<p>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.</p>

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

<p>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.</p>

<p>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</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-02-04T13:20:18.457Z
2019-02-04T13:20:18.457Z
Timothy Lukas H.
<p>In reading to understand shutter speed better, I found a consistent claim that setting shutter speed to <code>1/(2×fps)</code> makes "cinematic" motion and <code>1/fps</code> makes "TV" motion. <a href="https://video.stackexchange.com/a/7411/3643">Example</a></p>

<p>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? </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-02-04T18:49:52.843Z
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
<motion><television><shutter>
What's the difference between TV and cinema motion?
user3643
# What's the difference between TV and cinema motion?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-02-04)

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](https://video.stackexchange.com/a/7411/3643)

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?

**Tags:** motion, television, shutter

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: 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.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2019-02-04. Score: 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


---

