OK if I wanted to manually convert some of my 4:3(1.33:1) video to 16:9 widescreen how much would I need to crop off the 4:3 image to get 1.78:1,1.85:1,2.35:1,etc.
Thanks
Convert the ratios the other way - multiply up instead of dividing down.
1.33:1=4:3
1.78:1=5.34:3
1.85:1=5.55:3
2.35:1=7.05:3
My outlook on life - we’re all on the Hindenburg anyway…no point fighting over the window seat.
Thanks but maybe I am not following you right,do those numbers tell you how much of the 4:3 image you need to crop?
dark_jedi said:
... how much would I need to crop off the 4:3 image to get 1.78:1...
120px in total (e.g. 60px off the top and bottom).
Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here
Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here
Thanks M,how did you figure that? is there a formula? so 120px(60px from top and bottom) for 1.78:1,how many more for the other ratio's?
Thanks again
I'm a little confused by this as well. 640x480 is 1.33:1, so if you calculate:
9/16*640 = 360 which is 120 less than 480, and therefore 60 off the top and bottom.
BUT, if you calculate 9/16*720 = 404-ish which is more what I would expect for the correct value.
Of course this isn't taking pixel aspect ratios into account...
Otherwise there's Citizen's Aspect Ratio Calculator:
dark_jedi said:
Thanks M,how did you figure that? is there a formula? so 120px(60px from top and bottom) for 1.78:1,how many more for the other ratio's?
1.78 is 1.33 times wider than 1.33:1.
So in order to keep the correct AR, you need to also increase the height by 1.33.
Since you're limited to a height of 480px:
360 x 1.33 = 480
Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here
Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here
Sorry to dredge up this old thread..
I've had pretty good results with 720x405 for most NTSC letterboxed content but I just can't seem to get anything to work for the 1.66:1 ratio. When properly anamorphic, 1.66 will appear essentially pictureboxed and almost fill the entire screen. Any ideas?
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
1.66:1 is a weird beast. You can either do it letterboxed, and have black bars all the way around on a 16:9 TV but look right on a 4:3, or you can pillarbox the sides and fit it in a 1.78:1 frame for 16:9 TVs, meaning that on a 4:3 with no overscan, there will be black bars all the way around.
There's not really a good way to do it. Take a look at the Ultimate Editions of the early Bond films (like, the first 3) to see how they handled 1.66:1 in a 1.78:1 frame.
No need to be sorry bringing up this old thread, if you have a 16:9 HDTV I would definitely do whatever cropping needs to be done and add the side black bars, as ChainsawAsh mentioned, fit it in a 1.78:1 frame, this will look loads better than a full pillarboxed image, that sux!
I've tried every various resizing, and nothing seems to work very well. Finally I created a new 16:9 sequence in Final Cut Pro and simply scaled the image by hand. Here are some frames.
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
Even my 2.35:1 images look better this way.
Here is my previous effort-done by cropping to 720x405:
And here is the FCP scaled image:
Which do you think looks better?
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
Oh yeah, if you have FCP and can do it that way, that's what I'd do. Much simpler IMO.
The only downside on the 1.66:1 images is to not crop off any of the frame when doing so. I've resorted to leaving tiny black bars around the top and bottom edges so that nothing is cropped off. The problem with scaling these images is that every time I move the cursor either the very top or very bottom of the frame will go out of focus.
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
Try typing in numerical values in the "Motion" tab of the source window instead of using the mouse. Also, don't forget that in FCP, you can almost always use decimals (i.e., if you're scaling, and 94 is too much while 95 isn't enough, you can type in 94.5, or 94.25, or 94.6, et cetera).
Ahh! That helps. THX! Now if only I could figure out how to keep those pesky huttese subtitles in frame...
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
Would there be an easy way to scale the image on ANH and ROTJ and simply move the Huttese subs slightly upwards so that they aren't cut off? I'd hate to have to leave the scenes scaled in a bit just to keep the subs intact.
VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader
I'd crop them out and re-do them yourself using the title tool. It may be a little more work, but you have more control over them and the size of the image that way.
What's the best approach when you are not sure the original source is in any normal ratio?
For example, starting from:
Initial idea is to maintain the approximate resolution, convert to proper ratio and remove the top/bottom bars. For output to a smallish DVD.
Is it best to take an official source and use it as an underlay, tweaking till it's close? I'm expecting that there is some l/r cropping in the source. Which would mean there might end up having black bars on the side like the Bond examples shown several posts back, to maintain the 16:9 ratio.