14 Jan
2015
14 Jan
'15
10:31 a.m.
Hi all,
Going back to this...
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 16:02:51 +0100
Carsten Kurz <audiovisual(a)t-online.de> wrote:
Am 10.11.2014 um 15:41 schrieb Carl Hetherington:
OK. What would keeping the aspect ratio from the pixel AR always
present look like in practice? Where does it appear in the user
interface that DCP-o-matic is treating all pixels as square?
I'm loosing my ground here ;-) I guess what I thought of initially was a more
universal approach to non-square pixels. E.g. if we'd had (rare...) a file with 2x
anamorphic stretch, like classic scope.
They way you are doing it now is that you need an existing/fitting 16:9 scale factor to
deal with the non-square pixels, so currently DCP-o-matic can only deal with square or
16:9 non-square.
I'm afraid I'm still not sure I understand the problem here.
Consider a file which has 999 x 1080 pixels and a PAR of 2:1 (so the
image should be 1.85:1 when it is displayed). If you loaded it into
DCP-o-matic it would say "content video is 999 x 1080, pixel aspect
ratio 2:1, display aspect ratio 1.85:1". Then if you set it to scale
to 1.85:1 DCP-o-matic would scale it to 1998x1080 (with square pixels).
Is that right?
Regards,
Carl