wide 16:9 format

[ChrisA]

Does here anyone shoot in 16:9? My camera actually has a wider field of view in the horizontal direction in 16:9 mode (The TRV33 has a wide format CCD) I'm thinking about shooting in this format as I like the look.

If you do or don't shoot in this format why? I do find that it's harder to compose in the wider format, so much more has to be "right" all at once.

 

[yceltikci]

Does here anyone shoot in 16:9? My camera actually has a wider field of view in the horizontal direction in 16:9 mode (The TRV33 has a wide format CCD) I'm thinking about shooting in this format as I like the look.

If you do or don't shoot in this format why? I do find that it's harder to compose in the wider format, so much more has to be "right" all at once.

Many new generation SONY TRV camcorders support 16:9 format. I think it will do good with a wide angle lens. Next week I'll be in SharmElSheikh and I plan to shoot in wide format.

I think what is important about w/a is that where you are going to watch it. If you have a high resolution wide format LCD TV then it is good, otherwise you will have black stripes on the top and the bottom of the screen if you watch it on a standard 4:3 PAL or NTSC TV system.

Sorry if you already knew these... :06:

I'll keep you informed about my experience on 16:9 shooting and post production process..

Yener

 

[shroy002]

Does here anyone shoot in 16:9? My camera actually has a wider field of view in the horizontal direction in 16:9 mode (The TRV33 has a wide format CCD) I'm thinking about shooting in this format as I like the look.

If you do or don't shoot in this format why? I do find that it's harder to compose in the wider format, so much more has to be "right" all at once.

I have a TRV 33 and shoot only in widescreen mode. I have had no problems with it. I noticed that I had a wider field of view shooting in 16:9 and adding a wide angle lense increases that yet a again. Letter boxing gives a cool affect on a regular tv and in my view doesn't distract from the video at all.

I say go for it.

 

[Otter]

I've read, and it seems to be borne out by the new LCD/Plasma TVs, that 4:3 is dead and 16:9 will be THE standard format in the future. Might as well make the jump now.

 

[meekal]

don't know if this will help or hurt, but when i asked this of somebody (before i found this board) this as their answer to me:

As for 16:9, I must admit that looking cool is probably the main benefit of that feature. I don't know what you comfort/knowledge level is regarding aspect ratio, pixel ratio and size, and resolution, so this may or may not make much sense (skip this if you already know this).

Basically (and I'm leaving out a little bit of the detail here) There are multiple ways a camera can obtain a 16:9 aspect ratio. Here's the easiest to understand, my JVC JY-HD10U camera produces a 1280x720 image (720p HD). If you do the math, this is a 16:9 ratio (1280/16*9=720). The camera achieves this ratio by having as 1280x720 CCD with square pixels, and records pixel for pixel to the DV tape (in mpeg transport stream format). DV cameras capture images in various resolutions, depending
upon the CCD(s) of the camera. No matter the resolution, the image is stored to DV tape in 720x480 resolution, using NON-SQUARE (rectangle if you will) resolution. For regular 4:3 video, the aspect ratio is .9 to 1 (usually just written as .9). For 16:9, the aspect ratio is 1.2 (1.2x720=864. 864x480 = 16:9) (864/16*9=486 - close enough). Why the heck am I talking about this? For the DCR-PC100, 16:9 is achieved not by
having square pixels, but instead by cropping the top and bottom of the picture, and storing the resulting image in DV Widescreen format (1.2 or 16:9 aspect ratio). So, while you are achieving 16:9, you comprise some picture quality loss. I think with the XL1 and XL2, 16:9 can be achieved by using an "Anamorphic Adaptor". This is basically a wide angle lens that takes in more information and allows it to be stored into the
Widescreen DV format, without sacrificing detail. Does this make sense?

Now, to answer your original question, what is the advantage of using 16:9? 16:9 is the chosen aspect ration of the HD (High Definition) ATSC standard. All TV's will be in this format, as least for the next several years. In addition, I believe EDTV's, though a waste of money in my opinion, are also in this format. 16:9 is the future, for now

 

[shroy002]

Does here anyone shoot in 16:9? My camera actually has a wider field of view in the horizontal direction in 16:9 mode (The TRV33 has a wide format CCD) I'm thinking about shooting in this format as I like the look.

If you do or don't shoot in this format why? I do find that it's harder to compose in the wider format, so much more has to be "right" all at once.

Here is a video sample shot in 16:9 (warning it is a large file 33MB) so dial up users beware. Also it appears quite dark on PC screens--so if you have a video setting on your monitor use it. I just threw this together today so forgive the quality.

Here you go:

http://www.tsstest.gen.umn.edu/mediatest.htm

 

[shroy002]

Here is a link that gives a great explanation of 16:9 and why you would want to use it even now.

http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/understanding_16_9.html

The tutorial is nearly three years old but has very pertinent information.

Steve

 

[yceltikci]

Does here anyone shoot in 16:9? QUOTE]

Dear ChrisA,

As I mentioned in my previous thread, I shot in 16:9 in Red Sea. (BTW:Red Sea is such an amazing place to dive!!!) My view area did not enlarge too much. I think this is because our camcorders (MiniDV) are optimized for 3:2. So making it 16:9 is not enlarging the view horizontally but shrinking the view vertically to maintain the ratio. (Am I mistaken?)

Anyway, as the other folks said, it really looks cool, but nothing else..

I think, one and only reason to shoot in 16:9 is it is better viewable in those large format plasma LCD TV screens, without deforming the footage.

Anyway, I'll keep on shooting in 16:9 sometimes..

Regards
Yener

 

[bdombrowski]

Just want share my experience with 16:9 format.

As someone mentioned before, some cameras get 16:9 by simply cropping off pixels in the vertical direction. Lots of cameras do this, including the VX2000. IMO not good to shoot in 16:9 in this case because you are losing information in the picture in the form of lost vertical resolution.

A *native* 16:9 camera has the optics positioning the image on the CCDs so that all pixels are being used in the 16:9 mode. You get full resolution on these cameras at 16:9. Such cameras that do this are the PDX10 and PD-170 in the non-HD realm.

It's helps to think who your audience is before you decide what mode to shoot. Is it for friends to watch on standard def 4:3 NTSC or is the footage going to shown on the huge wide-screen plasma to help sell timeshares at some resort?

When I shoot stock footage, and if the situations allows, I will switch my PDX10 between 16:9 and 4:3 during the dive to cover all the bases of possible end-users.

Regards,

Brian