Converting SD 4:3 24P Basic to 16:9 Using CS3?

ENIGMACODE

ENIGMACODE

Active member
Hi Gang

I'm aware many people have discussed this topic before. Unfortunately I started a very expensive documentary 7-8 years ago when HD was still in its infancy, and many people had still not traded in their old CRT TV's for a flat wide screen. When there's absolutely no funding, little interest, for a complex project, you have to make choices. I personally had to prioritize long expensive journeys here and abroad to catch aging veterans before they died, vs. an early/costly HD camera.

Filmmakers are constantly faced with similar questions all the time. And adding to this; the jury is still out on HD conversion; Red Giant Instant HD etc. vs. a Hardware Conversion like a Kona Card and it goes on and on. Many experienced filmmakers simply say, just leave it alone with black bars as it will NEVER look the same once its been tampered with.

In any event, can someone please comment on this particular method for wide screen conversion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OP4MTTq5r3M Anyone had luck with it? *Maybe what I hadn't realized is that this method is primarily for U Tube. It may not be conducive for TV broadcast?

More from this person: http://www.lancecampeau.com/

Thank you
Mike
http://www.ww2survivorstories.com/
 
Last edited:
ENIGMACODE said:
In any event, can someone please comment on this particular method for wide screen conversion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OP4MTTq5r3M Anyone had luck with it? *Maybe what I hadn't realized is that this method is primarily for U Tube. It may not be conducive for TV broadcast?
Click to expand...

That's pretty much what an old 16:9 TV of mine used to do, and I wouldn't do it. You'll have weirdly-distorted sides to the image.

I guess if you like it, that's all that matters, but it wouldn't be my first choice.
 
"it wouldn't be my first choice"

Ok - thank you - any other ideas?

And BTW, I'm thinking it might be best to 1st upconvert/upres, (whatever method I decide on), then investigate the 16:9 conversion?
 
I'm not sure I have a perfect out of the box solution to offer, but you have to realize that you're in a tough spot since you're not just scaling to HD, but then have to deal with the aspect ratio as well. If you fill the whole screen in 16:9 HD, you're going to be cutting a big chunk off the top and bottom so now you'll have even more scaling. Any chance windowing the video content into something else like a background graphic would work with your material? That way you'd scale your 480 material up to maybe 720 lines (1.5x) instead of 1080 pillarbox (2.25x) or 1080 fullscreen (2.66x).
 
ENIGMACODE said:
"it wouldn't be my first choice"

Ok - thank you - any other ideas?

And BTW, I'm thinking it might be best to 1st upconvert/upres, (whatever method I decide on), then investigate the 16:9 conversion?
Click to expand...

Well, are you wanting HD or standard? If you just want standard, I wouldn't crop at all. Just leave it as 4:3.

If you want to upconvert to HD, then you'll need to make it 16:9 first, or do what was suggested above and just put background behind the 4:3 image. Either way, if you want to upconvert to HD, always be sure you're shooting with your Vert. Det. Freq. set to THIN.
 
"Any chance windowing the video content into something else" - Hello Andrius -Yes actually I'm also considering 'Window Box' - Apparently David is saying that I'd have to do just that before the HD up res? And BTW, I always shoot Vert. Det. Freq. set to THIN.

I may have this wrong: Was thinking Up Res 1st, then reducing the size within a 16:9 sequence in FC. Perhaps a little stretching, (minimal cropping), might be better? I realize my options are limited. My eyes gravitate to a wider, rather than taller image. And if done meticulously, I wouldn't mind cropping top and bottom as well.

As far as an image in the background - don't think so - its distracting - just BLACK within a window box/frame.
 
If you want to maintain the most resolution when you upconvert, then the windowbox is the way to go. There is no reason not to windowbox and then do the upconvert.
 
Well, there's something to be said for being in control of the upconvert, rather than leaving it up to a player or a TV.
 
David Jimerson said:
Well, there's something to be said for being in control of the upconvert, rather than leaving it up to a player or a TV.
Click to expand...

Sure, but if it's going to just wind up on the internet, then you might as well just leave it 4:3 SD as YouTube will just be downconverting your upconverted footage anyway since they default to 360 for most videos. That much conversion is not going to do you any favors.
 
If you're going for the windowbox, I suggest to feel these black bars on the sides with something, it's more appealing.
 
I would suggest just dropping it into a HD 16x9 timeline and leaving it 4x3. The only 4x3 to 16x9 conversions I have seen have a really really weird distorted look. It essentially just stretches the sides of the image and leaves the middle rather untouched.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top