16x9 mode - DVX100

[jimwww]

Hi guys.. just bought a used DVX100 and I am wondering how to get the camera into 16x9 mode. There does not seem to be anything in the manual. (maybe I am missing it)
:dankk2:

I am new here - and yes I did a search.. wasn't helpful..

 

[volcano]

Hi Jimww,
Cong on your purchase. I dont know what DVX100 you got (first, or b) but i believe they are in the same menu:
CAMERA SETUP--->ASPECT CONV--->Choose LETTER BOX
If you got a 100b, i believe there is an option of SQUEEZE MODE, which is another 16x9 mode... which is a sort of anamorphic widescreen...Do a searc on it.

 

[Barry_Green]

DVX100 (original) doesn't have "squeeze mode"; DVX100A and DVX100B do.

LETTERBOX is actually 4:3 video, with black bars to make it have the appearance of a widescreen movie.

SQUEEZE mode is actually 16:9 anamorphic video (created using a digital stretch in-camera, but the point is that squeeze mode will display properly on a widescreen television, whereas letterbox wouldn't.)

 

[volcano]

LETTERBOX is actually 4:3 video, with black bars to make it have the appearance of a widescreen movie

Hi Barry, tx for the detailed explanation. My concern is though, are you sure to call the letterbox a 4:3 video? (with etc...) People might think they have an option of removing the black bars after they shot it in letterbox mode. Isnt technically any frame that has a 1.78:1 ratio called 16:9?
Thanks

I am wondering how to get the camera into 16x9 mode

Jimww, many original DVX100 owners (including me) who doesnt have the squeeze mode has another trick: Shoot in 4:3 ratio by masking the lcd. ( Switch to letterbox, put clear tapes at the top & bottom of your lcd screen where the black bars appear then switch back to 4:3...
When editing select the whole footage and apply 16:9 filter...This way you'll get the full resolution of 4:3(Unfortunately in letterbox mode you'll loose 1:3 of screen resolution)

 

[ajs473]

" My concern is though, are you sure to call the letterbox a 4:3 video? (with etc...) People might think they have an option of removing the black bars after they shot it in letterbox mode. Isnt technically any frame that has a 1.78:1 ratio called 16:9?"

Letterbox is just a 4:3 image with black bars on the top and bottom to give it the shape of 16:9. While it is technically a 1.78:1 frame, it is not true 16:9, so if you were to play it on a widescreen tv, it would not fill up the whole screen, but be stretched with black bars still there. True 16:9 (at least in DVD format) will letterbox itself automatically on a regular tv and fill the screen on a widescreen tv.

If you're looking to shoot 16:9, do not use sqeeze mode. Your best bet is to tape off the 16:9 frame like volcano mentioned, but then to import the footage into a 16:9 timeline and scale it so that it fits the frame (make it 133.33%). Final Cut's scaling (as well as most other NLEs) is more reliable when it comes to resolution than the DVX CCD squeezing footage, and this way you also have room to play with your framing a bit.

 

[volcano]

Letterbox is just a 4:3 image with black bars on the top and bottom to give it the shape of 16:9. While it is technically a 1.78:1 frame, it is not true 16:9

I agree...I was just thinking true or not '16:9' is '16:9'..Some people are calling for the ban of releasing DVD movies on letterbox 16:9 btw

but then to import the footage into a 16:9 timeline and scale it so that it fits the frame (make it 133.33%)

Well, very wise, this way you get an anamorphic timeline too. But for me, pumping the scale up to %133 detoriates the quality of the footage. (Or am I wrong about it?) So i personally prefer to keep things letterboxed by simply using a 4:3 timeline and adding 16:9 filter...
(This is the only thing i am jealous about XL-2: anamorphic lens..)
Your method is handy to combine non anamorphic 16:9 with actual anamorphic footage for sure...

 

[bustak]

Hey Volcano,

When you talk about uprez'n using a filter, do you mean using Red Giants instant HD in Premiere or FCP:
http://www.redgiantsoftware.com/instanthd.html

I downloaded the demo & installed it for Premiere, & it's not working as I wish. Either A, I'm doing something wrong, or B it doesn't do what I want it to do.

In the Barry Green book it says you're better off shooting in the "letterbox" setting & resizing in post to be 16:9, in comparison to using the in camera 'squeeze' mode.

So I shot some footage in "letterbox" & imported it into Premiere, using both 4:3 & 16:9 settings. I then applied a widescreen filter from Red Giant & it doesn't vertically stretch & fill-up the frame as I would of thought.

