Anamorphic or Square Pixels?

[Roland R. kahlenberg]

Work in Square PAR comps. When you’re ready to render, nest the square PAR comp into its anamorphic equivalent and render from this anamorphic comp.

HTH
RoRK

Intensive mocha & AE Training in Singapore and Other Dangerous Locations

Imagineer Systems (mocha) Certified Instructor
& Adobe After Effects ACE/ACI (version 7)

[Simon Roughan]

Hi Roland, thanks for the reply.
What about just using the resize in the render options? Does this give the same results as nesting?
Cheers
Simon

The more I learn, the more I realise how little I know.

[Chris Brett]

Hi Roland / Simon

——— whats the consensus then — does the pixel ratio make any difference to the quality and what would one do with the settings.

for instance if you comp at 1024 x 576 square pixels do you then precomp it / change comp settings to something less wide ( 720 ? ) and alter the PAR to anamorphic.

If this is the case I cant see how the picture quality might be improved as you are ( presumably ) reducing the picture information.

Anyone else got any thoughts on this ……

—– sort of thing that can catch one out from time to time …

———————–chris —

[Roland R. kahlenberg]

[Simon Roughan] “What about just using the resize in the render options? Does this give the same results as nesting?”

Hi Simon, there is a good reason for not scaling in the Render Options but I can’t recall what it is at the moment and I’m really on a tight schedule to find out BUT Todd Kopriva did provide the reason in one of his posts a few months back, if you want to search for it.

For now, just do as I recommended and you should be fine.

HTH
RoRK

Intensive mocha & AE Training in Singapore and Other Dangerous Locations

Imagineer Systems (mocha) Certified Instructor
& Adobe After Effects ACE/ACI (version 7)

[Roland R. kahlenberg]

Hi Chris there should be no discernible quality change if you go from a square PAR comp to its anamorphic equivalent. For NTSC comps you will have to set the nested comp to fit into its new comp size. For PAL comps this is done automatically.

HTH
RoRK

Intensive mocha & AE Training in Singapore and Other Dangerous Locations

Imagineer Systems (mocha) Certified Instructor
& Adobe After Effects ACE/ACI (version 7)

[Simon Roughan]

Thanks again Roland, I will follow your advice.
But to all the other experts that are more knowledgeable than me about this theme, and have more time than Roland does at the moment please explain the “why”? As in WHY should I render in anamorphic.
Cheers
Simon

The more I learn, the more I realise how little I know.

[Chris Brett]

— wondering exactly the same Roland ……

………and I still reckon there is more picture info in the square pixels option ………

——–chris ———

[Roland R. kahlenberg]

[Simon Roughan] “As in WHY should I render in anamorphic.”

You can render to either square PAR or anamorphic (non-square PAR). There is no quality difference between the two. It’s all a matter of preference which is often dictated by workflow considerations and habits.

HTH
RoRK

Intensive mocha & AE Training in Singapore and Other Dangerous Locations

Imagineer Systems (mocha) Certified Instructor
& Adobe After Effects ACE/ACI (version 7)

[Roland R. kahlenberg]

Alright I think I recall why you shouldn’t resize in the Render Settings dialo –
1) if your square PAR and anamorphic equivalent comps have different number of vertical pixels, you may experience ‘field mush’. Google “field mush video” for more info

2) scaling initiated within the Render Settings dialog invokes a lower quality scaling algorithm than that available within the comps. scaling in the Render Settings dialog incurs a render hit as the scaling is applied after the comp has rendered

HTH
RoRK

Intensive mocha & AE Training in Singapore and Other Dangerous Locations

Imagineer Systems (mocha) Certified Instructor
& Adobe After Effects ACE/ACI (version 7)

[Simon Roughan]

Roland, du bist die besten.
Danke für die Mühe.

The more I learn, the more I realise how little I know.