[Brian Brandt]

Hi Noah

I recreated the menu using your 853×480 specs and at 300ppi. The menu is a little shy left to right in my screen. And, unfortunately it doesn’t appear any sharper. Am I missing something?

Brian

[Brian Brandt]

I have tried this in several ways and I’m still getting it squashed to a 4:3 look. Again, it was originally shot on an FX-1, HDV 1080i/60. The editing was not done in Anamorphic sequences. I’ve tried:

1) Selecting 16:9 Anamorphic in the Sequence Settings before pasting the nested file in

2) Selecting and deselecting the Anamorphic click in the command-9 window. I’m not clear about this one: does that Anamorphic check automatically appear if FCP detects an Anamorphic file on input? In other words, should I leave it to whatever the default appears to be for the track?

If I leave both of these Anamorphic check boxes off,and export to Compressor with the 16:9 Best 90 Minute preset, everything looks correct.

Another anomaly has crept in during these experiments: the footage originally looked great, but now sometimes I see “smearing” and stepping during movement. There are 4 films involved in this project, all shot and edited by the same team. So I noticed that some of the edited sequences had Field Dominance: None, others had : Upper.

When I make the new Sequence to drop the files in for Anamorphic, what should I set the Field Dominance to? I thought this HDV should be Upper. Would the wrong Field Dominance cause the smearing, etc.

I’ve done this stuff many times before and never had so many issues.

Thanks
Brian

[Brian Brandt]

Hi Noah

I tried this.
I created a new sequence in FCP and clicked “Anamorphic 16:9” in the Sequence Settings window.
I then copied my nested file from the sequence it was edited in (not originally Anamorphic) and pasted it into this new Anamorphic sequence. The result was a stretched image.
If I click the “Anamorphic 16:9” off it looks correct.

For curiosity, I compressed the “Anamorphic 16:9” sequence and brought it into DVDSP. The result was also stretched, also in the Simulator.

Am I missing something?

Thanks
Brian

Brian

[Brian Brandt]

Hi Noah

Thanks for your quick response. I’m curious why you always replicate from playable DVD-Rs. I had been told that these can be more prone to problems: additional error correction, etc. And that even the slightest surface blemish can be a problem.

DDPs, I was told, are more stable and less prone to errors.

So, are DDPs a thing of the past, like DLTs? Why bother with them?

And, is there any technical reason why the very same project, output as a playable DVD-R and a DDP should end up manufactured with different results?

Thanks
Brian