Activity › Forums › Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy › FCP 7 not exporting 16:9 properly
-
Rafael Amador
September 23, 2010 at 11:14 am[walter biscardi] “1440 x 1080 is anamorphic. “
Hi Walter,
I do not work with DVCProHD, but to my knowledge, is NOT Anamorphic.
Rafael -
Rafael Amador
September 23, 2010 at 11:21 am -
Tom Wolsky
September 23, 2010 at 11:24 amThey don’t call it anamorphic but it is. 1440×1080 is 4:3 but displays as widescreen 1920×1080.
All the best,
Tom
Class on Demand DVDs “Complete Training for FCP7,” “Basic Training for FCS” and “Final Cut Express Made Easy”
Author: “Final Cut Pro 5 Editing Essentials” and “Final Cut Express 4 Editing Workshop” -
Walter Biscardi
September 23, 2010 at 11:36 am[Rafael Amador] “[walter biscardi] “1440 x 1080 is anamorphic. ”
Hi Walter,
I do not work with DVCProHD, but to my knowledge, is NOT Anamorphic.
Rafael”HDV, HDCAM and DVCPro HD all shoot 1440×1080. This is an anamorphic version of 1920 x 1080. Yes, this is, and always has been, an anamorphic format.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media“Foul Water, Fiery Serpent” featuring Sigourney Weaver coming soon.
-
Rafael Amador
September 23, 2010 at 11:36 am[Tom Wolsky] “They don’t call it anamorphic but it is. 1440×1080 is 4:3 but displays as widescreen 1920×1080.”
You are right Tom. 1440 x 1080 HD pixels is the same frame than 1920 x 1080 Squared pixels.
What I pointed is that neither the clips, nor the sequence can be checked as Anamorphic.
Rafael -
Walter Biscardi
September 23, 2010 at 11:39 am[Rafael Amador] “1440 x 1080 HD pixels is the same frame than 1920 x 1080 Squared pixels.
What I pointed is that neither the clips, nor the sequence can be checked as Anamorphic.”It is an anamorphic format in the camera to make the file sizes smaller and the data rates lower. FCP automatically scales the footage out to full raster 16:9 during playback.
This is the same as 720p being shot at 960×720 in the camera. It’s an anamorphic format. But you don’t have an “anamorphic” switch in FCP because it’s an automatic stretch to 16:9
But in both cases, 1440×1080 and 960×720, the formats are anamorphic.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media“Foul Water, Fiery Serpent” featuring Sigourney Weaver coming soon.
-
Brian Cooney
September 23, 2010 at 12:00 pmthanks guys for the info. this exchange has been very helpful!
-
Rafael Amador
September 23, 2010 at 1:41 pm[walter biscardi] “This is the same as 720p being shot at 960×720 in the camera. It’s an anamorphic format. But you don’t have an “anamorphic” switch in FCP because it’s an automatic stretch to 16:9
But in both cases, 1440×1080 and 960×720, the formats are anamorphic”
Sorry Walter, you are mistaking Anamorphic for 16 x 9.
Anamorphic is way of scanning and display.
All the formats that have an Anamorphic option, is because they have an No-Anamorphic too.
In those formats you mention there is not a No-Anamorphic option. They don’t have two shooting options.
These formats are 16 x 9 because use HD pixels.
Anamorphic don’t has reason to be even mentioned nowhere.BTW DVCProHD p30 is 1280 x 1080, no 1440 x 1080.
Rafael -
Mark Maness
September 23, 2010 at 3:51 pm[walter biscardi] “HDV, HDCAM and DVCPro HD all shoot 1440×1080. This is an anamorphic version of 1920 x 1080. Yes, this is, and always has been, an anamorphic format.”
Ok… I know I shouldn’t do this, but I need to…
Walter, technically speaking 1440×1080 and 960×720 are not anamorphic formats, they are pixel scaled formats. AJA and every one else uses pixel scaling to translate the media from 1440×1080 to 1920×1080 and the same holds true for 960×720 scaled to 1280×720.
Using the term anamorphic is not proper in this case. Now, when your talking about aspect ratios like 2.1:1 or 2.35:1, yes, they are usually described as anamorphic. The term anamorphic is referred to as aspect ratios other than 4:3 and 16:9, not pixel scaling as in this case. Just ask someone at AJA about this.
Its kinda like the difference between megabits/sec and megabytes/sec.
_______________________________
Wayne Carey
Schazam Productions
https://web.mac.com/schazamproductions
schazamproductions@mac.com -
Joey Burnham
September 23, 2010 at 6:54 pm[Wayne Carey] “Using the term anamorphic is not proper in this case. Now, when your talking about aspect ratios like 2.1:1 or 2.35:1, yes, they are usually described as anamorphic. The term anamorphic is referred to as aspect ratios other than 4:3 and 16:9, not pixel scaling as in this case. Just ask someone at AJA about this.”
Elaborate please.
Is not anamorphic just widescreen picture squeezed 33% horizontally to fit in a 486 frame size? Ignore HD for the time being.Joey
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up
