Duct tape for framing?

A

Aviv

Member
I'm using a VX2100 to shoot in 4:3, but I like letterboxing in post to get more of a cinematic feeling, even though the video is always going to be displayed on a 4:3 set eventually. I usually overlay black bands in post, but then need to reframe my video. When shooting, I've heard of the method of ducttaping off the LCD to help with framing, how big should the tape strips be? Also, how big should each black band that I make in post in pixels?

Shooting in widemode on the VX doesn't really fit more into the picture, so it's not like you see more when letterboxed than you do in 4:3...Letterboxing is post would give that cinematic effect, though, even though it has no real benefit besides merely superficially cosmetic, even though doing that will result in the top and bottom of your frame being cut out which is ironic as a true letterboxed movie isn't cut off at the top and bottom, correct?

To the untrained viewer, which do you think looks better? Watching something letterboxed on a 4:3 set just gives it that cinematic look.
 
Last edited:
DON'T use duct tape, unless you never intend to take it off. The stickum will ruin the lcd.

Get a plastic overlay for the screen. If none are made for the 2100, get a skin for a PalmPilot or similar, cut it to fit, and draw the framing lines on that.

It's better to have the "letterboxed" area be transparent/semi-transparanet, so you can get a better idea of your framing.
 
Someone suggested putting a mask image on the memory card and using it with the overlay function.

I think it's quite funny how much of a psychological aspect letterboxing has on the looking of your work.
 
What about regular scotch tape and you jus kinda draw in the section thats cut off black with a sharpie?

Its not super sticky and its easy to rip off the screen.
 
Right, excuse the confusion but I'm quite inexperienced when it comes to 4:3 and 16:9

I think letterboxed 4:3 viewed on a 4:3 set just gives it that cinematic look. Watching 16:9 on a 16:9 set obviously wont have the black bands, but I think the letterbox is what gives something that film-on-tv look. It seems every indie movie shot on the VX2100 is letterboxed; [URL="http://www.media73.co.uk/videos/convict/Convict.htmlor"]http://www.media73.co.uk/videos/convict/Convict.htmlor[/URL] for instance.

Hypothetically, If I were making a movie on a microbudget and have it only printed to 500 DVDs lets say and distribute it myself without wanting to be to be blown up on film, what would I do when I know that 99% of those are going to be watched on a standard TV?

Film in 4:3 and edit in 4:3 and burn to a 4:3 DVD? If I wanted to have the 16:9/letterbox option on the DVD what would I do then? Film in 4:3, edit in 4:3 but letterbox it and put that version on DVD as well? That would cause parts to be cropped off though, of course. Is the only practical thing to have a sole 4:3 version of the movie, if that's how it was shot?

If I wanted a 16:9 version, would I have to film and edit in 16:9 originally and if I wanted a 4:3 version, I'd pan and scan it?

Watching 4:3 on a 16:9 pillarboxes it, but can the zoom function of the TV get rid of the pillar box?

at the moment I'm doing small scale event videography just for a bit of income, I'm still a student living at home. I just watched my brother's wedding DVD again which was shot on a Canon XL1, so it's 4:3 and it really doesn't look bad on a 4:3 set. Which of course, it shouldn't.

I mean, technically, if I know that my stuff isn't going to be displayed on widescreen TV, there is no reason at all to letterbox it other than giving that "16:9 on a standard screen TV" look, which come to think of it, I don't really know why anyone would want other than to give that filmlike look. But then again, watching a 16:9 video on a 16:9 TV wont have those black bands...I think it's the actual letterbox that makes me equate 16:9 video with film.

Letterboxing for me is, like I said, purely psychological...I've got that drilled into my head that widescreen = film and letterbox = a film/professional look, even though that's not necassarily true and clients that don't know much about aspect ratios might actually NOT want black bands at the top and bottom of the 4:3 set.

Am I right in saying that 4:3 I letterbox in post will be letterboxed on a 4:3 set and a 16:9 one too? Seeing as the letterbox is now part of the actual picture that's displayed? So watching that post-produced letterbox 4:3 footage will look pretty dumb on a 16:9 set? letterboxed and pillarboxed.

So I guess I need to look at my market, 95% of TVs here in South Africa are 4:3...I don't know anyone with a widescreen set and I think it's just my train of thought that gets me thinking that letterboxed 4:3 just looks more polished than normal 4:3, even though that would fit best on a 4:3 set. And then again, I just watched something I shot on my new VX2100 on my large screen 4:3 TV and was actually amazed at how good it looks...But I still have that nagging thought at the back of my head that says "Not letterboxed. Not widescreen. Doesn't Look Cinematic, Home Movie. Home Movie. Home Movie." Someone that doesn't know anything about aspect ratios and watch 90% of their stuff on TV obviously wouldn't think that, as they're used to a 4:3 picture. Ignorance is bliss

I need shock therapy...But thanks to anyone who can understand what I'm saying and maybe help me out :D
 
If you output as 16:9 Anamorphic (ie stretched) to DVD then 16:9 TVs will stretch the image to fit the screen. 4:3 TV will stretch the image horizontally and letterbox it on top and bottom.

I think what people don't realize is that DVD players will do a lot of work.

Also if you output as 24p the DVD player will do an interlace pulldown for you so you can play on an NTSC 60i screen.

Aren't DVD players great!!!!

FP
 
See, I guess what I want to do is just letterbox 4:3 video to give that impression that a 4:3 user is watching a widescreen video on their set, but then again that's just me and I can't really see why any client who doesn't know the differecne between the aspect ratios would want black bands on their 4:3 TV when their video is 4:3.
 
It's all a matter of preference.

If you like the look of the black bars on the top and a wide picture..thats cool

If you like full screen with no black bars...thats cool too

It's just filmmaker's preference.

some even go to 2.35.1...but after reading that really long post, which kinda twisted and turned a few times and confused me...i dont think i should mention anything beyond 16:9. lol
 
blckhawk542 said:
What about regular scotch tape and you jus kinda draw in the section thats cut off black with a sharpie?

Its not super sticky and its easy to rip off the screen.
Click to expand...

i like this idea.

but sharpie might get on your fingers.
 
blckhawk542 said:
It's all a matter of preference.

If you like the look of the black bars on the top and a wide picture..thats cool

If you like full screen with no black bars...thats cool too

It's just filmmaker's preference.

some even go to 2.35.1...but after reading that really long post, which kinda twisted and turned a few times and confused me...i dont think i should mention anything beyond 16:9. lol
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I guess a clients preference isn't mine :p Someone with a 4:3 set would want a full screen picture when they can have it, I guess.

But if my source footage is 4:3;

1. I want a 4:3 DVD on a 4:3 TV:

I work in a 4:3 project, edit in a 4:3 project and export to a 4:3 DVD.

2. If I want to make a a 4:3 DVD Widescreen,

I edit in 4:3, crop it in post and do some reverse pan and scan and export it as a 16:9 DVD?

3. If I edit in 4:3, DON'T crop it and export it as a 16:9 DVD, it will just be pillar boxed on a widescreen TV and letter boxed automatically on a normal TV?

4. If I work on 4:3 that I know will ONLY be on 16:9 DVD, then I use the guideframes when filming and don't have to worry about 16:9 pan-and-scan in post after I've added the bands?

5. What is the actual benefit of shooting DV in widescreen, besides the obvious fact that it will fill a widescreen TV? I can understand how Widescreen helps with DVDs of feature films, so you don't have to worry about pan-and-scan cutting off most of the image, but shooting in widescreen vs 4:3 on a camera doesn't add extra information into the image...You don't see more on the sides in widescreen than you do in 4:3...Does widescreen just look more natural?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top