is consumer camcording 16:9 a good choice?

[jmwismer]

I there,

I just bought a Panasonic NV-GS320, which is set by default on 16:9. I must say this format is convenient and well suited for most shooting.

I have read though that consumer camcorders actually fake 16:9 by using a subportion of their 4:3 CCDs.

Would that be true for that model?

If so, is 16:9 a bad choice? Am I just losing quality by shooting 16:9?

[JohnnyMalaria]

An easy way to tell if it is faked or not is this:

Point the camcorder at a scene that ideally has clear vertical edges such as a doorway or window. Frame the image so that the vertical edges are somewhat near the edges of the image. While viewing through the viewfinder/LCD panel, switch the camera mode back and forth between 16:9 and 4:3. If those vertical edges stay in the same place, the camera is faking it. If the edges seem to move inwards when set to 16:9, it is real 16:9 since the camera is using more of the CCD area.

[jmwismer]

interesting test!

I gain some width (edges do move inside) when I switch to 16:9...but lose some height. So no faking, but can one conclude about a loss of quality in 16:9?

I saw in the meantime that resolution is higher in 4:3 indeed. I guess a loss of resolution to 16:9 would have to happen anyways along the chain to 16:9 TV: either on the CCD, or on the TV set.

[guns1inger]

I saw in the meantime that resolution is higher in 4:3 indeed. I guess a loss of resolution to 16:9 would have to happen anyways along the chain to 16:9 TV: either on the CCD, or on the TV set.

The resolution will be the same. The way the pixels are represented changes.

[jmwismer]

@gunslinger:

I was referring to a test site which mentions:

Pixels effectifs : Vidéo 4:3 : 630 K x 3. Vidéo 16:9 : 540 K x 3.

Would this not mean the 16:9 resolution is lower?

That said, all I care about is to make sure I am not compromising too much shooting 16:9.

[guns1inger]

What test site ? And to what is it referring ?

[thecoalman]

DV is a set resolution of 720 X 480(576 for PAL) whether 16:9 or 4:3.

16:9 DV screenshot where it hasn't been adjusted for aspect:



You encode and author this as 16:9, the resolution does not change for standard DVD, the DVD player sees the 16:9 flag and adjusts the aspect by adding black bars top and bottom if you're viewing on a 4:3 TV or stretches it out to full screen for playback on a 16:9 TV.

[jmwismer]

http://www.magazinevideo.com/comparatif-video-432-334.htm

It is a (French) site comparing camcorders. They mention these specs at the very bottom of the table.

does it sound strange to you?

the 540k resolution in 16:9 is still more than the 720x568 DV in any case.

[thecoalman]

You can alleviate any problems where the whole censor is only being utilized for 4:3 by getting an anamorphic lens and record in 4:3. The 16:9 is created optically and it takes the camera out of the equation. Then simply change the flag during encoding or authoring, That's assuming your cam will accept one.

[ks47]

I have read though that consumer camcorders actually fake 16:9 by using a subportion of their 4:3 CCDs.

I can’t read French and those online translators are not the best when it comes to tech info. I don’t know that particular Panasonic model. But there was a guy, who did his own experiment with his Sony consumer camcorder. He wanted know how camcorder pixels are distributed in wide mode vs. standard, 4:3. He tried analyzing whether true 16:9 coverage was done or cropping of image was done to preserve the wide screen by his camcorder:

http://www.btinternet.com/~cvlachos/dcr-hc40/ccd-test/

His conclusion was indeed all pixels were used in wide mode. I think in order for true 16:9, as mentioned previously anamorphic lens or a camcorder have should have dedicated 16:9 pixels for true representation, instead of interpreting wide mode.

TS