Widescreen

[John Cambell]

When I watch a lot of movies or other videos and footage the black bars on the top and bottom of the screen are a lot bigger then the ones I have when I film with the Xh A1. Is this just effects added to footage or do there cameras record in that kind of widescreen, and if so is there a way to set the A1 to capture in that kind of widescreen so that the black bars are bigger and the picture seems wider???

[Steve Lewis]

Originally Posted by John Cambell

When I watch a lot of movies or other videos and footage the black bars on the top and bottom of the screen are a lot bigger then the ones I have when I film with the Xh A1. Is this just effects added to footage or do there cameras record in that kind of widescreen, and if so is there a way to set the A1 to capture in that kind of widescreen so that the black bars are bigger and the picture seems wider???

Hi,

These are simply just different aspect ratios:

Standard def is either square (4:3) or widescreen (16:9)

HD is widescreen (16:9) which also know an 1.78:1

Big movies these days shoot in an even wider aspect ratio: 2.35:1 (bigger black bars)

you can shoot 2.35:1 with the xha1 by just simply turning on the 2.35 guide in the menus of the A1. Then, when you are working in your NLE, just simply matte (add black bars) to the video to leave the 2.35 frame.

Did that make any sense?

-Steve

[Bill Watson]

Why would you want to do that?

[Dylan Pank]

Originally Posted by Steve Lewis

Hi,

These are simply just different aspect ratios:

Standard def is either square (4:3) or widescreen (16:9)

HD is widescreen (16:9) which also know an 1.78:1

Big movies these days shoot in an even wider aspect ratio: 2.35:1 (bigger black bars)

you can shoot 2.35:1 with the xha1 by just simply turning on the 2.35 guide in the menus of the A1. Then, when you are working in your NLE, just simply matte (add black bars) to the video to leave the 2.35 frame.

Did that make any sense?

-Steve

Interestingly, before native 16:9 CCDs became prevalent, you could get 16:9 anamorphic converters for 4:3 cameras with a 1.33:1 squeeze, as 1.33:1*1.33:1 (same as 4:3) comes out at about 1.76:1, nearly 16:9.

However if you put a the same anamorphic squeeze on a 16:9 camera, (i.e 1.78*1.33) you get 2.36:1, which is scope (or near as...) I wonder if anyone has actually done this.

I also think about putting such an adaptor on a 16:9 HDV camera rotated 90 degrees in order to get an high resolution 4:3 image. I wonder if anyone has actually done this.

Dylan

[Rich Ellis]

Originally Posted by Bill Watson

Why would you want to do that?

Dramatic/artistic effect.

It does make a difference. Whether the difference is for better or worse depends on how well your material lends itself to the chosen frame.

There's also the fact that most people associate 2.35:1 with "real" movies, out of habit -- the majority of audiences have seen most movies, and not much else, framed this way. So if you're trying to get a "film look" then this can be an effective step in that direction, even though the reason is so subjective. It looks like that letterboxed DVD we watched last night -- oooo it's like a real movie! :) (Don't laugh too much, it works.)