Conversion 4:3 to 16:9

[cholla]

@ DB83 ,
Would you post the ffmpeg codes you used for post #120 & post #136.

@Sharc,
I DLed the videos in #150 & watched them.
I watched them on VLC .
Should I have watched them on my BD player ?
They looked a lot like other posted videos.

[Sharc]

@Sharc,
I DLed the videos in #150 & watched them.
I watched them on VLC .
Should I have watched them on my BD player ?
They looked a lot like other posted videos.

You can watch them with any player. They should look and play correctly (especially the last 2 DVDi variants) with no borders on any 16:9 monitor, filling the screen, no borders.
They are
- hard telecined (just serving as an example for hard-telecining of 24fps film; I explained Telecine before)
- converted in 1 hop from your original soft-telecined horse(01).vob into a NTSC DVD compliant format (mpeg2, 720x480, ac3 audio, 16:9 anamorphic widescreen and put into a .vob container) without taking a detour via square-pixel 1920x1080 etc.
- using 1 ffmpeg commandline for all of the above

(You can import the .vobs in any DVD authoring tool, like AVStoDVD or DVDStyler etc. They don't require re-encoding as they are already DVD compliant)

It's not in conflict with other suggested variants by other users and my former versions. Just an attempt to producing it differently in 1 hop for anamorphic widescreen DVD compliant output, eliminating the borders and avoiding intermediate conversion steps.
One example for zooming-cropping with undistorted picture, and the other example for your preferred horizontal stretching.

There are many roads leading to Rome. Take the one which suits you best.

Edit:
Here the 2 ffmpeg commandlines which I used for the 2 DVDi variants. Hope I didn't miss anything.

:: Inverse Telecine the source, rescale and re-telecine (hard)

REM ====== zoom and crop, keeping the proportions intact ==============
ffmpeg -i "Horse(01).vob" -vf "scale=interl=1,setfield=tff,fps=30000/1001,fieldmatch,decimate,crop=716:358:2:48,scale=720:480,telecine=pattern=23:first_field=top,setdar=dar=16/9" -c:v mpeg2video -b:v 7000k -maxrate 9800k -bufsize 1835k -bf 2 -b_strategy 2 -mbd rd -trellis 2 -mbcmp 2 -precmp 2 -cmp 2 -subcmp 2 -skip_cmp 2 -mpv_flags qp_rd -flags +ilme+ildct -c:a ac3 -sn "Horse(01)_telecined_DVDi_zoom-crop.vob"

REM ====== stretched horizontally (cholla's preference) =========
ffmpeg -i "Horse(01).vob" -vf "scale=interl=1,setfield=tff,fps=30000/1001,fieldmatch,decimate,crop=720:388,scale=720:480,telecine=pattern=23:first_field=top,setdar=dar=16/9" -c:v mpeg2video -b:v 7000k -maxrate 9800k -bufsize 1835k -bf 2 -b_strategy 2 -mbd rd -trellis 2 -mbcmp 2 -precmp 2 -cmp 2 -subcmp 2 -skip_cmp 2 -mpv_flags qp_rd -flags +ilme+ildct -c:a ac3 -sn "Horse(01)_telecined_DVDi_stretched.vob"

[DB83]

@cholla

Ffmpeg was not used, at least directly, for my clips. I used a program called avidemux (which might well use ffmpeg to do the 'magic').


I have not tried but I guess all can be done directly within avs2dvd but using the avisynth filters.

[Sharc]

I have not tried but I guess all can be done directly within avs2dvd but using the avisynth filters.

Yes.

[cholla]

@ Sharc,
The "Horse(01)_telecined_DVDi_stretched.vob" uses this crop=720:388.
What I used is very close crop=720:390:2:42.

I got this by creating HORSE(B1).vob it has a 4 pixel red box around it.
This was made from an original cut of the DVD ripped .vob.
When it is cropped to the correct size the red box is gone.

