesting article as are the various responses! My approach is quite differrent & I note that your site seems to be related specifically to the viewing end of things. My perspective & nees are quite differrent but I cannot disregard your site's focus. My perspective is that of a filmmaker who has shot on film @ 24fps, in video (one of my production camera's is an HD model capable of 24p/30i/30p & 60p, & I am currently assessing 4K models that shoot at 24p as well as 30fps (i&p). So what do i choose to shoot in? The question is more complex than one might think for good reasons. If I want an actual film layback from video originated product I will wnt to shoot @ 24p but from what some are saying, They seem to suggest only 80p is worthwhile. Stu Maschwitz I think it was, once did a test shooting identical materials @ 24p/30p/30i & 60p. The result of his test was that most viewers wee most comfortable @ 24p (to be fair it was shot in standard video not HD or 4K). Most of those viewers felt that the 30p & 60p looked too "hard" but the 24p looked softer & they relaxed & enjoyed it alot more. Could this be due to simply being more used to a film sensibility? I think not because everyone watching the footage was long used to 30fps video (tv). Remember, we are analogue beings & I recall several people who'd watched the Peter Jackson 48fps Hobbit material commenting that the movement in the films was 'strange'. All of that said, I know that my HDcam may shoot @ 24p if so selected but it actually outputs @ 30i & requires a piece of software at the computer end when ingesting the footage into an edit program like Apple's Final Cut X or Avid Media Composer to restore it to 24p. as that is the case, it MAy be possible to also extract/crate a 30p version because, (& here's the kicker from a filmmaker's perspective), if so & if the footage would be smooth it then would afford me the ability to create 2 versions, one for a theatrical market & another for tv/video (but no 60p unless I wanna shoot everything twice). While your forum is decidedly about watching the end result, I have to consider many potential markets, (like the old 10cc song says; "art for art's sake, money for God's sake". Also, as a cinematographer I too have to worry about the viewing experience & issues like judder even if the term is used rather loosely. some of the issues mentioned about frame rates, inter-frame rates, the number of projector shutter blades etc. is both true & useful, there are so many considerations to take into account, the whole thing can become a perplexing maze. I do thank all for their comments as they are all useful & I'd also note that some companies, Sony for example have moved to a purely digital projection model in all their theatres (at least in North America), but it will be many years before a single standard is settled on. Anyone amongst you who could shed more light on this or offer more advice/info would be appreciated. Many Thanx.
Scott Posted Aug 2, 2015 10:07 AM PST
Whether anyone that thinks they are a tech head and refers it to the officially renowned definition of 'judder' or 'jitter', I see a similar problem (with panning) on all videos that are sent from my pc to tv (1080p capable lg), via a 2m hdmi cable, that is quite uncomfortable on the eyes.

My own panning is not so uncomfortable, but there is a difference between tv only and pc to tv watching. It is especially notable in action films, regardless of source (physical disc or digital). I have tried many brands of cable, so I can come to the conclusion that unless one is a poorly manufactured unbranded model that will notably wear or tear over time, it won't make a difference.

