16:9 squash to 4:3 which settings chosen. Anamorphic?

[Mark Spano]

It depends on what you mean by squashed. If your image was 16×9 full frame, it should now be completely contained in a 4×3 box, still being able to see everything you could see in the original frame. In addition, when opened in Quicktime Player, it should look about the same (accounting for the pixel aspect ratio). Did you use Compressor to make this file? Compressor uses the inverse values for pixel aspect ratio. Make sure you choose “PAL CCIR 601 (16:9)” as your pixel aspect ratio. Everything else should be as you have it.

[Ricky Milling]

Yes sorry it is completely contained, but the original 16:9 has turned to 4:3 but all the image is still there.

Yes i did create the file in compressor.

I do normally use that pixel ratio, however they have requested this one. I was wondering if there was aoption in compress to set it to anamorphic.

[Mark Spano]

[Ricky Milling] “I do normally use that pixel ratio, however they have requested this one.”

Yes, that’s what I meant by Compressor using the inverse value. All pixel aspect ratio is is just that – a ratio. One number over the other. In this case, a pixel aspect ratio of 1.42 IS a pixel aspect ratio of .7031 (as you see in Compressor when you choose PAL CCIR 16:9). Because if you remember from algebra:

x y
– = 1.42 just as – = .7031
y x

So use that as your pixel aspect ratio and you’ll be set.

[Mark Spano]

ugh forum formatting. equations should be read as “x over y equals 1.42 just as y over x equals .7031”.

[Mark Spano]

An even better way to describe this is that Compressor is using the formula of

storage ratio / display ratio = pixel aspect ratio

If the storage ratio is 720:576 (1.25) and the display ratio is 16:9 (1.78) then the formula is:

1.25/1.78 = .702 (pixel aspect ratio)

Other applications (like Photoshop) just invert the equation to

display ratio / storage ratio = pixel aspect ratio

So it looks like this:

1.78/1.25 = 1.42 (pixel aspect ratio)

Despite the number difference, they are the same – just one is using horizontal over vertical and the other uses vertical over horizontal.

[Tintin Christina]

Hi,
I am pretty new to final cut pro, and I am having a similar problem.
I am working on Final Cut pro 7 and compressing my video using Compressor.

the supplied videos have:
1440×1080 framesize
HD 1440×1080 pixel aspect

I need to make a 16:9 video for DVD (Im in Australia btw so working on PAL).

I am working on the sequence setting:
Frame size 1440×1080 [aspect ratio HD(1440×1880) (16:9)]
pixel aspect ratio: PAL – ccir 601 (720×576)
anamorphic 16:9 unticked

It looks fine on FCP. but when I compressed it using Compressor,
under the video format it says aspect ratio 4:3.
at which the final video looks fine but have letterbox on all edge since its 4:3

when I change the aspect ratio on Compressor to 16:9, the final result looks squashed (the people looks shorter and fatter).

how to fix this? where did I do wrong?
I was told to that I need to change my framesize on the sequence setting to 720×576 [aspect ratio: CCIR 601/DV PAL (5:4)
But that does not seems to work as the compressed result (from compressor) still squashed. Compressor’s video format’s aspect ratio still shows 4:3

What should I do to make it compressed as 16:9 without having a squashed result??

any help will be appreciated…..

THANKS!