Procedure for uprezzing 4x3 letterbox to 16x9

brdplya1 said:
I'm still getting black bars on left/right side of picture after movong to timeline and rendering....how do I scale up and remove bars?,,,thanks
Click to expand...
You interpret the footage to the widescreen PAR before putting the footage on the timeline.
And for your previous question, it will take some time. I recently rendered a 13 minute video (almost 20 000 frames) and it took about 4 seconds for Photozoom to process every frame. I devided all frames into groups about 3000-4000 and rendered a group when I felt that I had time to do it. 4 sec x 4000 frames = 16 000 sec = about 4.5 hours. Not that bad. It is still worth it.

Redshift said:
So this leads us to the question: I Photozoom 2 worth it? The answer is yes, if for no other reason than it is faster. If you will look you will see that the original algorithim is there. So you can use the original S-Spline and it should process faster.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, I noticed that right after I did my test. Photozoom 2 still has the old S-Spline + faster processing time so I would definitely go for it instead of Photozoom 1.
 
Norbert shall we do a test. We uprez same movie (not to long)

U use Photozoom

I use Vegas.

Then we compare results.
 
That sounds like a good idea.
Maybe the test would be more accurate if you did the test yourself with the demo version of Photozoom (just see past the markings it leaves on the image).
 
Last edited:
Not sure if it has been said before (this thread is long!) but oe way of dealing with interlaced footage is to seperate the fields (using Shake for instance) so you end up with 50 half sized frames a second (I'm from PAL land). Uprez those this photozoom and re-interlace them in Shake. I might try that later and post results (if anyone is interested).
 
235 Studios said:
This process is format agnostic. In other words, it doesn't care if you have progressive, interlaced, NTSC, PAL, or whatever.
Click to expand...

No, it's not, since you'll scale the fields, which by their nature can only be 1 pixel in height.

I just did a test with interlaced footage and this works great:

Import interlaced clip in Shake (i used an NTSC clip)
set globals to 720x240 (half vertical res)
Use 2 "fields" nodes. Set one to odd, the other to even.
Using 2 fileOuts, render tiff images for the odd and even fields.
Resize these using Photozoom to 720x320.
Import them to Shake, and attach an Interlace node. Set Mode to merge and field to even.
Attach a Window node, crop 80 at the bottom and set the resolution to 720x480
Set globals to NTSC anamorphic.
Render away.

This looks really good, especially when compared to a simple 133% stretch in FCP. I'm trying to uprez a clip to 1080i just for fun and might post some results later.
 
Geez.. This question may have been asked over and over in this really long thread but I have searched, so thanks for your patience! ;-)

Assuming the film is shot (progressive) in 4x3
I am still confused on how to crop in premier pro; here's why:

1. File --> Export --> Movie. There I have the Tiff Option, but no option in that dialogue to edit the dimensions or to crop.

So next I tried

2, File --> Export -->Adobe Media Encoder. Here I see no option for Tiff output so this can't be right.

Finally.. Do I just use the "Crop" tool under the effecets pallet in Premier Pro? If so, I only see %, and not pixels. What percent do I crop it to 10.x%?

Thanks for your help and clarification.. I am all set after this.

-Brett
 
i did the cropping outside of premiere. i used "image pan", "transform", "crop", and "motion"...they all scaled and then rescaled the image causing a nasty effect. using crop, at least in my version of premiere, it crops and then resizes the image to the project aspect. causing an unwanted interpolation that is quite noticeable. so i exported my frames out as-is and then in paint shop pro i batch processed them into the aspect i wanted using just a set crop. came out fine and looked much better than what i was getting out of premiere.

so my process is export TIFFs from premiere.
crop and batch process in paint shop pro.
uprez in photozoom pro.
create video in either quicktime pro or back in premiere.

but now i have another idea...hmmm...
 
Hello Everyone .
Question for the FCP / HD gurus! Do HD televisions have field dominance? Is it wise when doing the PhotoZoom process to turn off fields in the source footage, as well as the final composition? Would turning off field dominance compromise quality for regular 4:3 TVs?

I have had mixed results. I'm running various tests and going to best buy to test on a Plasma.

FCP WORKFLOW TO UP-RES WITH PhotoZoom.

1. Exported TIFF Image Sequence from timeline.
2. Used PhotoZoom and scaled the 720x480 files to 720x618.
3. Imported PhotoZoom TIFF Image Sequence into QT (Standalone)
4. Up to this point, I am rendering different compression schemes and doing tests. . . will update when have results. My goal is to achieve cross-compatability for 4:3 TVs and Widescreens. I am documenting every step. . .

also . . this might be off topic, but is it wise to shoot in Squeeze mode? Wouldn't that completely erase the need for this long process?
Thanks everyone!

-Alex
 
Last edited:
also . . this might be off topic, but is it wise to shoot in Squeeze mode? Wouldn't that completely erase the need for this long process?
Click to expand...

i can't speak for everyone else, but i'm upsizing to 1920x1080. even shooting in squeeze you might want to follow this procedure to uprez to HD format size.
 
Can someone who uses Instant HD to uprez letterboxed 4:3 to widescreen DV explain to me the procedure? I've tried everything and for the life of me I cannot get this to work. It just keeps the letterbox and never fills the frame.

All the HD uprez choices work fine though. Thanks!
 
This thread is a monster! Wow. lots of great input. Has anyone played with instant HD to resize 4:3 standard res footage to 16:9 standard res? I m working in a 16:9 24 p environment and I have some footage that is 4:3 --- if I want to resize this footage to fit the frame what is the consensus? Best approach?


Thanks in advance!
 
Optimal uprezzing

Optimal uprezzing

Instead of uprezzing to 1080 (which I suspect would look funky) or 720, why not uprez to something close to, but below 720, so that you get the best results, yet less artificial than 720? I think the whole reason this thread recommends uprezzing to 720 instead of 1080 is that 1080 will look really artificial -- but who's to say that 720 is the optimal number? It probably requires a lot of testing, but I think you could go below (or maybe even above) 720. You're not stuck with those two resolution rates.
 
quicky questions..... so would it be wise to use the 16:9 display aspect on the lcd to help with framing? that would leave the actual recorded footage in 4:3 correct? so then you could uprez...... have the image stretched...... then add your bars? am i understanding correctly? thanks.......
 
Hi disjecta,

first off, excellent post on converting 4:3 to 16:9. You can do this using Photozoom Pro. I have Adobe Photoshop CS2 as my image editing program. Please can you tell me if I can use Photoshop CS2 to convert my 4:3 letterboxed videos to 16:9? Has anyone tried Photoshop? Reason I asked is because I don't have Photozoom.

Thanks in advance.

Andrew
 
andybiz_2005 said:
Hi disjecta,

first off, excellent post on converting 4:3 to 16:9. You can do this using Photozoom Pro. I have Adobe Photoshop CS2 as my image editing program. Please can you tell me if I can use Photoshop CS2 to convert my 4:3 letterboxed videos to 16:9? Has anyone tried Photoshop? Reason I asked is because I don't have Photozoom.

Thanks in advance.

Andrew
Click to expand...

Yep on both counts- earilier in this thread I did just that. I also created some photoshop actions to automate the process. You can get the actions, and the how-to from my site: http://www.235studios.com/tutorials.html

Hope that helps. (The actions were built in PS7, but they should still work in CS2)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top