Why no standard for frames per second?

[uno]

After a long time I have been able to insert some videofiles from my phone and stillcamera into my HDV-films.
First I could not understand why the quality deteriorated so much on these clips from the phone/camera after editing in Vegas. However after having tried different methods I found that the problem was that the phone had 24fps and stillcamera had 30fps. The videocamera has 25fps.
I therefore bought AVSvideoconverter which made all the difference. I could now convert to same fps (25) and received very good quality.
Can someone explain to me why there is no standard for all videofiles with the same number of frames per second? I can understand that it was necessary in the old days with super8 to have different fps. I believe it was 18fps in order to save film. But with modern cameras there would be no need to have different fps.

[MurbeckJackson]

They're all depending on shutter speed, 60fps is a great shutter speed for blocky jagged movements. Used in action and so on. 30fps is the standard 1080p high definition setting, which can be altered to 24 fps (movie quality) in After effects/vegas/ final cut etc. Vegas should have a built in Frame converter itself and if it doesn't the AVS does work comparingly well. AVS however is only used to convert the file to another type, so if you really wanted a regular phone/still camera video file, i suggest to first converting it to avi, then reconverting to wmz to lose out the fuzzyness, then edit the fps rate to exactly match your HDV film, otherwise it would look shoddy and out of place.

[edDV]

After a long time I have been able to insert some videofiles from my phone and stillcamera into my HDV-films.
First I could not understand why the quality deteriorated so much on these clips from the phone/camera after editing in Vegas. However after having tried different methods I found that the problem was that the phone had 24fps and stillcamera had 30fps. The videocamera has 25fps.
I therefore bought AVSvideoconverter which made all the difference. I could now convert to same fps (25) and received very good quality.
Can someone explain to me why there is no standard for all videofiles with the same number of frames per second? I can understand that it was necessary in the old days with super8 to have different fps. I believe it was 18fps in order to save film. But with modern cameras there would be no need to have different fps.

Lots of history behind this. Bottom line, digital broadcasting is down to 5 frame rates.
- 23.976, 29.97 or 59.94 fps for ATSC (formerly NTSC) countries
- 25 or 50 fps for DVB (formerly PAL) countries

Film remains 24 fps (run at 23.976 fps in NTSC lands, and 25 fps in PAL lands).

Digital cameras and phones often use non-standard frame rates to reduce bit rate to flash media or for telco data com. It is your responsibility to choose one with compatible frame rates to broadcasting standards.

Frame rate conversion programs re-interpolate new frames. This process lowers quality.

[edDV]

Why is NTSC 29.97 fps and PAL 25 fps?

It all started with the availability and price of copper. The USA had plentiful cheap copper. Europe had to import copper.

[yoda313]

Why is NTSC 29.97 fps and PAL 25 fps?

It all started with the availability and price of copper. The USA had plentiful cheap copper. Europe had to import copper.

Wow thats interesting. Thanks for that tidbit.

[edDV]

Read about the GE (Edison) DC vs Westinghouse AC battles. 120V 60 Hz AC won for the USA. Europe went 230 V 50Hz to save copper cost. The safety hazard was ignored.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Currents
http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ll/ll_warcur.html
http://www.amazon.com/Empires-Light-Edison-Westinghouse-Electrify/dp/0375507396

[yoda313]

@eddv - I remember seeing a tv documentary about the ac/dc but I don't remember anything about the costs involved. I thought it was mainly the safety thing and the scare they put into it.

I can't remember which one did it but didn't they use the first prison electrocution as a scare tactic to campaign against that form?

[edDV]

@eddv - I remember seeing a tv documentary about the ac/dc but I don't remember anything about the costs involved. I thought it was mainly the safety thing and the scare they put into it.

I can't remember which one did it but didn't they use the first prison electrocution as a scare tactic to campaign against that form?

Yes, it was a major scare campaign by Edison. DC would have required much more copper.

[KBeee]

Strangely enough, DC was used in parts of London right up into the 1970's.
Rotary converters and massive mercury arc converters were used to supply DC to Fleet Street for printing newspapers, as the early electric motors used in the industry were all DC.

[edDV]

Strangely enough, DC was used in parts of London right up into the 1970's.
Rotary converters and massive mercury arc converters were used to supply DC to Fleet Street for printing newspapers, as the early electric motors used in the industry were all DC.

There are buildings in NYC that are still using the old Edison DC system. The utility ended DC distribution in 2007. The last DC customers used motor-generators to convert AC to DC.

[uno]

After this interesting history lesson back to fps.
I did not convert via avi to wmz(which I donot know what it is). However from the phone I converted from mp4with 23,879fps to mpeg2 with 25fps and the camera's MOV-file with 30fps I converted to mpeg2 with 25fps. No fuzzyness could be seen as there was when I put the original clip directly into Vegas and made a DVD together with the HDV-films. I have experimented with small files. I donot know which bitrate and other values to be used but I tried to look on other files and the result has been astonishingly good.
As you say there is a difference between NTSC and PAL. As I am in Europe we use 25fps. It now seems that phones and stillcameras are sold in Europe with NTSC-video. I donot beleive that NTSC-videocameras are sold in Europe. Therefore it seems that the phone and stillcamera-factories only make one model for the whole world and sometimes use NTSC-video and sometimes PAL-video. Is this correct?
Panasonic-Lumix has e.g. The correct fps for me as they use 50fps.

[edDV]

Therefore it seems that the phone and stillcamera-factories only make one model for the whole world and sometimes use NTSC-video and sometimes PAL-video. Is this correct?

Some do, some make region specific models.

Video camcorders are usually intended for TV display and except for the cheapest models come in "NTSC" or "PAL" models. Most times these record interlace at 29.97 or 25 fps (59.94 or 50 fields per second) and are ready for connection to an interlace 480i, 576i or 1080i TV input depending on model. Some camcorders record progressive at 25, 29.97, 50 or 59.94fps but usually can output analog 480i, 576i or 1080i to a TV. Some "NTSC" models can record 23.976p but few consumer "PAL" models will.

Digital still cameras or phones often take shortcuts. The most common "world models" don't properly support PAL. They shoot 30p or 60p progressive at high compression and are intended for computer 60 Hz display. Others may offer a 25p or 50p option.

24p/25p/30p are not appropriate for typical hand held shooting. The video will be jerky. A tripod should be used. Pan and zoom should be avoided while recording.

[uno]

Thank you for the explanation.
Regarding the conversion I have a SonyEricson Vivaz Pro phone. I have very good experience converting those videofiles as described above. I have seen them from a dvd on a 40 inch tv. Before I knew that the files had to be converted they gave a very bad picture on the dvd compared to the picture from the HDV-camera.