16:9 Real World Result with PD's and VX's

Georg Liigand · February 24th, 2006, 02:00 PM

But look how many people live in the US! :) That's a hell amount of TVs that have to be bought if at least 50% of US homes want to be HDTV ready. So as the pro's say, also in the UK, HDTV is at least 4-5 years away. But that's true, digiTV is going to be pushed. Here they are mostly focusing on the digital TV tuners than TV sets with tuners built in and currently there are not many sets in the shops that have the tuner built in. However, they still want to go digital in 2007 so will see how they plan to supply homes with the digital tuners. They are rather expensive, at least today.

Robert M Wright · February 24th, 2006, 02:21 PM

It won't be 4-5 years here in the US. Our Congress finally set the hard-limit. Analog broadcasts will be turned off on February 17, 2009. No more analog at all. That's three (3) years (almost to the day) from now. In the meantime, new televisions being sold here, will be required to be able to receive the digital broadcasts much sooner than that. The US is the land of consumerism. It won't be long until most living rooms here have real HDTVs, receiving real HD broadcasts.

Mike Rehmus · February 24th, 2006, 03:30 PM

Congress did not mandate HD television, they mandated digital transmission of television, a far different thing. A cheap set top box will be able to receive the digital transmissions and convert them to the older analog form.

There will be no need to go out a buy a new televison.

Georg Liigand · February 24th, 2006, 03:53 PM

What Mike is saying is what I also exactly meant. Digital TV is being pushed here just as in USA, maybe even harder. Much different from HD though. I saw a local TV programme talking about all kinds of electronics and they went to a shop to look what they have to offer regarding to TV sets. When the reporter asked about HDTV support, the salesman answered that most of the available TVs don't support it, but the very expensive large LCD screens do so that the buyer can consider it a longer term purchase and that it will be ready for the newer formats when they arrive. I think the salesman himself wasn't too smart either, but at least it is showing how far HD is here on the consumer level. However, in the same show they introduced digital TV very thoroughly and explained all kinds of aspects people have to know about. It's easy to see what is close and what isn't.

Marco Wagner · February 24th, 2006, 04:41 PM

Like Mike said, HD and digital are two different animals. 4:3 won't die ANY time soon. You have to take into consideration the non production or non broadcast uses as well. CC cams, security cams, specialized imaging systems, public educational institutions, etc. Most of those won't need or afford 16:9 or HD until it's dirt cheap. Who's going to put an HD 16:9 security cam in when their b&w 9" 4:3 model still shows a perfectly usable image? How many public schools are rushing to dump their 4:3 cams and televisions? How many security companies want to dump their high end 4:3 equipment just for a few inches on the sides?

It's like VHS vs. DVD. I still know numerous people who have yet to even purchase a DVD player and here we are about to see the next gen come out as HD-DVD....

One thing I have learned about americans, they don't like to give things up easily...

Kevin Shaw · February 24th, 2006, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Georg Liigand

When the reporter asked about HDTV support, the salesman answered that most of the available TVs don't support it, but the very expensive large LCD screens do so that the buyer can consider it a longer term purchase and that it will be ready for the newer formats when they arrive.

This sounds like a reference to the fact that many HDTVs are shipped without a built-in HD tuner, but that's something many people will simply rent from their cable/satellite TV provider -- so paying extra to have this built in isn't necessarily a good thing. And I saw a DVD player recently with an HD tuner for around $250, so this isn't a big deal compared to the cost of a good HDTV.

Boyd Ostroff · February 24th, 2006, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marco Wagner

What I am thinking is that it will look better enlarged rather than letting the camera remove the top and bottom.

Actually, to get the best 16:9 from the VX you should just letterbox it (put a black bar above and below the image inside a 4:3 frame). People with 16:9 TV's can use the "zoom" function on their remotes which will fill the screen with the letterboxed area in the 4:3 image. The hardware scalers on most widescreen/HD TV's will do a better job than the VX built-in anamorphic mode.

Marco Wagner · February 24th, 2006, 06:14 PM

I will probably go that route, start in 4:3 from the cam and then do 16:9 in post NLE. What would NOT including the bars at the top and bottom cause?

Chris Barcellos · February 24th, 2006, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marco Wagner

I will probably go that route, start in 4:3 from the cam and then do 16:9 in post NLE. What would NOT including the bars at the top and bottom cause?

Somebodt else jump in, if I got this wrong, but you will end up with distorted video. The editing program will not crop if you bring footage into a 16:9 project. It will be squished. You will have to resize

Workflow I would use in premiere pro if you want add bars in post is:

1. acquire 4:3 footage and open it in a 4:3 project.

2 Edit your project as you normally would, keeping in mind you will eventually add the mask.

3. Now add the mask. See the one I have shown in this thread at #21 I just key the blue part of the mask out, and that lets the video show through.

