2000 x 800 video to mpeg2 for SD DVD

[Carl Rohumaa]

Hi,
I am working in the format I plan to distribute i.e DVD.
OK so a DVD can be 16:9 but nobody makes “movies” with that aspect. Pretty much all movies actual content is wider than this and set in a 16:9 frame with information missing at the top and bottom.

[Carl Rohumaa]

Not only that why not at least work is video resolutions. 1920×1080 would be more sense since it will scale to 16:9 SD better and cleaner. But if you are not going to use the graphic on something HD I would work in SD resolution 720×480 with the aspect ratio you want.

OK do you mean set up my sequence as say 1080p and then go to .m2v?
I will try this now and see if it is better than having a PAL DV sized sequence.

[Carl Rohumaa]

Yes that’s what I did. See my second post. Thank you. This is the best way so far!

[Carl Rohumaa]

Resizing is something to be avoided when possible.
Only when up sampling.
If I make the QC render 720 wide (same aspect as 2000×800) and put this into a SD time-line the result is truly bad. If everybody followed your advice all films would be shot in SD. There would be no resizing right up to DVD. A 4k file still has end up on a SDDVD or Bluray/HDDVD

So in my tests a 2000×800 Quartz Composer movie in a SD time-line exports much much better than a 720×288 QC .mov
Much more detail. Gradients are smoother too.

Super-sampling is a concept where you make the render as big as possible so that when it is scaled and compressed there is much more information for the algorithm to work on. So you get a better result.

[Carl Rohumaa]

It is always best to work in as high a resolution as possible right up to when you trans-code to an end user format. Like when you replace the intermediate files with the original HD, 4K, RED or whatever
It makes total sense.
As regards DIGI beta you are missing the point. Digi Beta has nothing to do with my project. I never mentioned Digi Beta anywhere.

[Carl Rohumaa]

It is always best to work in as high a resolution as possible right up to when you trans-code to an end user format. Like when you replace the intermediate files with the original HD, 4K, RED or whatever
It makes total sense.
As regards DIGI beta you are missing the point. Digi Beta has nothing to do with my project. I never mentioned Digi Beta anywhere.

[Carl Rohumaa]

No. My video is that aspect because that is what I intended. You would not make a movie 16:9 just because that’s the most popular end user delivery format. You would fit your aspect within that. When was the last time you saw a movie that was actually 16:9? I am not distorting the content I am scaling it. OK I am not using the real estate above and below but then I do not want to.

Also I am not using After effects. I did not mention AF anywhere!
I use Quartz Composer to make my content (much more fun than AF). It actually just runs as a QC “track” inside a QuickTime movie so is not an actual render, its Quartz still running inside. I am using QC to code custom applications such as a generative video synths and custom compositing tools.

[Michael Sacci]

Well then replace AE with Quartz Composer. The point was not the program but to stay out of DV codec.

I would still not resize in FCP, I would work in a video pixel count and design in the padding I wanted.

You seem to be getting defensive, people are offering suggestions, no one is saying you have to do anything. If you like what you are getting that is all that matters.