11 May
2013
11 May
'13
6:23 a.m.
Like adding some formats that includes the cropping. Actually, I
always use "Flat without stretch", I consider the rest Advanced use.
Maybe some direct acces to ffmpeg parameters? instead on growing the
formats list to infinity.
Already got a couple of Scope inside a 1920x1080, and I expect to get
many more like that. And for SD material (old short films) I would
expect 16:9 inside 4:3 and even scope inside 4:3 (oh yes, got that in
a DV file last week)
Thanks!
Manuel AC
11 May
11 May
12:42 p.m.
On Sat, 11 May 2013, Manuel AC wrote:
Like adding some formats that includes the cropping.
Actually, I
always use "Flat without stretch", I consider the rest Advanced use.
Maybe some direct acces to ffmpeg parameters? instead on growing the
formats list to infinity.
I agree that menu needs some sorting out!
Already got a couple of Scope inside a 1920x1080, and
I expect to get
many more like that. And for SD material (old short films) I would
expect 16:9 inside 4:3 and even scope inside 4:3 (oh yes, got that in
a DV file last week)
If I understand correctly, you should be able to cope with those by
cropping the black out of the source file and then selecting the target
format. So for your Scope example, just choosing the "Scope" option
should stretch the 1920x1080 into DCI scope.
Best
Carl
--
DVD-o-matic: http://carlh.net/software/dvdomatic
Help DVD-o-matic reach the Mac! Donate to my Indiegogo project:
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/dvd-o-matic-on-mac-os-x/x/962078
18 May
18 May
12:05 p.m.
In my (swedish) everyday work these situations are the most common:
*
*
*Square pixels:*
*HD 16:9.* 1920 x 1080 -> 1920 x 1080
*HD 1:1,85* 1920 x 1038 -> 1998 x 1080
*HD 1:1,66* 1793 x 1080 -> 1793 x 1080
*HD 1:1,37* 1480 x 1080 -> 1480 x 1080
*HD 4:3* 1436 x 1080 -> 1436 x 1080
*HD scope.* 1920 x 803 -> 2048 x 858
*SD 4:3 768 x 576* -> 1436 x 1080
*SD 16:9 letterboxed* 768 x 431 -> 1920 x 1080
*SD scope letterboxed* 760 x 321 -> 2048 x 858 (nasty)
*Non square pixels:*
*SD 16:9 anamorfic* 768 x 576 -> 1920 x 1080
The numbers are calculated on my cellphone, please correct me if necessary.
Another alternative might be a checkbox "square pixels" combined with a
sort of zoom or "fill aspect FLAT/SCOPE" function.
What I´m aimaing at is a scaling option that makes incoming picture fit
into outgoing FLAT or SCOPE *without* any stretching or cropping.
Stretching or cropping should be an active choice from the operator
(assuming that he or she knows the consequences)
Some scope films has burned subtitles in the black bar. A "manual" or
"custom" choice would be necessary to handle those.
/M.E.
3:59 p.m.
I like the actual system, even a simpler one. What kills me is cropping it
"visually" and so stretching the image.
From the user perspective another option can be: select
the source pixel
aspect ratio for stretching, the target format, and manually adjust
zoom.
Add a vertical offset to compensate for subtitles on black or minimal
pan&scan, and magic! :D
To the Magnus list, add the NTSC SD formats, and you get an even longer and
evergrowing list of formats. (NTSC SD scope letterboxed: 268 pixels of
height... I projected that last week)
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Magnus Eriksson
<telegrafverket(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
In my (swedish) everyday work these situations are the
most common:
*
*
*Square pixels:*
*HD 16:9.* 1920 x 1080 -> 1920 x 1080
*HD 1:1,85* 1920 x 1038 -> 1998 x 1080
*HD 1:1,66* 1793 x 1080 -> 1793 x 1080
*HD 1:1,37* 1480 x 1080 -> 1480 x 1080
*HD 4:3* 1436 x 1080 -> 1436 x 1080
*HD scope.* 1920 x 803 -> 2048 x 858
*SD 4:3 768 x 576* -> 1436 x 1080
*SD 16:9 letterboxed* 768 x 431 -> 1920 x 1080
*SD scope letterboxed* 760 x 321 -> 2048 x 858 (nasty)
*Non square pixels:*
*SD 16:9 anamorfic* 768 x 576 -> 1920 x 1080
The numbers are calculated on my cellphone, please correct me if necessary.
Another alternative might be a checkbox "square pixels" combined with a
sort of zoom or "fill aspect FLAT/SCOPE" function.
What I´m aimaing at is a scaling option that makes incoming picture fit
into outgoing FLAT or SCOPE *without* any stretching or cropping.
Stretching or cropping should be an active choice from the operator
(assuming that he or she knows the consequences)
Some scope films has burned subtitles in the black bar. A "manual" or
"custom" choice would be necessary to handle those.
/M.E.
_______________________________________________
DVDomatic mailing list
DVDomatic(a)carlh.net
http://carlh.dnsalias.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dvdomatic
5:05 p.m.
I see no point in having separate stretching options when dealing with
square pixels. The idea with a checkbox is to avoid mistakes. If you put a
16:9 1920 x 1080 picture in DVD-o-matic and select FLAT as output you will
get a slight horizontal stretch. It can be hard to see if you are tired and
in a hurry. (been there, done that..)
OK, I agree about the "Magnus list" (with NTSC added). It would be far too
long. Zoom (scale), square pixels on/off, offset and crop would satisfy me.
Maybe combined with a before/after comparison view?
268 pixels! On what screen size? 0,27K :-)
4363
days inactive
4370
days old
4 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Carl Hetherington -
Magnus Eriksson -
Manuel AC