4. Now you can go back to individual clips and move video around to adjust framing.

5. Now render entire file to DV and you have your 4:3 version with a mask. This will give you a great letterbox production on any 4:3 output

6. If you have to have 16:9, you can open a 16:9 project, import the finished DV 4:3 version, and then resize until bars disappear. Then output to a new 16:9 DV file.

I have to confess I don't have a single 16;9 TV, so I am not sure if the 4:3 project renered to DVD will be read by Tv and made to fill screen.

Marco Wagner · February 24th, 2006, 08:10 PM

I was thinking the same thing. But doesn't that show the bars when you watch it on a 4:3 TV? I was thinking to it all in 4:3. Then import the finished product to a 16:9 project, THEN add the bars. Would that work?

Chris Barcellos · February 24th, 2006, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marco Wagner

I was thinking the same thing. But doesn't that show the bars when you watch it on a 4:3 TV? I was thinking to it all in 4:3. Then import the finished product to a 16:9 project, THEN add the bars. Would that work?

Marco:

You got to remember that when you open a widescreen project in your editor, the frame you will be working with is the 16:9 frame. When you drag you 4:3 DV file into 16:9 project, it will initially show up in the project monitor with bars on each side, or will be squished in some editors. You will have to resize everything to make it fit in the 16:9 frame. But it is another way to go.

Marco Wagner · February 24th, 2006, 09:06 PM

Yes when I import 4:3 into a 16:9 project it has the bars on the side. I didn't realize you were talking about bars on all 4 sides at that point. I'm I correct with that statement? Because if there is already a mask on a 4:3 on the top and bottom and you then bring that into a 16:9 you will have mask on 4 sides at that point, right?

Georg Liigand · February 25th, 2006, 03:35 AM

When you have a complete 16:9 video, then it will by default not show bars on 4:3 TV, but it will look stretched. This is the DVD player now that will have to letterbox the video for your 4:3 TV. When you import 4:3 footage to 16:9 project in PPro there is an option so that all the clips imported will be automatically zoomed into the 16:9. If you have it turned off the clips you put to the timeline will have black bars on the sides. Then you will have to zoom manually.

The letterboxing of 4:3 footage in post sounds rather interesting. Can Boyd or someone please tell me whether it is good to use such workflow with professional DVD projects too? Do some pro's actually do like that?

Something I've recently noticed when watching Finland television is that when they show 16:9 programmes or films, they now put the channel logo and subtitles also over the video and the black bars are left completely empty. This is probably because of the same thing - to allow widescreen TV owners to use the zoom function.

Boyd Ostroff · February 25th, 2006, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marco Wagner

I will probably go that route, start in 4:3 from the cam and then do 16:9 in post NLE. What would NOT including the bars at the top and bottom cause?

Well I'm a little confused about exactly what you're trying to do...

But you could just shoot straight 4:3 but frame the shot such that it will also look good when cropped to 16:9 - you could use some sort of overlay on your LCD screen for example. Then just burn a regular 4:3 DVD. However, when you watch it on a 16:9 TV, use the "zoom" function on the TV which will crop the top and bottom off the image and make the 720 pixel width fill the screen. From my own experience, this will give you the best looking widescreen footage from the VX. And of course, anyone watching the DVD on a regular 4:3 TV will just see a normal full screen version. But you won't have made a widescreen DVD, and it will be up to the user to figure out how to do this on their own 16:9 TV.

I do this all the time when I watch 4:3 broadcast TV on my plasma screen. It's interesting, because some footage is definitely shot so it will look good when cropped to 16:9, but for other programs you end up chopping off people's heads ;-) Quite a lot of Hollywood films are shot like this as full frame 35mm. This allows them to make two versions - a full frame one for 4:3 TV's and a cropped widescreen version for the theatres and widescreen TV's.

Interesting side note: take a look at the DVD's of Kubrick's films - specifically The Shining and Eyes Wide Shut. They were shot this way - full frame 35mm. But the theatrical version was cropped to 1.85:1. However the DVD's are the 4:3 full frame version, and there's a note on the package saying that's the way Kubrick wanted them released. However, if you watch them on a widescreen TV and use the "zoom" function as discussed above, they will look fine (just like the theatrical version). So basically, I'm suggesting that you could do the same thing.

Georg Liigand · February 25th, 2006, 09:06 AM

Yep Hollywood does use such technique. In one of the King Kong Production Diaries it can be clearly seen how they have set up the camera monitor. The footage is shot in 4:3 and they have a widescreen guideframe on the display. They will then probably cut out that part from the full frame for cinema use.

