4:3 to 16:9 and Safe Area

D

djkoz

Well-known member
I recently shot 4 hours of video in a 4:3 format at a concert using a Panasonic DVX100A. The producers want to create the DVD in 16:9 widescreen format, but I have a few questions.

It was my understanding that the LCD screen on the DVX100A pretty much only showed the “Safe Area” and that some additional parts of the scene, around the edges, would be captured. Yet when I view the video in Vegas and turn on the Safe Area guides in the preview window I notice that parts of the video are outside the guides. So my questions:

  • I assume that I should set the Vegas project properties to widescreen format as opposed to leaving it at 4:3, or would I be better off leaving the video at 4:3 and let the DVD player automatically put the black sidebars on the screen if it’s a wide screen TV.
  • Should I resize (shrink) the video so that it fits within the inner or outer of the safe area guides within Vegas so information around the edges is not lost?

Basically I want to achieve a wide screen look without loosing any of the edges of the scene regardless if the video is played on a wide screen or older 4:3 television or PC.

Any suggestions?

Thanks in advance,

Dan
 
I think you should zoom-in and crop at the same time, to fill up DVD's 852x480 image (that resolution is for square pixels), and at the same time stretch a bit. This way, while you zoom/crop, by stretching inwards and you get the wrong aspect ratio, it is still a better idea that having vertical bars and such. Sharp TVs use this trick for when you watch 4:3 footage on a 16:9 screen. They call it "smart stretch", because it's not just stretching, but also zoom/crop, but only a bit of each, just enough to fill up the screen and not make the footage look weird like Mitsubishi TV's "stretch" algorithm does.

I hope I am making some sense.
 
If it needs to be a 16:9 image, then work in a 16:9 timeline and crop to 16:9.

The only way you're going to guarantee that the parts of the video outside the safe zone are going to be on the screen is if you actually zoom OUT a little and enlarge the frame, making your picture smaller. This will create a "windowbox" -- you'll actually have black all the way around the image. This will be visible if anyone watches it on a computer or a projector; if you match it exactly to the action safe line, it will, on average, be right at the overscan of a lot of TVs, but the windowbox will be visible on some, maybe many.

I'd check with your client to see if that's acceptable to them. Otherwise, just crop to 16:9 -- on a standard TV, everything in the top/bottom of the image will be visible; only the sides will be shaved by overscan. On a 16:9 TV, an area all the way around the image will be cut, but unless you've got something crucial in the extreme edges of the picture, it should still be OK.
 
David, which is why I suggested "smart stretch" and not pure cropping. IMO it's the best idea for the problem. You resize first at the wrong aspect ratio (about 5-8%), and then you crop. This way, you have to lose less visible area. Sure the aspect ratio is a bit off, but most people won't notice. We have a Sharp TV here that does exactly that, and it's our default viewing mode.
 
Eugenia Loli-Queru said:
David, which is why I suggested "smart stretch" and not pure cropping. IMO it's the best idea for the problem. You resize first at the wrong aspect ratio (about 5-8%), and then you crop. This way, you have to lose less visible area. Sure the aspect ratio is a bit off, but most people won't notice. We have a Sharp TV here that does exactly that, and it's our default viewing mode.
Click to expand...

If it works for you, then by all means. I just wouldn't do it for a paying client until I explained the whole thing in detail.
 
I don't believe that there is a reason to explain this to a client. It's just a method, just like the cropping method. When the client says "i want widescreen", you just use which ever method you feel is best.
 
Eugenia, your method distorts proportions of the objects/people in the picture -- everything will appear wider than it is. And, if your pictures tell the whole story, it doesn't even solve djkoz's problem, because objects outside the safe zone will still be at least marginally outside the safe zone -- the edges of the picture are still the edges.

It may be a personally acceptable compromise to you sitting and watching TV at home -- I personally have no problem with Mitsubishi's stretch when I'm watching SD stuff -- but that's not the same thing as being acceptable to a client, and I don't see how it's anything but foolish to just do it that way and deliver it without advising the client of the compromises first. When he/she sees that every thing's stretched horizontally -- and many will definitely see it, especially if they're at all savvy toward this kind of thing -- it's going to cause alarm, or at least a sense of something being wrong.

I, as a client, would be a stickler for the correct picture proportions. I wouldn't want any kind of apparent stretching or squeezing at all, and my working assumption would be that any client I have would feel the same.

The better play in this situation is to sit the client down, explain the issue, and offer him/her alternatives, preferably with examples. Any method of displaying 4:3 as 16:9 involves some kind of compromise -- better to let a client decide which one he/she finds most acceptable.
 
Eug, got any side by sides pics of your method to show the amount of distortion? I'd be curious how noticeable it is...
 
Eugina -

Does this technique work with Vegas 6? I tried following the tutorial on your website but my dialog boxes are different than what you are displaying.

Thanks,

Dan
 
djkoz said:
Eugina -

Does this technique work with Vegas 6? I tried following the tutorial on your website but my dialog boxes are different than what you are displaying.

Thanks,

Dan
Click to expand...

They're the same in Vegas 6, but make sure you're in the right ones. The first part is in the pan/crop tool and the second is in track motion.
 
You can always adjust the number to stretch less, up to a point where it's indistinguishable if the footage was stretched or not. Besides, an editor can always see if something was stretched, because he has seen the original. 99% of the viewers won't notice it.
 
Eugenia Loli-Queru said:
Here you are http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/images/smartstretch.jpg
Click to expand...
Picking nits here. The bottom image should read "pillarboxed" not letterboxed.

Besides, an editor can always see if something was stretched, because he has seen the original. 99% of the viewers won't notice it.
Click to expand...
YouTube has really lowered the quality standards bar. I'm no fan of the argument that most people won't see it so what difference does it make. Set up color bars? Don't bother they can't tell. Set the proper audio levels? Nah it's not worth the trouble. It's the editors job to ensure the highest quality output. Using the audience as an excuse for substandard work is bad form.

If nothing else this thread illustrates the necessity to clearly communicate with your client before shooting begins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top