FORUMS: list search recent posts

16:9 vs. 4:3 anamorphic

COW Forums : Broadcasting

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Sean Donnelly
16:9 vs. 4:3 anamorphic
on Jan 24, 2008 at 12:23:57 pm

Could someone please explain to me what the difference (if any) is between 16:9 anamorphic and 4:3 anamorphic? Until this point I had never heard of two versions, just 16:9 with an anamorphic squeeze to fit into a 4:3 format. Am I just uneducated? The question arose while doing HD to DVCAM downconverts.

Thanks in advance,
-Sean





Return to posts index

Del Holford
Re: 16:9 vs. 4:3 anamorphic
on Jan 24, 2008 at 2:36:49 pm

Hi Sean

Both D5 and HDCam decks (setup #754 on the HDW-500) have setup selections for three SD outputs. One is letterbox, one is edge crop, and the third is anamorphic. The first two are common, while the third is used mostly for just making DVDs and not broadcast product. It takes a 16x9 image and squeezes the X axis down to 12x9 (4x3). Occasionally, by accident, our videographer has shot anamorphic. Using the dve I just expand the x axis to 1.33 and video is normal. DVD players do that on your TV.

I've never heard of a 4x3 anamorphic format, but that might be the way a person describes the above process. NTSC/CCIR 601 is 4x3 so other formats are converted to fit within its aspect.




Del
fire*, smoke*, photoshopCS3
Charlotte Public Television
del_edits@wtvi.org


Return to posts index

Sean Donnelly
Re: 16:9 vs. 4:3 anamorphic
on Jan 25, 2008 at 1:14:52 am

Thanks Del, just wanted to confirm that I wasn't crazy. I've always used the terms pretty much interchangeably, but it's amazing how confident someone can be of something they clearly don't understand.

-Sean





Return to posts index


andrew thompson
Re: 16:9 vs. 4:3 anamorphic
on Apr 26, 2013 at 12:34:39 am

Im curious; Is the term "16x9 Anamorphic" redundant? Isn't 16x9 inherently anamorphic?


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]