The "Horse(01)_telecined_DVDi_zoom-crop.vob" works OK & except it is missing some of the original video.crop=716:358:2:48 Not much on the horizontal but more noticible on the verticle. Look at the corporal playing the banjo stripes.

website with slide to compare:
https://imgsli.com/Mjc4Nzg0

AVStoDVD created a DVD from the .vob file I created with ffmpeg.
It would not allow "Direct stream copy" of the video so it used HCinc.
It did allow "Direct stream copy" of the audio.

@DB83,
I have AviDemux but it has been a long time since I used it.
I'm sure it needs to be updated.

I have never tried but Avisynth script could probably be added here:

[Attachment 80698 - Click to enlarge]

This is where AVStoDVD is set to use Avisynth :

[Attachment 80699 - Click to enlarge]

The videos are the redbox one & the one I did with AVStoDVD .
Made from the .vobs created with ffmpeg.
Using some of Sharc's code & some of mine.

[Sharc]

The "Horse(01)_telecined_DVDi_zoom-crop.vob" works OK & except it is missing some of the original video.crop=716:358:2:48 Not much on the horizontal but more noticible on the verticle. Look at the corporal playing the banjo stripes.

Yes, of course. It's intentional, by design. I am afraid you stll seem not to understand the difference between just stretching horizontally = distorting the proportions = making circles to flat ovals = fat people, versus zooming-cropping = preserving the proportions by enlarging the picture horizontally AND vertically by the same factor= circles remain circles = people keeping their original non-fattened proportions.
Think how to fit a 1.65:1 picture into a 16:9 frame. You have to make your choice between distorting the original picture by just stretching it horizontally, or keeping the proportions intact but sacrifice some vertical content (I cropped it from the bottom).
I presented both options.

If you want to preserve the full original picture content of the 1.65:1 picture UNDISTORTED (=keeping the geometric proportions intact, circles remaining circles) in a 16:9 frame you must accept the small black pillars left and right.

[cholla]

I took a couple of images with VDub2 so I could get close to the same frame.
Different time s make exact difficult but they are close.
Take a ruler & measure the shoulders of the man smoking the cigar.
Both are almost the same I get 1 1/8 inches.(Windows Photo Viewer) for both
In this post I get 1 1/4 inches for both.
Expanded on when clicked on i get 2 1/8 to 2 3/16 inches.
When I click back & forth in Windows Photo Viewer the get vertically stretched but less of the men are there.
That seems to also distort proportions vertically.

Don't get me wrong as the last ffmpeg codes you posted with my crop instead will help me make a better video.

[Sharc]

Your method of comparison is a bit doubtful and can be misleading. What you see as 720x480 are the anamorphic squashed DVD formats. You may better play and compare it as 16:9 in Vdub2 or on your TV. Unlike Blu-rays, DVDs are not square pixel. The pixel aspect ratio (PAR) of a 16:9 NTSC DVD is 32/27=1.185. You should see the tickmark set accordingly when you right click in the picture in VirtualDub2. You get this info (32/27) as well under File->File Information ..... Just watch the video in 16:9, as intended.
But more important you can't measure and "compare" widths only, like shoulder widths. The widths/heights of objects need to be in correct relation (commonly known as "circles test"), assuming one plays the video at the intended DAR (Display Aspect Ratio, 16:9). Your player and TV should play it automatically as 16:9.
And of course your (and my) stretched variants looks differently from a zoomed-cropped variant, as has been explained a couple of times.

Your VTS_01_1.VOB in post#155 is now perfectly soft-telecined though, and it is virtually identical with my (non-preferred) 'stretched' version. The minor difference is because of slighly different cropping. I cropped a bit more from the top to remove the oversharpened horizontal borderline artifact and a few less from the bottom, as you can conclude from my ffmpeg commandline. That's all. See attached demo.

Anyway I think we can just stop here. You process and shape it as you believe what's best for you. This is the most important and all what counts at the end.

