16:9 vs. 4:3 opinion

Brad Simmons · May 3rd, 2003, 08:59 PM

I have one quick question.

If you shoot 16:9 on an Xl1s, will is display correctly on a widescreen tv? This may be a dumb quesiton buy you never know...I mean...will it display correctly without image artifacts etc? I don't have access to one and I was just curious.
I know how everyone calls it fake 16:9, so I'm not sure it will be displayed "fake" on a widescreen tv somehow.

Michael Chen · May 5th, 2003, 10:20 PM

If I am not mistaken, then yes. It will play correctly in the widescreen tv.

Derrick Begin · May 6th, 2003, 07:13 AM

Yes, the television, at least Sony, recognizes it as 16X9 and fills the screen appropriately. Or stretches it.

Cheers!

Boyd Ostroff · May 6th, 2003, 07:40 AM

This may be somewhat dependent on how you capture and output in your NLE. There's supposed to be a signal embedded in the DV stream to indicate 16:9. Be sure to flag your footage as such to insure that this happens.

Jeremy Martin · May 7th, 2003, 10:34 AM

hey you guys from jersey, phili and DC.

i'm sorry to interrupt but as i was reading this i thought you might be able to answer my question as well. it has nothing to do with this topic however.

i'm looking to get a camera and am looking for a shop to go look at cameras before i buy a new one.

do any of you know of anything in the b-more, DC, pa, delaware area that i might be able to look at the canons and panasonics?

i know B&H in new york but didn't want to have to make the 4 hour trip up there in i didn't have to.

thanks a lot and sorry to add this off topic reply.

thanks again. J.

Bill Markel · May 7th, 2003, 12:35 PM

Jeremy,

You may want to check out Videosmith in Philly. http://www.videosmith.com Check their website for phone #, address, etc.

HTH,

Bill

Jeremy Martin · May 7th, 2003, 01:21 PM

excellent thanks. that's about 3 hours from me i think. but closer than new york.

thanks bill.

anyone else have any suggestions?

Boyd Ostroff · May 7th, 2003, 03:18 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Bill Markel : You may want to check out Videosmith in Philly -->>>

Wow, I saw this website long ago but had no idea they were located in Philadelphia, in fact just a couple miles from our production center! They should really advertise somewhere, like one of the trade mags cause I would have gladly dropped a few bucks there instead of dealing with out of town places. I never even saw them listed in the local yellow pages either. Thanks for the tip, will have to check them out.

Bill Markel · May 7th, 2003, 04:43 PM

I've bought some extras for my camera there. They're good people. Very helpful.

Bill

Kevin Maistros · May 13th, 2003, 10:43 AM

Just a thought.

1) Always shoot in 16:9

2) Post it in 4:3
- Stretch the 16:9 footage to the left and right boundaries of the 4:3 composition. Thus creating the horizonal 16:9 borders which will show up on a regular fullscreen TV.
-If full screen is required, then simply let the 16:9 footage overflow the 4:3 composition workspace? So basically the composition boundaries crop the overflow from the 16:9 footage.

Wouldn't this make sense?

Boyd Ostroff · May 13th, 2003, 02:58 PM

Not sure if I understand the last part. Are you suggesting turning 16:9 footage into 4:3 by chopping off the left and right side. Very bad idea. Using a camera like the XL-1s, you throw away 25% of the available pixels in 16:9 mode, creating a 720x360 image. If you later chop off the sides to recreate a 4:3 image you'd be discarding another 25% of the pixels, effectively reducing your resolution to 480x360. I doubt that you'll be happy with the results after after throwing away 50% of your image data....

Kevin Maistros · May 13th, 2003, 06:19 PM

If you dropped the left and right extra from the 16:9 it would be just as if you shot in 4:3 originally and the camera didn't capture that extra bits to the left and right that overflow the 4:3.

That's what I do, and it works the same as if I shot originally in 4:3 but now I also have the option of also using 16:9 without having to reshoot.

Boyd Ostroff · May 13th, 2003, 07:51 PM

Here's the problem with this idea. When you switch to 16:9 mode it takes your 720x480 image and crops the top and bottom off, ending up with a 720x360 image. Then it's stretched back into an anamorphic 720x480 image. But you've lost 25% of the vertical resolution.

So if you take the resulting 16:9 and chop off the right and left side to make it into 4:3 you're throwing away another 25% of the original. It has the same effect as though the original image was only 480x360. So you're really not producing an image that comes nearly up to the quality that the camera is capable of. You have literally thrown out 50% of your resolution. If that works for you, fine. From a technical point of view it won't give you very good results.

Rob Lohman · May 14th, 2003, 01:48 AM

I would letterbox the footage. That way you "only" loose the
vertical resolution and not the extra loss Boyd talks about.

In premiere just start a 4:3 project, import the 16:9 footage,
drag it to the timeline, right-click on it and select maintain
aspect ratio. Instant letterbox.

Kevin Maistros · May 14th, 2003, 02:05 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Rob Lohman : I would letterbox the footage. That way you "only" loose the
vertical resolution and not the extra loss Boyd talks about.

In premiere just start a 4:3 project, import the 16:9 footage,
drag it to the timeline, right-click on it and select maintain
aspect ratio. Instant letterbox. -->>>

This is what I meant. You're maintaining a 16:9 image within a 4:3 comp.

Although now I'm just going to start experimenting with a lot of different ways as talked about in this thread. Thanks for the input.

