Shooting in sqeeze mode....Why so bad?

reflex

reflex

Well-known member
I'm just wondering. I know people say it's better to shoot in a 4:3 frame and crop in post later since if you shoot in squeeze mode your losing 1/3 of your resolution. I agree and understand with the losing resolution, since your not using about 33% of your shot.. BUT since your cropping in post anyway your STILL not gonna use that video information anyway. So what's teh big deal with using squeeze mode?
 
I don't see any reason that squeeze wouldn't yeild very similar resolution to a crop in post. The only advantage that I can see to a crop in post is that you can decide which part of the frame you want to use. I have mixed B camera DVX footage that was shot in squeeze mode with anamorphic footage. For tight shots it was reasonably close, but on the wide ones, the anamporphic adapter was noticably better. This is an easy enough thing to test out, try both with an identical setup and see if you have a preference.
 
I always thought....shoot Squeeze mode, use anamorphic adaptor...which would increase the resolution optically..so the lost resolution that comes from squeeze is made up from the adaptor...am i rite?
 
No, shooting squeeze+anamorphic will give you a double-squeezed image, which you would then have to unsqueeze/letterbox in post if you want to be able to display it on any television.
 
The real advantage to cropping in post is that it leaves you options. That's why they use that kind of technique in film as well. You can determine the framing more carefully, you can show it full screen 4x3, and you can decide to have it display 4x3 letterboxed no matter what tv it displays on. You can also stretch it to fit 16x9 frame. When you shoot squeeze mode, you're stuck. Ain't no way to recover.

Steve
 
Ok. It does make more sense to do that. Well, I really, as I'm sure everyone does, want to have a finished product that will appear letterboxed on a 4:3 tv but then still display properly on a 16:9. after reading some posts, I take it that the dvd players themselves, the newer ones anyway with the smart chips, will detect it and display it the right way? maybe also depending if the end consumer sets it up right with there tv. I'm just saying , how do I know that the footage wont look vertacally streched on a 4:3 tv if I export as a 16:9 project?
 
It will be vertically stretched. You can't make one video that plays properly on both types of televisions.

The only way to make it work is that the DVD player will convert the video for you. This is a capability that has been built into DVD players since day 1, so any DVD player will convert the footage (letterboxing it for 4:3, etc).
 
if i shoot in 16:9 letterbox mode (not squeeze) is that the same as using an anamorphic lens? if not which is better?
 
Letterbox mode, on non-native 16:9 cameras, simply crops the frame on the top and bottom, adding a black strip over the image capture by the CCDs. You're losing that all the 'information' on that area.

The anamorphic 'adaptor' (not lens) will optically squeeze the 4:3 image.
The camera 'squeeze mode' does the same but electronically. So, you use all the area captured by the CCDs.
 
Got tired of trying to wrap my head around numbers and if-you then-yous.

Did a simple test.

http://www.changedcrocodile.com/Films/16943test.mpg

DVX100A, thin, Main Concept DV Widescreen render out of Vegas6. No CC or nuffin'.

Right-click and download, if you want. It's a 14 MB file for 20 seconds of...stuff.

No rez chart, just shooting out the livingroom window and then inside. Nothing changed between modes.

I think the Squeeze looks better than the 16:9 cropped 4:3. Maybe it's my eyes, but I don't think so.

And, interestingly, the 16:9 crop on 4:3 in Vegas and the Squeeze mode gives you slightly different-sized images. Not a whole lot, but...
 
I like shooting squeeze mode because I don';t have to tell each clip manually in Vegas that I want it to be anamorphic. Work flow is better for me.

Also, I did a personal test a few days ago between both modes and I could not see a difference. I even took it into PS and blew it up 600% and still couldn't see a difference so I don't care what the math says about squeeze mode, I will use it. Just frame correctly in the first place! As a DP that's your job.
 
I don't really see a difference. As far as the difference in size it seems that you didn't properly crop your 4:3 footage to match the squeezed frames?
 
I sedond Fu-pow's suggestion, the Aspect correct is an inexpensive and handy little tool.

Fu - why don't you post your breakdown of the three methods that you did recently? I found that to be very helpful for wraping my head around the differences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top