[cholla]

What you see as 720x480 are the anamorphic squashed DVD formats. You may better play and compare it as 16:9 in Vdub2

The images were made by using VDub2 using "Copy source frame to clipboard".
Then using Irfanview to turn them into .jpg.
The lower image was made from your Horse(01)_telecined_DVDi_zoom-crop.vob which MediaInfo shows as a 720x480 16/9.
IDK if VDub2 copied them as "anamorphic squashed DVD formats".
The information inVdub2 is as you posted & I had already checked it before copying the frame.

Is there some setting in the ffmpeg code in post#152 that makes the video softer or less sharp ?

I did some searching for this but I did not find much specific information on the settings.
More on some than others.

[Sharc]

IDK if VDub2 copied them as "anamorphic squashed DVD formats".

Yes. The DVD format is non square pixel = anamorphic. The player needs to stretch the picture horizontally by 32/27=1.185 to display it as 16:9. In Vdub you can right click into the picture and tick '16:9 frame (Wide)' or '1.185 pixel (Source)' to display it as intended on your TV (16:9).
Perhaps re-read my post#109

Is there some setting in the ffmpeg code in post#152 that makes the video softer or less sharp ?

No. There is no softening filter included in that commandline.
The commandline does essentially:
- IVTC the soft-telecined source
- crop and resize it
- re-telecine it (hard telecining in this case)
- encode it using mpeg2 codec (for DVD compliance)
- multiplex the video and ac3 audio into a .vob container

[cholla]

@ Sharc,
The photos in post #157 were taken the way you instructed in post # 160.
I tested in a couple of photo programs I have & they stay the same as Irfanview created them.
I tried both 1.185 & 16/9.
This is a video of what I did?

[Alwyn]

@Cholla, to export an image from VDub2: File>Export>Single Image.

But be careful; simply changing the display AR using the right-click menu will not change the actual aspect ratio of the exported/copied image/video/single frame. The video itself has to match the aspect ratio you have chosen on the right-click menu.

[Sharc]

@ Sharc,
The photos in post #157 were taken the way you instructed in post # 160.
I tested in a couple of photo programs I have & they stay the same as Irfanview created them.
I tried both 1.185 & 16/9.

Yes, I understand. But take note that the 1.185 or 16/9 Vdub picture just shows how the video will eventually look on your 16:9 TV. However, what Vdub copies to the clipboard using 'Copy source frame to clipboard' is still the source format, means the anamorphic 720x480 squashed picture in case of an NTSC DVD source like your .vob. This makes it difficult for unexperienced users to draw the right conclusions on real geometric dimensions. Post #109 with its buzzwords as a hint what to google for.
All this became easier with Blu-rays (HD) as these are usually 1920x1080 square pixel sources, means Pixel Aspect Ratio 1:1.

Anyway, I think with your VTS_02_1.VOB of post#155 you produced something playable and "watchable" which can be put on DVD, how ever you made that one. Alternatively, the ffmpeg commandlines in post#152 should also produce what you want.
Don't dispose the original DVD though, just in case you come to new conclusions ....

[cholla]

Yes, I understand. But take note that the 1.185 or 16/9 Vdub picture just shows how the video will eventually look on your 16:9 TV. However, what Vdub copies to the clipboard using 'Copy source frame to clipboard' is still the source format, means the anamorphic 720x480 squashed picture in case of an NTSC DVD source like your .vob.

I usually take a "snap" with a media player like VLC & the image is what is on the screen.
The reason I used VDub2 this time is I thought I could get a more precise "snap" for the two different videos.
I have two programs that will let me expand a square around an image on screen & capture it.
Then there is Windows Print Screen.
Even so the images on the "anamorphic 720x480 squashed picture" will be what my TV does the "pulldown" to make it 16x9.
If the expansion is proportionally equal on both videos then the measurements made should still be good.

Post #109 with its buzzwords as a hint what to google for.

I did google the ffmpeg codes but not much information that explained what each one does.
Some were explained better than others.
For the rest I have read about most of those but I learn slower than I did when I was younger.

