Is 16x9 really 16x9?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Is 16x9 really 16x9? I have a 16x9 TV. If I watch any broadcast the
screen is filled 100%. My CANON camera shoots 16x9. I have all of my
settings set to PAL WIDE SCREEN. If I check a clips properties it tells
me that the pixel aspect ratio. is 1.4568(pal wide screen). Yet when I
render out a section, set it to 16x9 & play it on my TV I have a small
black band at top & bottom of my TV picture. Why?

Thanks in advance

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"videot" <nothere@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:430ea3d4$0$21681$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Is 16x9 really 16x9? I have a 16x9 TV. If I watch any broadcast the
> screen is filled 100%. My CANON camera shoots 16x9. I have all of my
> settings set to PAL WIDE SCREEN. If I check a clips properties it tells me
> that the pixel aspect ratio. is 1.4568(pal wide screen). Yet when I
> render out a section, set it to 16x9 & play it on my TV I have a small
> black band at top & bottom of my TV picture. Why?
>
> Thanks in advance

Remember this is a ratio, not a size. 700::480 is 16::9 but so is 583::400
or 364::250.

Your TV may be the same ratio but a bigger size.

Tom P.

 

[rs]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Henry Padilla wrote:
> "videot" <nothere@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:430ea3d4$0$21681$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
>>Is 16x9 really 16x9? I have a 16x9 TV. If I watch any broadcast the
>>screen is filled 100%. My CANON camera shoots 16x9. I have all of my
>>settings set to PAL WIDE SCREEN. If I check a clips properties it tells me
>>that the pixel aspect ratio. is 1.4568(pal wide screen). Yet when I
>>render out a section, set it to 16x9 & play it on my TV I have a small
>>black band at top & bottom of my TV picture. Why?
>>
>>Thanks in advance
>
>
> Remember this is a ratio, not a size. 700::480 is 16::9 but so is 583::400
> or 364::250.
>
> Your TV may be the same ratio but a bigger size.
>
> Tom P.
>
>

Plus, don't most camcorders just fake a widescreen mode by stretching
and putting bars on top and bottom?

 

[Tony]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:37:24 -0500, RS <mail@mail.com> wrote:

>Henry Padilla wrote:
>> "videot" <nothere@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:430ea3d4$0$21681$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>
>>>Is 16x9 really 16x9? I have a 16x9 TV. If I watch any broadcast the
>>>screen is filled 100%. My CANON camera shoots 16x9. I have all of my
>>>settings set to PAL WIDE SCREEN. If I check a clips properties it tells me
>>>that the pixel aspect ratio. is 1.4568(pal wide screen). Yet when I
>>>render out a section, set it to 16x9 & play it on my TV I have a small
>>>black band at top & bottom of my TV picture. Why?
>>>
>>>Thanks in advance
>>
>>
>> Remember this is a ratio, not a size. 700::480 is 16::9 but so is 583::400
>> or 364::250.
>>
>> Your TV may be the same ratio but a bigger size.
>>
>> Tom P.
>>
>>
>
>Plus, don't most camcorders just fake a widescreen mode by stretching
>and putting bars on top and bottom?

Yes. Low end camcorders (under $2500 or so) are not true 16x9 and they do simply stretch the
picture. You need a camera that shoots true anamorphic widescreen. Read a bit about it here:

http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/understanding_16_9.html

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"Tony" <trusso11783@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:vj3ah1dmhmf5ahsd2vt0e2n92uabtsj8m5@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:37:24 -0500, RS <mail@mail.com> wrote:
>
>>Henry Padilla wrote:
>>> "videot" <nothere@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:430ea3d4$0$21681$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>
>>>>Is 16x9 really 16x9? I have a 16x9 TV. If I watch any broadcast the
>>>>screen is filled 100%. My CANON camera shoots 16x9. I have all of my
>>>>settings set to PAL WIDE SCREEN. If I check a clips properties it tells
>>>>me
>>>>that the pixel aspect ratio. is 1.4568(pal wide screen). Yet when I
>>>>render out a section, set it to 16x9 & play it on my TV I have a small
>>>>black band at top & bottom of my TV picture. Why?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks in advance
>>>
>>>
>>> Remember this is a ratio, not a size. 700::480 is 16::9 but so is
>>> 583::400
>>> or 364::250.
>>>
>>> Your TV may be the same ratio but a bigger size.
>>>
>>> Tom P.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Plus, don't most camcorders just fake a widescreen mode by stretching
>>and putting bars on top and bottom?
>
> Yes. Low end camcorders (under $2500 or so) are not true 16x9 and they do
> simply stretch the
> picture. You need a camera that shoots true anamorphic widescreen. Read a
> bit about it here:
>
> http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/understanding_16_9.html

Also, I just found out that standard movie format is not 16:9 (1.78:1) but
more like 1.85:1 or 2.35:1 . Read below for more on video formatting.

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/video-format.htm

Tom P.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

Well there are a few ways to look at it

NTSC DV video is 720 x 480. The same resolution be it
16 x 9 or 4 x 3.

Simple math tells you that neither of those ratios work out to
720.

No matter what the actual pixel count of a camera or display,
there is going to be some stretching and squeezing to cram a
720 x 480 image (as recorded on the tape) into 16 x 9 or 4 x 3.
The reason is that most CCDs, LCDs, and other display and
camera technologies have square pixels, but 720 x 480 DV
resolution assumes rectangular pixels. Taller than wide in
one case, and wider than tall in the other case.

David

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

"David McCall" <david.mccall@comcast.net> schreef in bericht
news:QZYXe.15777$Zg5.8188@trndny05...
> Well there are a few ways to look at it
>
> NTSC DV video is 720 x 480. The same resolution be it
> 16 x 9 or 4 x 3.
>
> Simple math tells you that neither of those ratios work out to
> 720.
>
> No matter what the actual pixel count of a camera or display,
> there is going to be some stretching and squeezing to cram a
> 720 x 480 image (as recorded on the tape) into 16 x 9 or 4 x 3.
> The reason is that most CCDs, LCDs, and other display and
> camera technologies have square pixels, but 720 x 480 DV
> resolution assumes rectangular pixels. Taller than wide in
> one case, and wider than tall in the other case.

The important thing is that camcorders having a 16:9 option should use all
scan lines (480 in NTSC and 576 in PAL) instead of first masking top and
bottom and then stretching the image vertically to form an anamorphic image.
More and more consumer cameras with megapixel chips (Sony, Canon) do this
correctly, they form an 16:9 image using the full chip and then squeeze it
horizontally to fit in the 720x576/480 matrix. This can be checked by
switching from 4:3 to 16:9 and then observing the image in the viewfinder.
If it shows more in the horizontal plane, it is OK. If it doesn't, it is
pseudo widescreen. My new camera (Canon MVX330i in Europe or Canon Elura 85
in the USA) does this correctly and is very reasonably priced for what it
offers.
--
Lou van Wijhe
Website: http://home.hccnet.nl/jl.van.wijhe/
AntiSpam: Vervang INVALID in e-mail adres door NL
AntiSpam: Replace INVALID in e-mail address by NL