Do you know what I'm doing wrong? Any help would be of help.

peace,
Ken

 

[volcano]

Hi AJS473,
Here are the sample frames from my FCP canvas. Footage below originally shot in
4x3 ratio.Final product is to be 16x9. Stil undecided if I should use anamorphic or 4x3 letterboxed timeline...
Pic2 Footage is on 4x3 timeline with 16x9 widescreen mask added...
View attachment 620
Pic 4 Footage blown to 133.33 scale on the anam. 16x9 timeline...
View attachment 621
Pic 4 what you did recommend on your last post. Do you notice the detoriation at the footage on Pic4 comparing to Pic2. It is especially visible on widescreen. I guess if you see the pic4 on a 4x3 tv it will be same quality with Pic2, because it will be squeezed back into what it was, masked by blackbars. Am I right?
So the point is; if you want anamorphic and trying to do it with regular 4x3, you'll sacrifice a bit of quality for widescreen tv, but for 4x3 it is all same...

 

[volcano]

When you talk about uprez'n using a filter, do you mean using Red Giants instant HD in Premiere or FCP

Hey Ken, i mean widescreen matte in FCP... Never used Red Giant, or Premiere, so sorry I ve no idea what your mistake can be...

 

[Noel Evans]

Hey Volcano,

When you talk about uprez'n using a filter, do you mean using Red Giants instant HD in Premiere or FCP:
http://www.redgiantsoftware.com/instanthd.html

I downloaded the demo & installed it for Premiere, & it's not working as I wish. Either A, I'm doing something wrong, or B it doesn't do what I want it to do.

In the Barry Green book it says you're better off shooting in the "letterbox" setting & resizing in post to be 16:9, in comparison to using the in camera 'squeeze' mode.

So I shot some footage in "letterbox" & imported it into Premiere, using both 4:3 & 16:9 settings. I then applied a widescreen filter from Red Giant & it doesn't vertically stretch & fill-up the frame as I would of thought.

Do you know what I'm doing wrong? Any help would be of help.

peace,
Ken

OK so instant HD from redgiant is designed to upres footage to HD not 4:3 SD to 16:9 SD, but it can do it.

Step 1
Capture your footage on a 4:3 timeline and crop.

Step 2
Export movie as is.

Step 3
Open new 16:9 project

Step 4
Import 4:3 footage (will show as standard 4:3 with extra padding)

Step 5
Apply instant HD filter

Step 6
Select the custom option and resize to fit your 16:9 window maintaining aspect ratio.

Step 7
Render

Final Cut's scaling (as well as most other NLEs) is more reliable when it comes to resolution than the DVX CCD squeezing footage, and this way you also have room to play with your framing a bit.

Not sure about others but I would say the algorithm emplyed by ppro is worse than squeeze, truly looks like stretched out footage. My reading and preliminary tests on FCP (cant use InstantHD at this time with Intel Macs so its not an option for me right now) is that FCP employs a far superior algorithm than ppro. I cam use Instant HD on my PC still, but there seems no need as FCP does a rather exceptional job on its own IMO. Then again in two weeks I have found that FCP does a far better job at most things. My footage is coming out so much sharper (because of RT rendering) that I am going back through recent jobs and re cutting them whenever I have the chance. Im extremely surprised at the difference..... N.B. I have not used ppro 2 just 1.5 so 2 could have many improvements.

 

[David Jimerson]

I agree...I was just thinking true or not '16:9' is '16:9'..Some people are calling for the ban of releasing DVD movies on letterbox 16:9 btw

If by that you mean releasing only in widescreen anamorphic, then it's almost a moot point, because very few, if any, movies are released in letterbox anymore, and those which may be are cheap transfers of old public-domain stuff sold for a couple of bucks.

If by that you mean some people are calling for full-screen only DVDs, then those people are called "fools."

In any case, letterbox video isn't 16:9. The black bars are part of the pciture. They will react to color correction, animated transitions, ripple effects, etc., AS part of the picture.

Which is one of the reasons why you shouldn't shoot letterbox.

 

[epsilonbass]

In any case, letterbox video isn't 16:9. The black bars are part of the pciture. They will react to color correction, animated transitions, ripple effects, etc., AS part of the picture.

Which is one of the reasons why you shouldn't shoot letterbox.

Or one of the reasons you shouldn't use the ripple effect.

 

[volcano]

because very few, if any, movies are released in letterbox anymore, and those which may be are cheap transfers of old public-domain stuff sold for a couple of bucks.

Good news then. Actually you'd be surprised the number of letterbox 16:9 dvds available, especially if you are collecting hard to find movies around the world...

people are calling for full-screen only DVDs, then those people are called "fools

I agree.

Which is one of the reasons why you shouldn't shoot letterbox

Agreed, i never shoot in letterbox mode, but i do edit on letterboxed timeline...
What do you have to say about scaling the footage to %133.33 for the sake of anamorphic???

 

[jimwww]

Wow.. you guys are great.. I have a Dvx100 - no a, no b.

I want the effect of letterbox on my finished film so that it can be shown on a normal tv. ( Iwanted to know how to turn the bars on) I can add the black bars later in editing. What type of tape should I use on the LCD pullout - should be transparent. I am a believer in eyes one third down.. but if the black bars or transparent tape isn't there then I cannot judge my framing while shooting..