Don't dispose the original DVD though, just in case you come to new conclusions ....

I wasn't going to. Why dispose of a DVD? I hope I never get so crowded for space disposing of a DVD will make a difference.

[Sharc]

@cholla:
Allright. Essentially you deal with 3 subjects in your project

1) Handling of the 23.976fps video on your NTSC DVD to convert it to 29.97fps (=59.94 fields per second) for playback on NTSC (60Hz) infrastructures.
This is solved by Telecine / Pulldown. It has nothing to do with aspect ratios and scaling.

2) Scaling of the video to play it on a 16:9 canvas (TV screen)
We have been discussing 3 methods, see attached picture. All figures are shown in square pixels to avoid extra complexity.
a) is the original film frame (say ~1.65:1, after cropping any black borders off) which shall be scaled to fill the 16:9 TV screen (the black rectangle in b),c),d))
b) The picture is linearly scaled to fit into the 16:9 TV frame. The full content of the film frame a) as well as the shape (proportions widht/height) of the objects is preserved. The circle is still a circle and the square is still a square. One gets however left and right pillars. This is the correct way to do it and to play it.

Now if one doesn't like the sidebars, one may basically apply 2 tinkering methods in order to "fill" the 16:9 screen: c) Stretching or d) Zoom-crop.
c) stretches the picture of b) horizontally: The circle becomes an oval, and the square becomes a rectangle. Means the objects are distorted.
This seems to be your favoured method. Others don't like the distortion.
d) zooms the picture in proportion. Means its height exceeds the height of the 16:9 screen and one has to crop the picture vertically.
The shape of the objects (their width/height ratio) is preserved, the objects are just slightly enlarged, but their proportions are intact. The circle is still a circle, and the square is still a square. No "fat people", no oval wagon wheels. However, one looses some of the original picture content vertically. The cropping needs not to be symmetrical top/bottom as shown in the picture. One may prefer to crop more from the bottom and less from the top for example.

3) author the video + audio (+ subtitles + menus) as a specs compliant DVD if one wants it as a DVD.

Maybe you know all this. So it's just to talk about the same.

[Sharc]

I did google the ffmpeg codes but not much information that explained what each one does.

Agree. The ffmpeg documentaion is how it is. I posted the commandlines just in case you want to use it as is, doing what you want in one hop.
The same can be done with GUIs and tools of course which may be more intuitive.

[DB83]

@Sharc.

You have been more than patient in this thread. You said, many posts ago, that all has been stated but @Cholla just comes back for more.


And your reply above sums all this up. One is now just going around in circles.

[cholla]

Cholla just comes back for more.

Easy to explain I do not fear being disagreed with.

[cholla]

@ Sharc,
Nice graphic example
I do not totally agree with it.

a) Film picture (-1.65:1)
Meant to be shown at a movie theater from a projector.
These are the sizes on indoor movie theaters:
30-90 feet wide by 10-30 feet high
I'm sure there are some outside this range but this is what Google found.
The largest Drive-in screen was:
The Algiers Drive-in in Detroit, Michigan, USA had a screen that measured (120 ft) wide and (80 ft) high when it first opened on 15 August 1956 to show the western The Searchers (USA 1956) starring John Wayne.
Close in time to the movie I'm working with.
The point I have tried to make about this is when projected on a 120 ft x 80 ft screen.
The actors were wider & taller than on my 24" computer monitor.
If wider=fatter they were a lot fatter.
Depending on the projector & projectionist maybe or maybe not in the correct proportions.

b) Picture correctly sized in 16:9 TV
Both wider & taller.No longer 1.65:1.
So probably an oval also just in both directions.

c) Picture stretched => objects distorted
Picture wider but no loss from the picture.
So I agree an oval or rectangle.

d) Zoomed and top/bottom cropped
Larger =wider & longer. at that point the double oval.
Then cropped crop=716:358 by width & height not just top/bottom.
As you posted some of the picture is lost.
Larger width still equals fatter(for those that have a problem with this).

