Best 16:9 with this camera: shoot 16:9, or shoot 4:3 and convert in S/W?

[fvisagie]

Hi All,

I'm trying to figure out the best way of getting 16:9 720x576 from my Sony DCR-TRV330E. When set to 16:9, video resolution remains 720x576 as with 4:3, output image width remains the same, but height is reduced (see the two attached samples). I.e. with 16:9 there's an apparent increase in vertical resolution. However, surely the camera has no way of rearranging its CCD pixel matrix to achieve this?

Is it then correct to assume that the camera likely captures the same image size at the same resolution as for 4:3, then crops top and bottom for 16:9 display aspect ratio, and then scales the result to 720x576 for encoding? I.e. there's an actual loss of vertical resolution during cropping?

In other words, if I wanted the best quality 16:9 720x576 output I'd probably be better off shooting at 4:3 and then cropping and scaling using high-quality software? (Taking into account the dangers of framing for 16:9 with 4:3 ).

If this is all wrong please set me straight!

Thanks!

Francois

[mike20021969]

It certainly looks like the 4:3 has been cropped & resized to produced a 16:9.
The 16:9 looks dreadful and has lost resolution.

You could see if doing it yourself will get a better end result, although be careful when framing for 16x9 using 4:3.

[Richard_G]

That's how all standard definition DV cams work when you set them to 16:9, they simply blank off the top and bottom 80 lines. A high end camera will be fitted with an anamorphic lens which uses the full 720x576 frame but squashes the video. When authored as a 16:9 DVD then the player does the un-squashing and stretches it out to fill the 16:9 frame on the display device.

[FulciLives]

You might be able to find a 16x9 anamorphic lens attachment for your camera and if you can then you would set the camera to 4:3 but because of the lens attachment you will actually be shooting in 16x9 but I don't know if they make such lens attachments for your camera.

If you can find one that it would give you full resolution and would be the best solution (aside from maybe buying a new camera).

[aedipuss]

that cam had a small low quality sensor. not much of anything will make the video look like today's cams do.

[Richard_G]

and anamorphic lenses are bloody expensive. Been looking at getting one for my VX2100 but decided it isn't worth it.

[Cornucopia]

That's how all standard definition DV cams work when you set them to 16:9, they simply blank off the top and bottom 80 lines. A high end camera will be fitted with an anamorphic lens which uses the full 720x576 frame but squashes the video. When authored as a 16:9 DVD then the player does the un-squashing and stretches it out to fill the 16:9 frame on the display device.

Not it's not. Some DV cams crop (& resize), some DV cams will adjust their sensor raster to accomodate wide or standard formats (where the sensor captures more or less pixels, but shows them adjusted to fit the viewfinder). I've never used a DV cam that expected an anamorphic lens, and I've worked with some of the BEST DV cameras ever made (incl. those with interchangeable lenses). This can be done to enable a NON-Widescreen camera to be used as a wide-screen cam, but it is certainly non-standard. See this link for more info...

@fvisagie, to see whether this is really done right or not, you could cap it to a PC with WinDV and then run through Enosoft enhanced DV decoder which will tell you for sure whether it was in 16:9. But you could probably get away with even MediaInfo reading the AR in the file also. A "letterboxed" 16:9 is still in essence a 4:3 image and so would be listed as 4:3, or a cropped image resized to become 16:9 would show evidence of vertical blending. Only a true 16:9 "anamorphic" DV (which made use of the extra pixel sensors) would be listed as 16:9 AND not-show evidence of vertical blending.

Opening the DV in Vdub and showing the preview when set as 4:3 DAR will show whether it truly was anamorphic or not (anamorphic 16:9 pixels would show as tall & skinny image).

Unfortunately, it looks like that camera does the fake, cropped & resized variety (from snippets of the manual that I can find).

Scott

[Richard_G]

Not it's not. Some DV cams crop (& resize), some DV cams will adjust their sensor raster to accomodate wide or standard formats (where the sensor captures more or less pixels, but shows them adjusted to fit the viewfinder). I've never used a DV cam that expected an anamorphic lens, and I've worked with some of the BEST DV cameras ever made (incl. those with interchangeable lenses). This can be done to enable a NON-Widescreen camera to be used as a wide-screen cam, but it is certainly non-standard. See this link for more info...

Scott, There may be more modern ones that do as you say but for consumer SD cameras of the era the OP is talking about they will all crop the top and bottom to give a 16:9 image within a 4:3 frame size. More modern cameras may well have a larger sensor so they can do wide format but the older ones only had a 4:3 sensor so the only way of getting a 16:9 image was to lose the top and bottom. The VX2100, and the broadcast standard PD150 and PD170 were state of the art in their time and the only way you will get full frame 16:9 is by using an anamorphic lens.

[fvisagie]

See this link for more info...

Working through that certainly seems to confirm the suspicion that my camera is doing 16:9 the "wrong way". This seems confirmed by zooming into the two samples to the same on-screen size for objects, where the 16:9 sample comes off worse. E.g. horizontal flower petals are duplicated, one above the other.

I don't have much experience spotting and identifying artifacts - where can I see examples of vertical blending (and preferably other artifacts too)?

Many thanks for all the helpful responses so far.

PS. The camera's manual is at http://pdf.crse.com/manuals/3065263121.pdf.