Final Cut Pro 6.0.6 problems

[Jerry Hofmann]

What exactly are the sequence settings?

Also, you’re not running more than one version of QT on the same machine, right?

Jerry

Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski.

8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17″ MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX Cinema Displays

[Robb Harriss]

that’s a really common issue.
I prefer rendering out as MP4 files with the h.264 codec. There hasn’t been a problem with the aspect ration when playing those in QT, or anywhere. Up the rendering speed by using a Qmaster render cluster coming out of compressor. If you have more than one machine you can setup a nice little render farm for all sorts of exports, not just the h.264

Non-linear: all the time and nothing but.

[Chris Poisson]

If you want 16×9 you must export using QuickTime conversion. In there you can select 16×9.

[David Almond]

Hi,
Thanks for your reply,
Yes we are running Quicktime 7.5 & Quicktime 7.6.4, as we thought it could have been a quicktime issue, but no luck with either?

[Miodrag Ristic]

Is there any loss of quality by going thru Quick Time conversion considering that we are always advised
to go thru Quick Time export (without conversion) to maintain the highest quality.

Mio

http://www.digitalvideovault.com.au

[Michael Gissing]

A common misunderstanding of SD video is that 16:9 is a cheat achieved by anamorphic squeeze of the pixels. If you are using SD anamorphic frame sizes then that is why you should expect a quicktime movie export to maintain the 4:3 ratio unless you manually adjust the frame size. Quicktime player should correct but it may not and should not be relied on.

Rather than wonder if other media players will correctly read an anamorphic flag and stretch the image back out like a 16:9 TV does, try exporting and setting a 16:9 frame size.

In PAL that means exporting 1024 x 576 instead of the anamorphic 720 x 576.

In NTSC I think it is 840 x 480.

[Miodrag Ristic]

Michael, I’m not getting it.

I did think that it was a cheat, for example, Canon GL2 camera was 4:3 native with ability to shoot
16:9 but it would just cut top and bottom of a frame and stretch it horizontally – consequently loosing
the resolution with obvious grain.

Higher model, Canon’s XL2 was then announced as a true 16:9…

So, what’s the difference between the two?

Mio

http://www.digitalvideovault.com.au

[Michael Gissing]

As I said, standard def frame sizes are 4:3. In PAL that means 720 x 576 pixels and in NTSC 720 x 480. There are two ways to get 16:9 framing inside that 4:3 frame. Either crop top and bottom (usually called letterboxing) or squeeze the image (usually called anamorphic or rectangular pixel).

When SD is broadcast or put on a DVD, the TV can stretch the image horizontally to create a corrected 16:9 image from the anamorphic 4:3 original. On a computer media player you either have to tell the player to display 16:9 or hope that it might correctly resize by reading the anamorphic flag in the file. As this is not reliable and subject to peoples individual settings in the computer, it is safer to create the computer file in true 16:9 by rendering the horizontal stretch.

Does that make more sense?

[Miodrag Ristic]

“As I said, standard def frame sizes are 4:3. In PAL that means 720 x 576 pixels and in NTSC 720 x 480.”

Sorry, maybe I’m slow little bit… For example my Panasonic HPX170 shoots both SD and HD (DVCRPO HD)
and it’s a native 16:9 camera, the image sensors are shaped 16:9.

Are you trying to say that that’s still 720:576 when in SD even though it’s 16:9?

Because the manual says, to get a 4:3 picture, camera is “extracting 4:3 shaped patch out of the center of the 16:9 CCD; it uses the full height of the CCD, and ignores the extra width on the sides.”
So if this extracted “patch” is 720:576, it means it must have been higher horizontal resolution (higher than 720) when we thrown out some of it?

Mio

(I just noticed that you’re from Tassie, I used to live in Launceston ten years ago (for about 2 years)

http://www.digitalvideovault.com.au

[Michael Gissing]

The sensor is 16:9 but the image is then squeezed anamorphic to record as a 4:3 digital signal in SD. Have a look in FCP at a SD sequence and you will see that selecting anamorphic changes only the display in FCP. The frame size remains 720 x 576 as you are PAL.

HD is true 16:9 square pixel.