I prefer no screen loss with people slightly wider & no bars.
If I can manage to widen less & get the same results that is great .

Sharcs code for "zoom and crop, keeping the proportions intact" helped with this after I change the crop.
(I tried the code exactly as written also)
To me the picture was softened & I plan to work on that.
If I find the reason for that then this will work for me the way I want it to when turned back into a DVD with AVStoDVD .

So Thanks Sharc you have been a lot of help to me for doing this.
We just have a different perspective on some things.
This is fine with me & I hope it is with you.

[lollo]

b) Picture correctly sized in 16:9 TV
Both wider & taller.No longer 1.65:1.
So probably an oval also just in both directions.

I prefer no screen loss with people slightly wider & no bars.

Now repeat once more what Sharc wrote:

b) The picture is linearly scaled to fit into the 16:9 TV frame. The full content of the film frame a) as well as the shape (proportions widht/height) of the objects is preserved. The circle is still a circle and the square is still a square. One gets however left and right pillars. This is the correct way to do it and to play it.

and stop this non sense forever!

[Sharc]

@cholla: Your "cinema" issues:
In cinema theaters they show this movie in its original format at its original movie aspect ratio 1.85:1. This is not the same as somehow stretching your ~1.65:1 DVD release to 16:9 to give it the "cinema look". The 1.85:1 is even slightly wider than 16:9, and playing it corrrectly on your 16:9 TV would leave tiny borders on top and bottom (1.85 picture on 16:9=1.778 canvas). On the attached picture you see that the original 1.85:1 movie has additional picture content on the left and right side which has been cut off for your DVD release. You can't recover the missing material by simply stretching the picture of your DVD horizontally. You would just distort the picture.

Attached a screenshot of the 1:85 "widescreen" release: Left and right you see content (marked red) which has been removed from your ~1.65:1 NTSC 4:3 DVD (made for playback on legacy 4:3 TVs).

So again: The correct way to scale and view your DVD release on a 16:9 monitor is with the small sidebars, according b) in post#165, and as all the other users have been telling you, or to zoom-crop to preserve the proportions (shapes) of the original, or perhaps get a "widescreen" (16:9) version of this DVD (with tiny top/bottom bars only).........

So much for your "cinema" aspect ratio discrepancy.

Happy stretching and tinkering

[ProWo]

I would suggest closing this thread, that objectively it makes no sense at all to play 4:3 source material as 16:9.
Either parts of the movie are missing or the display aspect ratio is wrong.
So, as I said, completely pointless.

[cholla]

@ Sharc,
I shoud have looked for a 16:9 wide screen version.
I did not think of that.
I will stop messing with the rip from this DVD as it does not have the whole movie.
Meaning some of the picture has been cropped on the commercial DVD.

I found this while looking for some more information on 1.85 aspect:

Open your VOB files in VirtualDubMod. Add the Null Filter. Use the Cropping tool to crop off the top and bottom black borders. Look to see how many scanlines are left. Use the equations I gave earlier to calculate the aspect ratio.

Oh wait, you're in Australia so you need PAL equations. Hold on a minute...

4:3 PAL: divide 768 by the number of scanlines.
16:9 PAL: divide 1024 by the number of scanlines.

I went ahead & left the PAL information even if it does not apply to my DVD.

For a 4:3 encoded NTSC movie in a 720x480 frame divide 640 by the active picture height (ie, what's left after removing the black bars). For example 640/272 = 2.35.

For a 16:9 encoded NTSC movie in a 720x480 frame divide 853 by the active picture height.

For the DVD I have now not much point in doing the math but since the height appears to be the same in the wide screen version on post# 171.
720÷1.85=389 which is close to the 390 height I had been using.

