16:9 or 4:3 – which for acquistion?

[Rafael Amador]

Hi Adam,
The first case (4×3>16×9) you must get it by cropping, so you have to hink when filming that any action will be missed when cropping.
With the second (16×9>4×3) the problem is not only that you will lose image by the sides. The worst is that you must blow your image up to feel the screen. And i think this is the worst can be done.
I belive that the third system is the best. You keep your film in all its integrity. The people had already got the use of watching adds in this (16×9 framed in 4×3) fashion.
Salud,
rafael

[Mark Maness]

[rafalaos] “The first case (4×3>16×9) you must get it by cropping, so you have to hink when filming that any action will be missed when cropping.
With the second (16×9>4×3) the problem is not only that you will lose image by the sides. The worst is that you must blow your image up to feel the screen. And i think this is the worst can be done.
I belive that the third system is the best. You keep your film in all its integrity. The people had already got the use of watching adds in this (16×9 framed in 4×3) fashion.”

I agree with Rafael. We are shooting every 16:9 and editing 16:9 but outputing 4:3 letterbox. Now with the HD revolution, you have no choice but to shoot 16:9. So, that should give you some direction in this matter.

_______________________________

Wayne Carey
Schazam Productions
http://www.schazamproductions.com

[13]

I see many commercials that are 16×9 they have been leterboxed and many of then use that extra space on top or bottem to put there text so it isnt over the video

[Mark Maness]

Yeah, it can be used for that. BUT, for those people who have 16:9 TVs and want to watch in 16:9, they will lose this information. So I would rather use that area for a color background or just black and use the video area for my info. Besides, if you want to later uprez the commercial to HD, it will work just fine. Just something to consider.

_______________________________

Wayne Carey
Schazam Productions
http://www.schazamproductions.com

[13]

“for those people who have 16:9 TVs and want to watch in 16:9, they will lose this information”

that all depends on how the staition is brodcasting

ita comes down to who you want to caiter your commercials to the few with 16:9 TV’s who get broadcasts in 16:9 or the majority of those who dont

[Mark Maness]

[zrb123] “ita comes down to who you want to caiter your commercials to the few with 16:9 TV’s who get broadcasts in 16:9 or the majority of those who dont”

That’s true! BUT we are in a mode of transfer from SD video to HD video and if you notice the amount of programming that is edited in 16:9 now.

These are all things to consider when editing commercials. Personally, I like the 16:9 look. The main thing to keep in mind is, what does the client want and where is this commercial going to air? What we think doesn’t really matter if the client doesn’t agree. After all, they are paying us to do a project for them.

_______________________________

Wayne Carey
Schazam Productions
http://www.schazamproductions.com

[Adam Taylor]

interesting replies, thanks.

its a difficult one to judge for us. Being based in the UK, where the broadcasters all use the 16:9 spec it would be great to be able to work solely in that format. I think that 4:3 tv’s are becoming quite rare over here. However, as our products do sell elsewhere we have to be aware of other markets needs as well.

I know many UK viewers are reported as finding letterbox on 4:3 screens as unacceptable. Its something i could never understand – the attitude that a black bar top and bottom could actually distract from the content!

Is this a problem in your own areas?

On a technical point – if we did shoot 16:9 maintaining a 4:3 action safe area, is it a simple matter of cropping the sides of the 16:9 full height anamorphic image to leave a standard 4:3 frame? It sounds easy, but its best checking there are no hidden problems with doing that!!

Adam

Editor/Mixer
Character Options Ltd
Oldham, UK

[David Smith]

[lightning ad] “if we did shoot 16:9 maintaining a 4:3 action safe area, is it a simple matter of cropping the sides of the 16:9 full height anamorphic image to leave a standard 4:3 frame? It sounds easy, but its best checking there are no hidden problems with doing that!!”

Personally I think there is a HUGE problem with that. How do you compose an image that is the best it can be if you’re trying to frame it in two different sizes and aspect ratios? Maybe some people don’t have a problem with that but I’ve never been able to shoot properly that way. I think you come away with two compromised frames and no good one.

Regards,
David

[Adam Taylor]

A good point David and one i tend to agree with, but….and here’s the point of the whole thread… do you have or know of an acceptable compromise or even a solution ?- other than shooting the material twice.

adam

Editor/Mixer
Character Options Ltd
Oldham, UK

[David Smith]

[lightning ad] “here’s the point of the whole thread… do you have or know of an acceptable compromise or even a solution ?- other than shooting the material twice.”

I would go with the letterbox option. I know there is some opposition to it but I think as it becomes more common that is lessening. As pointed out in the thread, we are dealing with a transitionary phase. In a few years it probably won’t matter at all….. we’ll be dealing with some other transitionary phase. I can hear it now….. “how can I package my 2D material for best viewing on the new home hologram systems?”