The panning issue shows on dvd, blue ray, and backups sent from pc to tv via hdmi(eg recordings from tv, usually TS files 25fps on pc hdd). Watching the pc or tv individually however, whether movies on disc, or the same tv recordings via a usb stick that goes directly into the tv, this slight panning dizzyness does not exist. I have noticed there are a couple of users on the net talking about watching internet videos (on a net capable tv) and similar motion sickness
Jesse Brauning Posted Oct 22, 2015 10:06 AM PST
Judder is how its supposed to look. It's not an issue, its a feature. Enjoy it like you're supposed it.
Frypan Posted Oct 26, 2015 12:18 AM PST
As others have pointed out, the issue doesn't apply to flat screen TVs that have 24p mode, or "cinema mode", which most do. My 2008 Panasonic plasma displays 24p video at 48hz, eliminating the judder.
Matt Posted Jan 1, 2016 2:53 PM PST
Did you read the entire text??? There is detailed explanation about this (Frame Creation).
philkb Posted Jan 4, 2016 5:52 PM PST
However short this "forum" is, it contains a lot of interesting comments and explanations harder to find on other forums. Anyway, my feelings about all this, as you can probably anticipate, are mixed. Although I have yet to try to find a hard to the point definition of what JUDDER is, I've always felt that it is that annoying "hopping" look to movies when they are played on TV. Again, I'm also assuming that the hoppy look is caused by the 3:2 pull down caused by the obvious uneven division and multiples of the frame rates in use. Movies, at 24, unless they have been doubled as I have read here. For me, if I can find out how to enable it on my Samsung TV, I would enable the smooth look offered by frame interpolation. My set is a D8000 series 3D set, from late 2011. It has or says it has, a 240 refresh rate. Also, even before that time there were sets that used interpolation on display at Sam's Club and I was amazed, having NEVER before seeing glass-smooth movement on a TV OR movie screen. In any case, I'm going to look more into all this, especially hoping and finding that there is setting in my TV's menu to enable the smooth motion effect. I hope I haven't offended anyone in any way with my comments, and that more people may come by this forum and learn and comment both.
Mikey Posted Jan 10, 2016 5:49 AM PST
Turn off all motion features including real cinema (24p) on the TV and set your blu-ray player to 24p output to avoid any conflicts. Your blu-ray player will handle your movies according to their fps.
Dead Posted Jan 20, 2016 10:31 AM PST
Amazing wrote: "Hopefully Peter Jackson kicks the industry in the teeth with his 48 fps Hobbit films and we start getting more films coming down the pipe that aren't a flickery vomit inducing mess."

Four years later and everyone still hates 48fps because it looks like a soap opera, or some behind-the-scenes footage. Sorry guy.

I agree with you, however, on the subject of the article itself. It's annoying when someone claiming to be an expert on the matter so readily misuses established terms, but the date of the article is probably a factor. Judder is a very well established issue that arises during the 3:2 pulldown. 24p playback eliminates this judder, it does not introduce it. It is superior in every way when properly output and not juddered up by the pulldown. Maybe back in 2008 all of these things weren't clear.
Frank B. Posted Sep 30, 2016 8:42 AM PST
What arises from 2:3 pulldown is "telecine judder". What arises from 24p is "inter-frame judder". From what I've seen I still feel "telecine judder" is the lesser of two evils.
Nick Mac UK Posted Feb 5, 2018 4:45 AM PST
Please remember, that most of the world uses 25/50hz, and all this talk about changing the film industry's standard to 30/60hz would cause further complications, to areas outside the Americas, and Japan. As it stands at present, 24fps to 25fps via speed up, has suited us very well, with no dreaded pull down affects. I personally can't stand 3:2 pull down, and much prefer a pure 24fps feed , to a TV set that can do straight forward integer multiples thereof.
EBE Posted Jun 4, 2022 4:36 PM PST
Jeez I thought I was alone thinking that this 24p archaic framerate was ruining any BR viewing enjoyment !! Luckily, we now have great Frame interpolation.. it literally made me interested again in BR.. and BR 4K actually !!

One question please : I have a Sony x90h 120hz panel (will soon receive the x95k flagship mini-led ^^) Should I configure my Sony BR player to output 60p or 24p? Relative to Sony's frame interpolation tv processing.. what is the best? Receiving 24p or 60 3:2 ?

Thank you again for that great, great article.
Rob Sabin, Editor Posted Jun 6, 2022 12:00 PM PST
EBE, while we're not experts in flatpanel tech around here, I feel comfortable saying that setting your source to playback at 60Hz or 24 hz out with movie content is more a matter of taste and how well the display handles the 24 frame content. If you don't mind the soap opera effect that comes with frame interpolation and prefer the smoother motion than watch that way. You can try it both ways and perhaps with 3:2 processing turned off if the set's menu allows.

Post a comment

Enter the numbers as they appear to the left