DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

The one thing not mentioned is if you want the lettebox. To some people, its an artistic tool to have the black bars on top and bottom, it gives a certain feel. Gap even does it now with white bars on the top and bottom of the frame. Resolution wise, its a shitty way to do it (that being letterboxing)
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

[quote author=JBN link=board=news;num=1088273641;start=15#18 date=07/01/04 at 18:50:31]So the show is broadcast to homes that have both 4:3 and (presumeably) widescreens.  If I shot in squeeze mode, what, if any, problems would that present?[/quote]

The US is a 4:3 market. I don't know that any station in the country would knowingly broadcast a 16:9 signal, would they? (other than native HDTV broadcasting, of course).

I can't imagine a circumstance where squeeze mode would be the right choice for an over-the-air broadcast... if you want the widescreen look, you'd use letterbox, and if you want to fill the screen, you'd use 4:3... but US stations don't broadcast widescreen signals. Do they?
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

Does squeeze give you a better film look? and does it still look like letterbox in queeze mode if not what is the best sittings for shooting Int to get the best film look?
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

Squeeze has nothing to do with "film look". It just changes the shape of the video so it'd be appropriate to display on a widescreen TV, at the loss of some vertical resolution.
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

O.K., I gotcha on the 4:3 vs. 16:9 broadcast specs....makes since. Do you loose any resolution shooting in 30P/letterbox mode?
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

Well, you don't "lose" it, but you do cover it up with black bars. But the area between the bars is full resolution.
 
Anamorphic lens

Anamorphic lens

I just received my Panasonic Anamorphic lens and am having a rough time trying to configure it. First of all, what mode do I shoot in? I've tried standard - it leaves black bars on either side, widescreens - it squishes the video. This is all apparent in Vegas after I've captured the video. Also, does anyone know how to correctly mount the adapter lens for complete optimism? The instructions are so vague. Is there a site where I can get complete informtion on using it. I've called Panasonic tech support and the guy there was just as clueless as I am. Thanks.
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

I answered a post nearly identical to this one over on dvinfo.net -- are you the same user? If so, check the dvinfo.net panasonic board and you'll see answers to all your questions.
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

Right on the subject, so i heard when shooting in cam anamorphic you use approximately as much resolution as you would letterboxed. The difference is that one of the formats is actually wider than the standard 1.33:1 format. So you do in fact have the 1.78:1 aspect but you are using approximately the same amount of lines as you would covering up top and bottom of the 1.33:1 frame.
Barry could you either correct or confirm that?  I am a bit skeptical here.
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

The in-camera anamorphic is just taking the area inside what would be the black bars and stretching it to fill the whole frame. Because it's being stretched before compression to tape, it saves some quality over stretching letterboxed footage in post.

Either though is considerably less sharp than well-focused footage shot with the anamorphic adaptor.
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

warmstepvision, your understanding is correct, except that the squeeze mode isn't any wider than 4:3 or letterbox. It's stretched such that it will play properly on a widescreen TV, but the field of view is the same as what you'd get in letterbox (almost, but not exactly, as the two modes use a different height).

Squeeze mode yields footage that is 1.78:1 in aspect ratio, suitable for playing on a widescreen TV, at the expense of about 30% of your potential resolution.
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

Interesting, i always thought anamorphic process captured a wider field of view resulting in a greater aspect.
In use of actual film it does, with the use of proper optics you are able to squeeze a 2.35:1 onto a 1.85:1 frame. Does not same go for the DV?(of course 1.78 instead of 2.35 for dv) I see people mentioning "in cam anamorphic" but if a wider field is not captured what good does that do? But in conclusion what squeeze does is utilizes the use of the full 1.33:1 chip in order to capture anamorphic-like video. Only since it is done electronically rather than optically we loose resolution lines, end up with the same field of view but have ourselves a full 1.78:1 format.  Am i anywhere close to truth? Doesn't a true anamorphic capture result in a greater horizontal field of view?
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

With the anamorphic adapter, yes it gathers a wider field of view.

With squeeze mode, no: the field of view is almost identical to that of letterbox mode.

Squeeze does not use the full 1.33:1 chip. It uses 75% of it (about the same area as letterbox) but then it stretches it to fill the full video frame. So it can be displayed properly on a widescreen television, but it's no higher resolution than letterbox mode: just a different shape.

The anamorphic adapter gives you the full resolution of the chip, AND the wider field of view.
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

I guess Ill be sending my rental facility a request for that anamorphic adapter after all, anyone got some good links?  They're gonna need to read up on it before they buy it :)

Edalgo
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

Hi,
Im new to the site and the Panasonic DVX100a is of the cameras I am looking at. This question popped up for me as well and I found that Panasonic does make a 16:9 conversion lens for the camera. AG-LA7200G. Its under accessories on Pan's main site. There is little info there though. There was a review of it in this month issue (Aug 2004) of Digital Video(DV) Mag. If you make a free login you can read the review and see images here:

http://www.dv.com/dv_login.jhtml?_requestid=369988

List price of the converter is about 950$us. Interestingly enough this also mounts to the Canon XL series as well.

Sel
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

Every time I think I have reached an understanding regarding 16:9 I read something else that complicates it all. Man what a thorny issue. It's like sex with a porcupine, if you're another porcupine there's nothing to it, but if you're not, you just can't figure out how it's done.

So let me try a simple question and see if I can understand.

I have a feature in mind that I would like to shoot. It will never go to 35mm, but it will be released in DVD and VHS format. I would like to shoot it in 16:9 because it looks much better in widescreen, but if in doing so I end up with something that does not look good in 4:3, on VHS or broadcast, then I will shoot in 4:3 right from the start and produce a widescreen version in post. (Man I wish I could fall asleep for about 10 years and when I wake up 4:3 would be gone and the whole world will be watching 16:9)

So, my question is ...

Should I shoot in 4:3 and produce a widescreen version in post or should I shoot in 16:9 and produce a 4:3 version in post.

AND

If I do shoot in 16:9 and have a DVX100, not the DVX100A, should I order an anamorphic adapter and shoot with the 100 or trade my 100 for a 100A and shoot in squeeze mode.

I'm not looking for the eleventh commandment here, just some direction from the head porcupines.

Thanks all,

Tim
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

I'd say that you should optimize your quality for the DVD release, because VHS is a dying format and lower quality anyway. Accordingly, I'd say you should shoot either squeeze mode on the 100A, or anamorphic adapter on the 100, and make an anamorphic DVD. You can always re-render it for the VHS release, adding letterbox bars.
 
Re: DVX100A 16x9 in post or in camera?

wow , I just read this whole post and it' all makes sense now. YES.... ;D I don't think I wouldn've splurged for a 16:9 adapter anyway's. P.S., Barry I was at the local Best Buy the other day, and they had a couple 7inch Clarion widescreen monitors, for $150 bucks, if I mount that onto my camera or tripod or stabalizer, and shoot in squeeze will it unsqueeze in theory and show the true widescreen image on the monitor, I have a problem with my composition in squeeze mode and this would be a better alternative over the $300+ screw on unsqueezer. [glow=red,2,300][/glow]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top