(thanks I did turn it on)

By the way I am a pro photographer so if you have any questions I am here to help as well. ( www.cuttingedgephotography.com )

jim

 

[ajs473]

volcano,

i was suggesting that you scale the footage to 133.33 into 16:9 as an alternative to shooting squeeze mode (because the original poster was asking about 16:9 mode). ive seen tests that have shown that there is slightly less resolution loss beacuse NLEs can scale a little better than the camera's CCD. this also leaves ur options open so ur not stuck with anamorphic if u dont want it. obviously there will be a quality loss in scaling, but slightly less or the same than shooting squeeze--but such is the case getting anamorphic with a dvx. if you dont want quality loss and you want true 16:9, that wont happen with a dvx.

as for editing in 4:3 letterboxed, this is perfectly fine if you know that it will only be played on regular tvs. if you want it to play on any widescreen tv (which i assume would happen unless its for your own personal use) its gonna look like smashed image with bars.

 

[volcano]

By the way I am a pro photographer so if you have any questions I am here to help as well.

Hey I recognised locations of many of your pics...I like your web work too...

i was suggesting that you scale the footage to 133.33 into 16:9 as an alternative to shooting squeeze mode

And your suggestion was great...

if you dont want quality loss and you want true 16:9, that wont happen with a dvx.

Neither one of us like the anam. lense I guess

as for editing in 4:3 letterboxed, this is perfectly fine if you know that it will only be played on regular tvs.

Yeah, it all comes down to choosing the lesser evil... I was thinking the use of a projector for watching purposes, so size and format really not restrictive since they are adjustable, but keeping the resolution high is vital... Maybe I should do both, one for possible DVD distribution(anamorphic DVD) and for my own(letterbox DVD, to watch on a projector)

 

[PaPa]

If by that you mean releasing only in widescreen anamorphic, then it's almost a moot point, because very few, if any, movies are released in letterbox anymore, and those which may be are cheap transfers of old public-domain stuff sold for a couple of bucks.

If by that you mean some people are calling for full-screen only DVDs, then those people are called "fools."

In any case, letterbox video isn't 16:9. The black bars are part of the pciture. They will react to color correction, animated transitions, ripple effects, etc., AS part of the picture.

Which is one of the reasons why you shouldn't shoot letterbox.

dave not to be an ass, but thats probably the lamest excuse for not shooting letterbox, there are plent yand plenty of ways to get around that which i hopefully dont haev to go into cause im sure you can think of them too.

here are two right off the top of my head

editing in different resolution, i.e. 720x270 ( for my 2.35:1) conversion
or just having another layer with a letterbox mask,

This way it is never affected.

"What do you have to say about scaling the footage to %133.33 for the sake of anamorphic???"

Well the only thing i can say to that is i would rather watch letterboxed DVX footage that is properfly framed for which eve aspect ratio is suppoesd to be delivered with fullresolution on the viewable image than stretching the resolution ( unless your uprezzing ) to match the 16x9 image area.

Your already throwing away detail with the black lines, dont worsen it by making it bigger. At least the perceived detail on a letterboxed shot relative to a 16x9 will be much better.

 

[ajs473]

but regardless of resolution loss, shooting letterboxed 4:3 immediately puts people with widescreen tvs out of the picture. that just doesnt make sense to me. why try for anamorphic, if those with tvs made for it wont be able to watch it.

"Your already throwing away detail with the black lines, dont worsen it by making it bigger."

i shot a short last year in regular 4:3 which i ended up scaling into a 16:9 project in final cut (and later uprezzing but forget that for now). in post i watched both letterboxed 4:3 and scaled 16:9 on a large tv and the difference was hardly recognizable. maybe if you plan to print to film or project onto a huge screen you need to worry, but to me the 16:9 compatibility is definately worth the small resolution loss.

 

[PaPa]

but regardless of resolution loss, shooting letterboxed 4:3 immediately puts people with widescreen tvs out of the picture. that just doesnt make sense to me. why try for anamorphic, if those with tvs made for it wont be able to watch it.

"Your already throwing away detail with the black lines, dont worsen it by making it bigger."

i shot a short last year in regular 4:3 which i ended up scaling into a 16:9 project in final cut (and later uprezzing but forget that for now). in post i watched both letterboxed 4:3 and scaled 16:9 on a large tv and the difference was hardly recognizable. maybe if you plan to print to film or project onto a huge screen you need to worry, but to me the 16:9 compatibility is definately worth the small resolution loss.

It does not put them out of loss

the only two televisions i have in my house are widescreen, and from what ive seen they both have 4 settings for aspect ratio. no problems here.


and why dont you juts shoot in squeeze mode then? Your basically loosing the same quality as enlarging it 133% orwhatever it is.

 

[ajs473]

so you set the tv to play it and it plays much smaller than possible which seems counteractive because you want to save detail but then it plays smaller.

as for shooting squeeze, i was talking about it in one of my earlier posts. its not worth it because people have tested it and have found scaling in an NLE generally loses slightly less resolution than shooting in squeeze mode. in addition to this, it also leaves your options open.