Has anyone tried non-square pixel output?

[wmfv7]

I have been searching for the best way to capture standard analog video through a co-axial cable and I think I have found it. After I read some posts that explained that the standard cable input is the equivalent of 320x480 I decided to capture at this resolution. Now the problem is that the capture does not have the same aspect ratio as the monitor. However, I found a program that can handle this. The new windows media 9 encoder has a setting for non-square pixels. Basically this allows you to simulate the correct aspect ratio with the squished video. You are probably asking "So what, why would this help?". It helps because you are compressing the video at its original resolution. Most people record at 320x240 which is throwing away half of the vertical resolution. Some record at 480x480, 640x480, or even 720x480. This is way over kill(with coaxial cable) because the input is a much lower resolution signal than this. So basically I tried a VBR windows media 9 capture in WME9, with the output resolution set to "Same as input", the quality set to 86, I enabled non-square pixels, I set it to de-interlace, and I adjusted the aspect ratio to 2:1. The resulting file was only 800 kb/sec(Fits 2 hours on 1 CD) and it looked perfect! The file showed no signs of the smoothing effect that Windows Media usually has and there were no signs of macro blocks at all. Now I know that most of you will say that you have tried Windows Media before and this won't be any different. Well the fact is that if you haven't tried exactly what I described above then you have not tried anything at all. Just do what I said above and try to prove me wrong! What do you have to loose. If it works then you will have a great new capture method. If it doesn't work then you can say I told you so. There are some drawbacks to the non-square method though. Older versions of the Windows Media player won't display the aspect ratio correctly. I am not sure about other file payers? If the ATI file player can not show the video correctly maybe that is a feature that needs to be added. Also, the windows media player 9 has an option for video overlays. If this option is not checked then the aspect ratio will not be displayed correctly. I am not sure what the default is but I think it is checked? Could someone who hasn't changed their settings please let me know what the default is. Happy Capping!

[FOO]

Most people record at 320x240

Really ! And how did you discover this ?

[lordsmurf]

wmfv7, I think you need to go read more.
Capturing at non-standard resolutions won't do any good for disc formats.
Read the UNDERSTANDING YOUR SOURCE guide at lordsmurf.com
Most people capture too high at 720x480.
Many of us go for 352x480, which is just about right for most sources. 8)

[FOO]

Almost all audio/video cables are Coaxial. The notable exceptions
being 300 ohm twin-lead from your antenna and
optical for DTS.

do humans still do antennas ?

[bugster]

and optical for DTS.

and DD, and PCM, and any other audio format you care to name if you have a suitable decoder.

[wmfv7]

1. When I said "most people record at 320x240" I was speaking about captures that use MPG4 derivatives and Windows Media 9. Sorry I didn't qualify that more. Almost every Capture that I have seen with these codecs is 320x240.
2. Since I am talking about Windows Media 9 there are not any resolution standards that I am aware of. Unless you are talking about HighMat and I believe that this resolution will comply with that standard. I will check that though.
3. I did read your site. It was great! That is where I got the idea to try non-square pixels from. Since I saw that Cable is generally 320x480 I decided to try to capture in a format as close to the source as possible.
4. Do you not agree that capturing at 720x480 is a waste when the source is 320x480? Also isn't 352x480 non-complaint for SVCD and VCD. Plus it is not even the correct 4:3 aspect ratio. When you record your 352x480 .mpg files with your ATI card do your files have black bars when viewed with Windows Media Player on your computer monitor?
5. When I said co-axial cable I was referring to cable TV received in through what is commonly referred to as a co-axial cable as opposed to receiving digital cable through an s-video cable. Since the digital TV signal through the S-video cable would have a higher resolution than 320x480 my settings would not apply to that scenario.

Give this a try before you blindly say I am wrong.

[lordsmurf]

4. Do you not agree that capturing at 720x480 is a waste when the source is 320x480? Also isn't 352x480 non-complaint for SVCD and VCD. Plus it is not even the correct 4:3 aspect ratio. When you record your 352x480 .mpg files with your ATI card do your files have black bars when viewed with Windows Media Player on your computer monitor?

Yes. Capturing over the source resolution is often a waste. Given the source (analog cable, VHS, broadcast... anything under 352x480) the highest resolution and at-resolution files will look the same. You are limited by the amount of information in the source. Capturing higher will not magically make it better, sharper, etc (given that the hardware/software is good).

No. Aspect ratio is set separate from resolution. Disc formats have rigid
standards on resolution choices (352x240, 352x480, 704x480, 720x480), and only two for aspect (16:9 or 4:3).

No. 352x480 is a valid CVD (SVCD) format.

WMP only has black bars if aspect ratio is not turned on in the program. On one of my systems, aspect is disabled. On the other, it is enabled. You can choose (though it's been so long, I forgot where it is).

Give this a try before you blindly say I am wrong.

I wasn't saying you were wrong. Please don't think that.

I just missed the boat the first go-around. I was under the impression you wanted to use this settings for disc-based video. But for computer-only format, this method sound intriguing.

If I have a similar need, you can bet I'll be trying this method.

[lordsmurf]

{deleted}

[wmfv7]

First off I would like to say that the lordsmurf.com website is excellent. Thank you for posting such great information. Finally, I have video captures that I am satisfied with and I actually understand what I am doing now. There is also another site that I found very useful. It is a microsoft Windows Media Encoder Technical document on Aspect ratios. The link is below.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/howto/articles/PixelFrames.aspx

I tried the MPG2 settings from lordsmurf.com. The capture really turned out well but it is still a little large for my use. I had tried the 352x480 settings before with .MPG1 but it seems that Windows Media Player 9 will not stretch out the file to fill the screen. However, the .MPG2 file was streched perfectly. Is it possible to get WMP9 to stretch the .MPG1 file? You mentioned a setting in WMP9 to control aspect ratio? I could not find one. I do have one question though. I did the calculations for what non-square pixel ratio I needed to make 720x480 a true 4:3 ratio. I came up with 8:9 but the Windows Media site said the ratio should be 10:11 for DV 720x480. I think this should be the ratio for 704x480 video which last time I checked is not DV. What should be the correct ratio for displaying DV video as true 4:3? Here are the resolutions and aspect ratios that I came up with.

Standard 4:3 Format
720x480 = 8:9 or 10:11?
720x240 = 4:9
640x480 = 1:1
640x240 = 1:2
480x480 = 4:3
320x480 = 2:1

Widescreen 16:9 Format
720x405 = 1:1
640x360 = 1:1
426x240 = 1:1
320x360 = 2:1
640x240 = 1:1.5 = 2:3
720x240 = 1.6875:1 = 3:5

[MachineMan]

I tried the non-square pixel rendering on Ulead Media Studio7 with MPEG2 720x480. Every thing was fine except that all my text and transitions were offset to the left of the screen. Never figured out why so I stopped using that feature.

[lordsmurf]

720x480 at 4:3 aspect is DV uses.