-
720×540 or 720×547
I work in motion graphics as an editor and everyone always designs things at 720×540…but I just saw in the FCP User Manual that for D1 they should be designing at 720×547 instead. Now I have always wondered why there seems to be a couple of black lines of pixels at the top and bottom of all the footage I get from everyone, so I just did a test in photoshop using the 547 dimension and it solved the problem.
Now here’s the thing, if you choose the D1 square pixels setting in photoshop it uses 540 by default, not 547. Now EVERY designer that I’ve worked with at multiple motion graphics companies seems to design in 720×540 (which the FCP manual says is to be used with 720×480 footage). Now I don’t want to go around acting like I know something that nobody else seemed to pick up on and start asking everyone to start designing differently, nor do I even think it is possible to do this. What gives? I am working at some of the top motion gfx companies in the country…it seems odd to me that everybody is doing it wrong. Is this an FCP specific thing?
Thanks,
Eli -
19 Replies
-
HA!
Thanks for the amusing response Dave. Yeah…I only believe half of anything I read in the Apple manuals. It is a pain though to be the guy who is always complaining to my co-workders about things not being done the “right” way, when it nearly always only applies to how FCP does things.
Best,
Eli -
Dave, you are so pessimistic.
Eli, why design in square pixels if your output is not going to be in square pixels?
Jeremy
-
Don’t ask me…if I were doing it I would design in non-square…but I work with dozens of different designers who all do it a certain way (I guess the way they were originally taught), and they aren’t going to change there ways to please little ol’ me. I think it may have to do with the fact that we work with a lot of 3D and I know that Maya and the like is very specific about how it handles things…but that is just a guess. The best is when working on a big project and everyone is doing it differently…it is amazing how disorganized a lot of companies are…I guess it has a lot to do with them being mostly freelance based without a set up company guidelines. I don’t usually play a lead role on projects, otherwise I would make sure that everyone was on the same page (as it is I try my hardest to do this).
-
Got ya. Good luck, Eli. I now exactly how you feel.
Jeremy
-
A better answer to your question might have been “Because it looks correct on a computer screen as you design it.” Yes, PS and others can operate in non-square pixels, but it is displayed as interpolated. It’s fuzzy. Stretched. Squished. Kind of like viewing as square pixels in FCP or AE. It’s not pixel for pixel. Even at 100%. My question: Why would you design in a format that is not native to the actual display you’re designing on?
-
Sorry man, but times have changed. Even Photoshop can now handle non square pixels appropriately, and after effects has been able to do it for eons. You shouldn’t design to the computer display, you should be designing to your ultimate output, otherwise you are designing square pixels for a non square pixel video environment.
Jeremy
-
There are software and hardware out there that do not natively handle non-square PARs, hence the 720×540 square-pixel designs. Examples would be Apple DVD Studio Pro and Pinnacle Thunder.
tim
-
Uhh, what?
DVD Studio pro handles non square PARs just fine. It was photoshop that couldn’t, but now it can.
PInnacle Thunder? I’ll leave that one alone.
If you are designing for FCP SD, non square is the way to go, in my opinion.
-
Getting back to Eli’s question…720×540 is the lowest common denominator for 4:3 SD video.
For example, if you design in 720×486, and the software/hardware only supports square pixels, the image will end up with black bars on the top and bottom, unless you stretch it vertically. But that reduces resolution. If you design 640×480(6), it’ll be the right dimensions, but have a black border around it and will need to be resized. With 720×540, you have enough resolution for any SD situation.
As far as DVD SP, common practice has been 720×540, as well as being stated in the DVD SP4 manual. That’s how I had to create menu graphics in PS CS2 (with presets) to look right in DVD SP. Granted, DVD SP may support non-square PARs, but I had a problem with it. Maybe it’s worth a revisit.
FYI: Pinnacle Thunder is a still store/clip server used in live/live-to-tape broadcast production. The video with key functionality is very nice.
tim
-
[Tim Ward] “With 720×540, you have enough resolution for any SD situation.”
And how do you lay that off to tape appropriately? Somewhere, something has to be squished and re-proportioned, why not do it in the design so you know everything is proper? And if you have something that comes off of tape to something like a PInnacle Thunder, I’m sure it simply stretches out the image to square just to compress it back to non square for a non square display (ie CRT TV).
Also, as far as DVDSP, I always understood as designing @ 540, then squish it to 480 because Photoshop couldn’t handle the non square aspect ratio, but perhaps I’m wrong. It had nothing to do with DVDSP and more to do with the limitations of PS.
Jeremy
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up