Hey, ive stumbled over this recently...,
why are some using a format called 960x544 ??
wouldnt it make moer sense to use 960x540 whis is exactly half of 1980x1080
Am i missing out on something?
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3
-
-
Originally Posted by squadjot
960x544 (or 960x540 if you prefer - it makes no significant difference) is NOT "exactly half" of 1980x1080. This is a common math error. It is actually almost one fourth (1/4) because what you have is a situation of 1980 being cut in half (roughly) to 960 and 1080 being cut in half to 544 (or 540) and 2 x 2 = 4, so it's about one fourth. Or put another way:
960 x 544 = 522240
1980 x 1080 = 2138400
2138400 / 522240 = 4.09 (let's round that off to 4)
so 960 x 544 is one fourth the size of 1980 x 1080.
Similar Threads
-
Shouldnt i deinterlace? (encoding with handbrake)
By squadjot in forum DVD RippingReplies: 3Last Post: 25th Sep 2010, 20:29 -
footage that shouldnt need to be rendered comes up as needing to be rendere
By fionawhitty in forum Newbie / General discussionsReplies: 4Last Post: 11th Mar 2010, 14:56 -
dvd help .size.file to large shouldnt be.
By larebow in forum Newbie / General discussionsReplies: 6Last Post: 10th Feb 2009, 01:08 -
[Help] How to downscale WMV 1920x1080 to 960x540 ???
By elliott in forum Newbie / General discussionsReplies: 6Last Post: 10th Jun 2008, 16:25 -
upconversion of 960x540 footage to HD-DVD?
By ravisankar in forum Video ConversionReplies: 3Last Post: 6th Aug 2007, 07:59