May 7th, 2003, 10:34 AM	#50
Jeremy Martin Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: baltimore, md Posts: 51	hey you guys from jersey, phili and DC. i'm sorry to interrupt but as i was reading this i thought you might be able to answer my question as well. it has nothing to do with this topic however. i'm looking to get a camera and am looking for a shop to go look at cameras before i buy a new one. do any of you know of anything in the b-more, DC, pa, delaware area that i might be able to look at the canons and panasonics? i know B&H in new york but didn't want to have to make the 4 hour trip up there in i didn't have to. thanks a lot and sorry to add this off topic reply. thanks again. J. __________________ Jeremy Martin Uhrwerk.nu

May 7th, 2003, 01:21 PM	#52
Jeremy Martin Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: baltimore, md Posts: 51	excellent thanks. that's about 3 hours from me i think. but closer than new york. thanks bill. anyone else have any suggestions? __________________ Jeremy Martin Uhrwerk.nu

May 14th, 2003, 01:48 AM	#59
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	I would letterbox the footage. That way you "only" loose the vertical resolution and not the extra loss Boyd talks about. In premiere just start a 4:3 project, import the 16:9 footage, drag it to the timeline, right-click on it and select maintain aspect ratio. Instant letterbox. __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

May 3rd, 2003, 08:59 PM	#46
Brad Simmons Major Player Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Washington DC Posts: 304	I have one quick question. If you shoot 16:9 on an Xl1s, will is display correctly on a widescreen tv? This may be a dumb quesiton buy you never know...I mean...will it display correctly without image artifacts etc? I don't have access to one and I was just curious. I know how everyone calls it fake 16:9, so I'm not sure it will be displayed "fake" on a widescreen tv somehow.

May 5th, 2003, 10:20 PM	#47
Michael Chen Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 163	If I am not mistaken, then yes. It will play correctly in the widescreen tv.

May 6th, 2003, 07:13 AM	#48
Derrick Begin Major Player Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: New York Posts: 329	Yes, the television, at least Sony, recognizes it as 16X9 and fills the screen appropriately. Or stretches it. Cheers!

May 6th, 2003, 07:40 AM	#49
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	This may be somewhat dependent on how you capture and output in your NLE. There's supposed to be a signal embedded in the DV stream to indicate 16:9. Be sure to flag your footage as such to insure that this happens.

May 7th, 2003, 12:35 PM	#51
Bill Markel Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Sicklerville, NJ Posts: 59	Jeremy, You may want to check out Videosmith in Philly. http://www.videosmith.com Check their website for phone #, address, etc. HTH, Bill

May 7th, 2003, 03:18 PM	#53
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	<<<-- Originally posted by Bill Markel : You may want to check out Videosmith in Philly -->>> Wow, I saw this website long ago but had no idea they were located in Philadelphia, in fact just a couple miles from our production center! They should really advertise somewhere, like one of the trade mags cause I would have gladly dropped a few bucks there instead of dealing with out of town places. I never even saw them listed in the local yellow pages either. Thanks for the tip, will have to check them out.

May 7th, 2003, 04:43 PM	#54
Bill Markel Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Sicklerville, NJ Posts: 59	I've bought some extras for my camera there. They're good people. Very helpful. Bill

May 13th, 2003, 10:43 AM	#55
Kevin Maistros Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 129	Just a thought. 1) Always shoot in 16:9 2) Post it in 4:3 - Stretch the 16:9 footage to the left and right boundaries of the 4:3 composition. Thus creating the horizonal 16:9 borders which will show up on a regular fullscreen TV. -If full screen is required, then simply let the 16:9 footage overflow the 4:3 composition workspace? So basically the composition boundaries crop the overflow from the 16:9 footage. Wouldn't this make sense?

May 13th, 2003, 02:58 PM	#56
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Not sure if I understand the last part. Are you suggesting turning 16:9 footage into 4:3 by chopping off the left and right side. Very bad idea. Using a camera like the XL-1s, you throw away 25% of the available pixels in 16:9 mode, creating a 720x360 image. If you later chop off the sides to recreate a 4:3 image you'd be discarding another 25% of the pixels, effectively reducing your resolution to 480x360. I doubt that you'll be happy with the results after after throwing away 50% of your image data....

May 13th, 2003, 06:19 PM	#57
Kevin Maistros Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 129	If you dropped the left and right extra from the 16:9 it would be just as if you shot in 4:3 originally and the camera didn't capture that extra bits to the left and right that overflow the 4:3. That's what I do, and it works the same as if I shot originally in 4:3 but now I also have the option of also using 16:9 without having to reshoot.

May 13th, 2003, 07:51 PM	#58
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,802	Here's the problem with this idea. When you switch to 16:9 mode it takes your 720x480 image and crops the top and bottom off, ending up with a 720x360 image. Then it's stretched back into an anamorphic 720x480 image. But you've lost 25% of the vertical resolution. So if you take the resulting 16:9 and chop off the right and left side to make it into 4:3 you're throwing away another 25% of the original. It has the same effect as though the original image was only 480x360. So you're really not producing an image that comes nearly up to the quality that the camera is capable of. You have literally thrown out 50% of your resolution. If that works for you, fine. From a technical point of view it won't give you very good results.

May 14th, 2003, 02:05 AM	#60
Kevin Maistros Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Cleveland, OH Posts: 129	<<<-- Originally posted by Rob Lohman : I would letterbox the footage. That way you "only" loose the vertical resolution and not the extra loss Boyd talks about. In premiere just start a 4:3 project, import the 16:9 footage, drag it to the timeline, right-click on it and select maintain aspect ratio. Instant letterbox. -->>> This is what I meant. You're maintaining a 16:9 image within a 4:3 comp. Although now I'm just going to start experimenting with a lot of different ways as talked about in this thread. Thanks for the input.