720p HD from 50i SD

Martin Munthe · June 9th, 2003, 11:03 AM

Thought this would be a good place to post a couple of snaps from the project I'm working on. These are original HD size but web compressed. Original frames are 2,2MB.

Shot using PD150 and an Optex 16x9. I've posted stills before but not original size and aspect ratio.

http://www.campslaughter.com/double16x9.html

Zac Stein · June 9th, 2003, 11:27 AM

Very stylised look there!!

I like it, they are very soft in nature, and look like you purposely had some kind of diffuse on there to bloom out some of the highlights, which i thought looked cool.

My only concern is that they look soft because of manipulation, like very soft, rather than original footage, but i could be wrong.

Zac

Alex Knappenberger · June 9th, 2003, 11:33 AM

Huh? Did I miss something? How did you get 720P out of a PD150?

Martin Munthe · June 9th, 2003, 11:47 AM

Zac: These are color corrected and graded images as you will see them on sceen. There are a lot of filtering going on. They are also interolated fields and you are watching the whole frame (p).

Alex: By 2x compression on the 4x3 image. This is done by switching camera to 16x9 AND using a 16x9 optic adapter at the same time. It's by no means ideal but it's one way of not having to crop anything when going up to HD. The final image master is 1280x576 (this has to be done in PAL).

Alex Knappenberger · June 9th, 2003, 11:51 AM

Oh. So your still recording 720x480 (or whatever it is in PAL) to tape, and then blowing it up in post?

Martin Munthe · June 9th, 2003, 12:11 PM

Yes. 720x576. I put up three more snaps in the same URL.

A regular blow up is just zooming into the pixels. This way you only zoom the horizontal. Not the vertical. Something like 33% less image loss.

Alex Knappenberger · June 9th, 2003, 01:15 PM

Interesting. I tried this in Vegas just with some footage from my 1CCD camera (no 16x9 adapter or even 16x9 mode) but it works pretty good, and I blew it up from 720x480 to 1280x720. You have to sit back about 3FT from the monitor to not see the "artifacts" though.

Sit back from your monitor when looking at these, or else they are ugly. :D Remember, they are from a low end 1CCD camera.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-...04/Image94.jpg

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-...04/Image91.jpg

Martin Munthe · June 9th, 2003, 02:09 PM

Yes, that shows that you can blow up SD to HD with an OK result. If you step up to 1080p you will have even more loss. You'll every bit of those lost 33% res.

There is another bonus to the double16x9 method. When composed on SD the image has to be squeezed to letterbox (720x340 approx). This produces a higher source line density and a sharper image than if it would be displayed in just regular SD since you are pushing 576 lines into 340.

Glenn Gipson · June 10th, 2003, 02:53 AM

Did you use Magic Bullet with this project?

Martin Munthe · June 10th, 2003, 03:16 PM

Yes. The deinterlacer and to some extent the look suite.

Glenn Gipson · June 11th, 2003, 06:07 AM

ok, looks good! How long did it take you to render out your full project with Magic Bullet? And what was the final length anyway?

Martin Munthe · June 11th, 2003, 09:15 AM

The estimate is 7 hours per 1 minute. The total length is 94 minutes.

Glenn Gipson · June 11th, 2003, 09:20 AM

Man! That is a lllllooonnnggg time.

June 9th, 2003, 11:03 AM	#1
Martin Munthe Major Player Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 331	720p HD from 50i SD - examples... Thought this would be a good place to post a couple of snaps from the project I'm working on. These are original HD size but web compressed. Original frames are 2,2MB. Shot using PD150 and an Optex 16x9. I've posted stills before but not original size and aspect ratio. http://www.campslaughter.com/double16x9.html __________________ Martin Munthe VFX Supervisor/DP/Director

June 9th, 2003, 11:47 AM	#4
Martin Munthe Major Player Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 331	Zac: These are color corrected and graded images as you will see them on sceen. There are a lot of filtering going on. They are also interolated fields and you are watching the whole frame (p). Alex: By 2x compression on the 4x3 image. This is done by switching camera to 16x9 AND using a 16x9 optic adapter at the same time. It's by no means ideal but it's one way of not having to crop anything when going up to HD. The final image master is 1280x576 (this has to be done in PAL). __________________ Martin Munthe VFX Supervisor/DP/Director

June 9th, 2003, 12:11 PM	#6
Martin Munthe Major Player Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 331	Yes. 720x576. I put up three more snaps in the same URL. A regular blow up is just zooming into the pixels. This way you only zoom the horizontal. Not the vertical. Something like 33% less image loss. __________________ Martin Munthe VFX Supervisor/DP/Director

June 9th, 2003, 02:09 PM	#8
Martin Munthe Major Player Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 331	Yes, that shows that you can blow up SD to HD with an OK result. If you step up to 1080p you will have even more loss. You'll every bit of those lost 33% res. There is another bonus to the double16x9 method. When composed on SD the image has to be squeezed to letterbox (720x340 approx). This produces a higher source line density and a sharper image than if it would be displayed in just regular SD since you are pushing 576 lines into 340. __________________ Martin Munthe VFX Supervisor/DP/Director

June 10th, 2003, 03:16 PM	#10
Martin Munthe Major Player Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 331	Yes. The deinterlacer and to some extent the look suite. __________________ Martin Munthe VFX Supervisor/DP/Director

June 9th, 2003, 11:27 AM	#2
Zac Stein Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 730	Very stylised look there!! I like it, they are very soft in nature, and look like you purposely had some kind of diffuse on there to bloom out some of the highlights, which i thought looked cool. My only concern is that they look soft because of manipulation, like very soft, rather than original footage, but i could be wrong. Zac

June 9th, 2003, 11:33 AM	#3
Alex Knappenberger High School Student Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canton, Ohio, USA Posts: 609	Huh? Did I miss something? How did you get 720P out of a PD150?

June 9th, 2003, 11:51 AM	#5
Alex Knappenberger High School Student Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canton, Ohio, USA Posts: 609	Oh. So your still recording 720x480 (or whatever it is in PAL) to tape, and then blowing it up in post?

June 9th, 2003, 01:15 PM	#7
Alex Knappenberger High School Student Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Canton, Ohio, USA Posts: 609	Interesting. I tried this in Vegas just with some footage from my 1CCD camera (no 16x9 adapter or even 16x9 mode) but it works pretty good, and I blew it up from 720x480 to 1280x720. You have to sit back about 3FT from the monitor to not see the "artifacts" though. Sit back from your monitor when looking at these, or else they are ugly. :D Remember, they are from a low end 1CCD camera. http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-...04/Image94.jpg http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-...04/Image91.jpg

June 10th, 2003, 02:53 AM	#9
Glenn Gipson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Plainfield, New Jersey Posts: 927	Did you use Magic Bullet with this project?

June 11th, 2003, 06:07 AM	#11
Glenn Gipson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Plainfield, New Jersey Posts: 927	ok, looks good! How long did it take you to render out your full project with Magic Bullet? And what was the final length anyway?

June 11th, 2003, 09:15 AM	#12
Martin Munthe Major Player Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 331	The estimate is 7 hours per 1 minute. The total length is 94 minutes. __________________ Martin Munthe VFX Supervisor/DP/Director

June 11th, 2003, 09:20 AM	#13
Glenn Gipson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Plainfield, New Jersey Posts: 927	Man! That is a lllllooonnnggg time.