[DB83]

@Cholla

Only looking at UK Amazon I find 16:9 dvds and Blurays of this film - But do show me ANY of your posts that list the title (I had to work it out myself). Whether ANY of these is true 16:9 with total frame you will have to find that out yourself. DVD covers often report the AR of the film yet the image you see is not. And I know that from personal experience with another John Wayne filum - The Alamo. I have the VHS of the longer 'roadshow' and the basic 16:9 DVD version. The displayed image is not the same. And if your 16:9 DVD does show the full width what will you do if there are still letter-box bars on it ?


And whilst your dvd may have information missing left and right is that 'critical' to your enjoyment of the film ?


And your analogy of 720/1.85 = 389 is so wrong since a DVD does not have square pixels. But I refuse to discuss that ferther since it had already been covered ad naseum.

[cholla]

@ChollaAnd your analogy of 720/1.85 = 389 is so wrong since a DVD does not have square pixels..

The math came from jagabo.
I will use jagabo's example.
jagabo rounded up as I did.
640/272 = 2.35 or 640÷272=2.35
I was not sure where jagabo got the 640 but I assumed it is the width of the video with the pillars removed.
If you change the formula to multiplication then 272 x 2.25 = 639.2.
Therefore 639.2 ÷ 2.35=272
I used 720 instead with the 1.85. This matched what the crop was using VirtualDubMod per jagabo's instructions.
If I use 1.66 the crop would be at 434 height & that would leave a lot of top & bottom bars.

Even though Sharc pointed out my video is 1.66:1 .
This is an interesting article on this:
https://noamkroll.com/the-magic-of-the-1-661-aspect-ratio-how-i-plan-to-use-it-on-my-feature-film/
"It was first introduced as the European widescreen standard".

For the rest I never posted DVDs have square pixels.
Nobody asked me the name of the title.
I try to keep file names short when posting.
I could have used VTS_01_1.VOB instead as that is where I clipped the original HORSE(01).vob in post#35 from.
The AR on the cover is 1.66:1 Widescreen.
Only the blu rays show 1.85:1 & I believe that would be the source of the image Sharc posted in #171.
If not I was not able to find a DVD in 1.85:1.

@DB83,
On a side note I disposed of most of my commercial VHS tapes.
I have a few but very few.
The rest of my VHS are of family taken with an old camcorder that used VHS.
I have put those on DVD.
I still have a Grex for working with commercial VHS but it has been a long time since I've used it.
I even had a SVHS unit at one time.
Like most hardware it finally crashed.
I still have an Insignia combo unit.
It has component & s-video out as well as composite out.
No HDMI .

[DB83]

FYI 640 is the actual real display of a NTSC 720*480 4:3 DVD. Simple maths.

Now remember that with the crop to 360 pixels, and a WS DVD gives 852 pixels, you get 852/360 = 2.36. The true AR of the film is probably 2.40 so, yes, there is some image loss but is that critical ?.


The DVDs I looked at said 1.66 which is not a true reflection but rather what the DVD displays. I did not look at the Blurays which might have been more accurate.

[davexnet]

1.85 A/R according to this
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052902/technical/?ref_=tt_spec_sm

Hi-def version here:
https://ww1.m4uhd.tv/watch-movie-the-horse-soldiers-1959-235949.html

[Sharc]

If you happen to find a widescreen DVD or a BD release of that movie which includes the full 1.85:1 original picture it will look like the attached figure b) on your 16:9 TV, means with tiny top and bottom black borders. If you don't like the tiny borders you can again butcher the video like c) or d).

I absteen from any maths at this point. Take it as granted.

[cholla]

@davexnet
I had looked at the tech specs at IMBD already.
I did not find a DVD with the 1.85:1 all were 1.66:1 .
In the second link the video did not play but redirected to another website.

@ DB83 I found this topic on this forum.
I have not read it all much less absorbed it.
What I have read so far seems to be very good information.
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/325272-General-Aspect-Ratio-Clarification

[DB83]

^^ My apologies. You already had that covered.

@Davexnet


Could not access that link. Received a malware warning. And when I looked earlier, I could not the specs on IMDB. Oh well.


But it just shows how wrong the info on a DVD cover can be.