Stupid resolution question at DVinfo.net

Alan James · July 23rd, 2006, 08:26 PM

Really simple question. How does the HDR-FX1 film 16:9 video? I have read that it only films 1440 X 1080i but that is 4:3. Does it extract the middle area or stretch the image or does it film 1920 X 1080i? The only reason I’m asking this question is because I don't own an FX1 but I will be using one in a month to do SD slow mo effects for a movie (yes it can be done). Thanx for the help in advance.

Kevin Shaw · July 23rd, 2006, 08:35 PM

The number of recorded pixels is 1440x1080, where each pixel represents a non-square part of the image which gets stretched during playback to produce a proper 16:9 output. Same concept as how widescreen DVDs use 720x480 pixels to represent a 16:9 image. During editing you have to make sure the software understands how to interpret the non-square pixels properly at either HD or SD resolution. Hope that helps.

Alan James · July 23rd, 2006, 08:43 PM

It does help a lot. That’s the exact answer I was looking for. My new question is what is the resolution if converted to square pixels. My XL2 films at 720 X 480 non square widescreen pixels but in square pixels it is 864 X 480. Does the FX1 convert to 1920 X 1080? Thanx for the fast response by the way.

Steven Gotz · July 23rd, 2006, 08:48 PM

Yes, that is how it looks with square pixels on a 1080i HDTV or when exported to square pixels for some graphics program other than Photoshop. You see, Photoshop handles non-square pixels.

Heath McKnight · July 23rd, 2006, 10:04 PM

Non-square pixels is right, which means you get the nice 1920x1080 look on an HDTV. Both the FX1 and Z1 do this.

heath

Mark Utley · July 24th, 2006, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan James

I will be using one in a month to do SD slow mo effects for a movie

I don't know how you were planning on going about post production, but you can get 60p out of a 1080i clip in a DV project.

Boyd Ostroff · July 24th, 2006, 05:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan James

My XL2 films at 720 X 480 non square widescreen pixels but in square pixels it is 864 X 480.

Just a little nitpick there... with square pixels 16:9 literally means 16 divided by 9 or 1.778. Now 1.778 x 480 = 853.44, but since you can't have a fractional pixel it is usually considered 854. So NTSC SD 16:9 would be 854x480. But this isn't necessarily related to the size of the camera's sensors. Your XL2 has 960x480 CCD's... see the following for more information: http://www.dvinfo.net/canonxl2/articles/article06.php

IIRC, the CCD's on the Z1 and FX1 are actually 960x1080 just to further confuse you :-) BTW, 1440x1080 is actually an HDV standard, and not just something that Sony came up with.

Alan James · July 24th, 2006, 07:37 PM

Yes you are correct about the square pixel thing, however all widescreen DV cameras use non-square pixels with a width of 1.2. If you take 1.2 and multiply it by the 720 horizontal square pixels it has on a tape you come out with 864. When I open after effects and select this setting (square pixels 480 X 864) it fills the entire frame without any running over the sides like it does on a setting with 854 pixels. Mark I don’t know if you meant to put “can’t” or if you are telling me that I can do what I already know is possible to do. If it is cant then ill explain in case you are interested in doing it yourself. A 60i camera films 60 frames a second. These frames are half frames composed of either odd or even lines. In normal SD video that would mean that they are 240 pixels tall. In after effects you can tell it to separate the fields and alternate between odd and even thus create a slow mo effect, but because its only 240 lines it looks bad. SO… if you use HD you get 540 lines and when that’s converted to the normal 480 lines of SD it looks great. You can’t tell a difference. However this would be for another post. If anyone wants to know exactly how to do this then start a post about it and I’ll explain how. (I also think it might already be somewhere on this site……somewhere.)

Dale Connelly · July 29th, 2006, 08:38 PM

Just to make sure this is clear: The physical pixels are not square. The sensor is 16x9.

July 23rd, 2006, 08:26 PM	#1
Alan James Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tampa, Florida Posts: 261	Stupid resolution question Really simple question. How does the HDR-FX1 film 16:9 video? I have read that it only films 1440 X 1080i but that is 4:3. Does it extract the middle area or stretch the image or does it film 1920 X 1080i? The only reason I’m asking this question is because I don't own an FX1 but I will be using one in a month to do SD slow mo effects for a movie (yes it can be done). Thanx for the help in advance.

July 23rd, 2006, 08:48 PM	#4
Steven Gotz Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Clermont, FL Posts: 1,520	Yes, that is how it looks with square pixels on a 1080i HDTV or when exported to square pixels for some graphics program other than Photoshop. You see, Photoshop handles non-square pixels. __________________ Steven Gotz http://www.stevengotz.com

July 23rd, 2006, 10:04 PM	#5
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Non-square pixels is right, which means you get the nice 1920x1080 look on an HDTV. Both the FX1 and Z1 do this. heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

July 23rd, 2006, 08:35 PM	#2
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	The number of recorded pixels is 1440x1080, where each pixel represents a non-square part of the image which gets stretched during playback to produce a proper 16:9 output. Same concept as how widescreen DVDs use 720x480 pixels to represent a 16:9 image. During editing you have to make sure the software understands how to interpret the non-square pixels properly at either HD or SD resolution. Hope that helps.

July 23rd, 2006, 08:43 PM	#3
Alan James Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tampa, Florida Posts: 261	It does help a lot. That’s the exact answer I was looking for. My new question is what is the resolution if converted to square pixels. My XL2 films at 720 X 480 non square widescreen pixels but in square pixels it is 864 X 480. Does the FX1 convert to 1920 X 1080? Thanx for the fast response by the way.

July 24th, 2006, 07:37 PM	#8
Alan James Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tampa, Florida Posts: 261	Yes you are correct about the square pixel thing, however all widescreen DV cameras use non-square pixels with a width of 1.2. If you take 1.2 and multiply it by the 720 horizontal square pixels it has on a tape you come out with 864. When I open after effects and select this setting (square pixels 480 X 864) it fills the entire frame without any running over the sides like it does on a setting with 854 pixels. Mark I don’t know if you meant to put “can’t” or if you are telling me that I can do what I already know is possible to do. If it is cant then ill explain in case you are interested in doing it yourself. A 60i camera films 60 frames a second. These frames are half frames composed of either odd or even lines. In normal SD video that would mean that they are 240 pixels tall. In after effects you can tell it to separate the fields and alternate between odd and even thus create a slow mo effect, but because its only 240 lines it looks bad. SO… if you use HD you get 540 lines and when that’s converted to the normal 480 lines of SD it looks great. You can’t tell a difference. However this would be for another post. If anyone wants to know exactly how to do this then start a post about it and I’ll explain how. (I also think it might already be somewhere on this site……somewhere.)

July 29th, 2006, 08:38 PM	#9
Dale Connelly New Boot Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Texarkana, Texas Posts: 24	Just to make sure this is clear: The physical pixels are not square. The sensor is 16x9.