My post #117 was written very quickly, without much detail.
In this post I will use the conservative convention of labelling as 29.97i the interlaced NTSC frame rate often popularly known as 59.94i, or 60i.
Yes to clarify, Vegas Blu-ray authoring is indeed restricted to official Blu-ray formats. So the tool for creating a Blu-ray disc image doesn't allow rendering settings of 1080p50, or 1080p59.94 either for 2D or for 3D. (It will allow 1080i29.97 for 2D or side-by-side 3D, but not for frame-packed 3D.)
For frame-packed 3D, the Blu-ray image rendering options are 720p50, 720p59.94, and 1080p23.976.
In general, you can create artificial 29.97i (e.g. for televison broadcasting) by applying 2:3 pulldown to a 23.976p source. You can recover the original 23.976p by applying an inverse telecine (IVT) process to the artificial 29.97i.
The 29.97i the NTSC region version of the Sony TD10 creates is not derived from an underlying 23.976p frame rate but is a natural 29.97i containing unique interlaced fields with even timing.
Exactly how the Vegas MVC rendering codec produces 23.976p 3D, from two 29.97i (or even 59.94p) sources of Left and Right is a matter for conjecture, but it seems likely the method would create a slight temporal judder. [Whereas inverse telecine performed on artificial ( 3:2 pulldown created) 59.94i can recover the original 23.976p frames intact, an inverse telecine-like process undertaken on natural 59.94i or 59.94p will necessarily involve approximations.]
For 2D purposes I personally dislike 24p as a frame rate. It blurs presentation of rapid movement (e.g. acrobatics), and requires very slow panning rates. It reportedly (e.g. director James Cameron) causes even more problems with 3D. Certainly my own vision becomes very active with 3D video and I find the slowness of 24p a barrier to enjoyment. Subjectively I am more aware of the limitation than with 2D.
29.97i though not as good as 60p, represents a huge improvement in motion fluidity over 24p.
It's great being able to enjoy this by playing the 3D direct from the camera HDMI output socket to a compatible display [such as my own 2010 Australian model Panasonic plasma TV]. It's a bit frustrating only a handful of Blu-ray players cater for the format.
And although the latest graphics cards are supposed to cater for advanced 3D formats, I have not noticed anyone claiming they are actually getting 1080i29.97 frame-packed 3D from a particular software player teamed up with a particular graphics card.
Originally Posted by Wolfgang S.
So I ask myself: if you shoot with a pair of TD10s as 1080 60p, is there is really an advantage compared to the situation that you shoot with 1080 24p in the direct way? I do not think so, at least not if you wish to end up with a MVC-based 3D Blu-ray as 1080 24p.
There may be an advantage if the TD10s are not synchronised with each other. If they are free-running at 60p then they could be manually time aligned (with whole frame quantization) on a double NTSC rate Vegas timeline to within 1/120th second (worst case). If the TD10s are set to capture at 24p, there are only sufficient source frames to time align to within 1/48th sec (worst case discrepancy).
On the other hand if somehow the TD10s could be made to capture in perfect synchronisation, 24p could be expected to yield less judder compared with capturing at 60p and converting to 24p.