February 24th, 2006, 03:30 PM	#258
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Congress did not mandate HD television, they mandated digital transmission of television, a far different thing. A cheap set top box will be able to receive the digital transmissions and convert them to the older analog form. There will be no need to go out a buy a new televison. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

February 24th, 2006, 04:41 PM	#260
Marco Wagner Trustee Join Date: May 2005 Location: Saint Cloud, Florida Posts: 1,043	Like Mike said, HD and digital are two different animals. 4:3 won't die ANY time soon. You have to take into consideration the non production or non broadcast uses as well. CC cams, security cams, specialized imaging systems, public educational institutions, etc. Most of those won't need or afford 16:9 or HD until it's dirt cheap. Who's going to put an HD 16:9 security cam in when their b&w 9" 4:3 model still shows a perfectly usable image? How many public schools are rushing to dump their 4:3 cams and televisions? How many security companies want to dump their high end 4:3 equipment just for a few inches on the sides? It's like VHS vs. DVD. I still know numerous people who have yet to even purchase a DVD player and here we are about to see the next gen come out as HD-DVD.... One thing I have learned about americans, they don't like to give things up easily... __________________ www.facebook.com/projectspecto

February 24th, 2006, 06:14 PM	#263
Marco Wagner Trustee Join Date: May 2005 Location: Saint Cloud, Florida Posts: 1,043	I will probably go that route, start in 4:3 from the cam and then do 16:9 in post NLE. What would NOT including the bars at the top and bottom cause? __________________ www.facebook.com/projectspecto

February 24th, 2006, 08:10 PM	#265
Marco Wagner Trustee Join Date: May 2005 Location: Saint Cloud, Florida Posts: 1,043	I was thinking the same thing. But doesn't that show the bars when you watch it on a 4:3 TV? I was thinking to it all in 4:3. Then import the finished product to a 16:9 project, THEN add the bars. Would that work? __________________ www.facebook.com/projectspecto

February 24th, 2006, 09:06 PM	#267
Marco Wagner Trustee Join Date: May 2005 Location: Saint Cloud, Florida Posts: 1,043	Yes when I import 4:3 into a 16:9 project it has the bars on the side. I didn't realize you were talking about bars on all 4 sides at that point. I'm I correct with that statement? Because if there is already a mask on a 4:3 on the top and bottom and you then bring that into a 16:9 you will have mask on 4 sides at that point, right? __________________ www.facebook.com/projectspecto

February 24th, 2006, 02:00 PM	#256
Georg Liigand Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Estonia Posts: 214	But look how many people live in the US! :) That's a hell amount of TVs that have to be bought if at least 50% of US homes want to be HDTV ready. So as the pro's say, also in the UK, HDTV is at least 4-5 years away. But that's true, digiTV is going to be pushed. Here they are mostly focusing on the digital TV tuners than TV sets with tuners built in and currently there are not many sets in the shops that have the tuner built in. However, they still want to go digital in 2007 so will see how they plan to supply homes with the digital tuners. They are rather expensive, at least today.

February 24th, 2006, 02:21 PM	#257
Robert M Wright Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Minnesota (USA) Posts: 2,171	It won't be 4-5 years here in the US. Our Congress finally set the hard-limit. Analog broadcasts will be turned off on February 17, 2009. No more analog at all. That's three (3) years (almost to the day) from now. In the meantime, new televisions being sold here, will be required to be able to receive the digital broadcasts much sooner than that. The US is the land of consumerism. It won't be long until most living rooms here have real HDTVs, receiving real HD broadcasts.

February 24th, 2006, 03:53 PM	#259
Georg Liigand Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Estonia Posts: 214	What Mike is saying is what I also exactly meant. Digital TV is being pushed here just as in USA, maybe even harder. Much different from HD though. I saw a local TV programme talking about all kinds of electronics and they went to a shop to look what they have to offer regarding to TV sets. When the reporter asked about HDTV support, the salesman answered that most of the available TVs don't support it, but the very expensive large LCD screens do so that the buyer can consider it a longer term purchase and that it will be ready for the newer formats when they arrive. I think the salesman himself wasn't too smart either, but at least it is showing how far HD is here on the consumer level. However, in the same show they introduced digital TV very thoroughly and explained all kinds of aspects people have to know about. It's easy to see what is close and what isn't.

February 25th, 2006, 03:35 AM	#268
Georg Liigand Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Estonia Posts: 214	When you have a complete 16:9 video, then it will by default not show bars on 4:3 TV, but it will look stretched. This is the DVD player now that will have to letterbox the video for your 4:3 TV. When you import 4:3 footage to 16:9 project in PPro there is an option so that all the clips imported will be automatically zoomed into the 16:9. If you have it turned off the clips you put to the timeline will have black bars on the sides. Then you will have to zoom manually. The letterboxing of 4:3 footage in post sounds rather interesting. Can Boyd or someone please tell me whether it is good to use such workflow with professional DVD projects too? Do some pro's actually do like that? Something I've recently noticed when watching Finland television is that when they show 16:9 programmes or films, they now put the channel logo and subtitles also over the video and the black bars are left completely empty. This is probably because of the same thing - to allow widescreen TV owners to use the zoom function.

February 25th, 2006, 09:06 AM	#270
Georg Liigand Major Player Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Estonia Posts: 214	Yep Hollywood does use such technique. In one of the King Kong Production Diaries it can be clearly seen how they have set up the camera monitor. The footage is shot in 4:3 and they have a widescreen guideframe on the display. They will then probably cut out that part from the full frame for cinema use.