Frame size question at DVinfo.net

Jonathan Kirsch · June 1st, 2007, 09:38 AM

Since the XL2 shoots native 16:9, what is the full-size frame size. Someone on another forum mentioned 854x480 or 720x404 (which I believe is the square-pixel version of 854x480). I know the XL2 shoots 16:9 and flags it anamorphic, which would be the 720x480 NTSC, and then in FCP (or whatever NLE) you have to mark the timeline anamorphic as well as output the DVD in that way. But I'm talking about exporting out of the NLE...what the full-size 16:9 widescreen frame size would be. I use Compressor to export and I don't want to check the Widescreen filter and have it letterboxed, so I'm just trying to figure out what width, height to enter in.

Anyone know what I'm talking about?

Jonathan

Jarrod Whaley · June 1st, 2007, 10:55 AM

If you export it at anything other than 720x480 with a 16:9 flag, then you can no longer use a DV codec and will have to go uncompressed (or use some lossy codec other than DV). Even if you plan on going to DVD, you'll want to export as 720x480 with 16:9 flag. Furthermore, if you're exporting for use with another app (like After Effects or something), the other app should be able to un-squeeze the anamorphic video.

For 99.9% of applications, you'll want to stick to the original resolution. Is there some reason why flagged 720x480 absolutely won't work in your case?

Jonathan Kirsch · June 1st, 2007, 12:57 PM

Sorry for the confusion, Jarrod. The original question on the other board was about compressing to a smaller size...I was wondering what the frame sizes for 16:9 were and how to figure out what a good, small 16:9 frame size would be without distortion and/or letterboxing. I was told to take a number for the length (like 720, 480, 640 etc.), divide by 16 and multiply that number by 9. But I was wondering how do I know what length to select in the first place...could I just select a random number or are there numbers that work better than others. Make sense?

Jonathan

Jarrod Whaley · June 1st, 2007, 03:34 PM

Ah, I see. I guess you're compressing for the web? That's different.

The formula you've been given is correct. As far as picking a width goes, it doesn't really matter too much. You can pretty much go with whatever seems to fit best into the space on your web page and/or gives you a usable file size for web use.

368x208 is pretty watchable and seems to be iPod compatible, if that's important to you.

Jonathan Kirsch · June 1st, 2007, 04:09 PM

Thanks, Jarrod. That's what I needed to know.

Jonathan

June 1st, 2007, 09:38 AM	#1
Jonathan Kirsch Major Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 204	Frame size question Since the XL2 shoots native 16:9, what is the full-size frame size. Someone on another forum mentioned 854x480 or 720x404 (which I believe is the square-pixel version of 854x480). I know the XL2 shoots 16:9 and flags it anamorphic, which would be the 720x480 NTSC, and then in FCP (or whatever NLE) you have to mark the timeline anamorphic as well as output the DVD in that way. But I'm talking about exporting out of the NLE...what the full-size 16:9 widescreen frame size would be. I use Compressor to export and I don't want to check the Widescreen filter and have it letterboxed, so I'm just trying to figure out what width, height to enter in. Anyone know what I'm talking about? Jonathan

June 1st, 2007, 10:55 AM	#2
Jarrod Whaley Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: chattanooga, tn Posts: 721	If you export it at anything other than 720x480 with a 16:9 flag, then you can no longer use a DV codec and will have to go uncompressed (or use some lossy codec other than DV). Even if you plan on going to DVD, you'll want to export as 720x480 with 16:9 flag. Furthermore, if you're exporting for use with another app (like After Effects or something), the other app should be able to un-squeeze the anamorphic video. For 99.9% of applications, you'll want to stick to the original resolution. Is there some reason why flagged 720x480 absolutely won't work in your case? __________________ -->jarrod whaley. www.oakstreetfilms.com Last edited by Jarrod Whaley; June 1st, 2007 at 12:10 PM.

June 1st, 2007, 12:57 PM	#3
Jonathan Kirsch Major Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 204	Sorry for the confusion, Jarrod. The original question on the other board was about compressing to a smaller size...I was wondering what the frame sizes for 16:9 were and how to figure out what a good, small 16:9 frame size would be without distortion and/or letterboxing. I was told to take a number for the length (like 720, 480, 640 etc.), divide by 16 and multiply that number by 9. But I was wondering how do I know what length to select in the first place...could I just select a random number or are there numbers that work better than others. Make sense? Jonathan Last edited by Jonathan Kirsch; June 1st, 2007 at 01:49 PM.

June 1st, 2007, 03:34 PM	#4
Jarrod Whaley Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: chattanooga, tn Posts: 721	Ah, I see. I guess you're compressing for the web? That's different. The formula you've been given is correct. As far as picking a width goes, it doesn't really matter too much. You can pretty much go with whatever seems to fit best into the space on your web page and/or gives you a usable file size for web use. 368x208 is pretty watchable and seems to be iPod compatible, if that's important to you. __________________ -->jarrod whaley. www.oakstreetfilms.com

June 1st, 2007, 04:09 PM	#5
Jonathan Kirsch Major Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Denver, Colorado Posts: 204	Thanks, Jarrod. That's what I needed to know. Jonathan