widescreen (anamorphed) image sequences?

[Adrian@Stufish]

I'm rendering image sequences in LW with camera set at NTSC widescreen, so I get 720x480 anamorphed image image files.

Query; when I import 720x480 (anamorphed) images into an NTSC 16:9 project WHY DONT THEY FILL THE SCREEN.

If I set a SpeedEdit project as NTSC 16:9 and import the image sequences they come in as 4:3 with black bars at the sides, I can render an edit and tell it to stretch to 16:9 - but I have a horrible suspicion that SpeedEdit may be squashing then re-stretching my images - doesn't bode well for quality.
I can set up a project as NTSC 4:3, import the image sequences one at a time, rendering each to a SpeedHQ NTSC 16:9 by clicking 'stretch', then open a new project as NTSC 16:9 & edit in that.
A BIG waste of time & disc space.

[Lightwolf]

Some image formats (such as TGA) can't store the pixel aspect, so SE assumes them to be 1:1 in most cases.

Changing the aspect in SE will only tell it how to interpret the footage and not cause any scaling by default.

Cheers,
Mike

[billmi]

To expand a little bit on what Mike said...

Normally Speed Edit attempts to figure out and set the correct aspect ratio for a clip. In some cases, the data to do it properly isn't there, or SE may not understand it properly.

Instead of stretching the video, the direct way to do this is to manually set the aspect ratio. This is an option in the control tree (either control tree view in the main edit window, or open up the Edit Clip Properties panel (F8.))

Aspect Ratio is under the Layer Settings menu (click the + sign next to Layer Settings to expand the menu.)

[Adrian@Stufish]

Alas and Alack, somebody disabled most of the control tree for image sequences, thats what I'm complaning about!

[Adrian@Stufish]

what (pixel) size would I have to render an image sequence at to be able to open it in a SpeedEdit NTSC16:9 edit - 864x480?
- see my problem?

[SBowie]

Alas and Alack, somebody disabled most of the control tree for image sequences, thats what I'm complaning about!That's kind of odd. I just rendered a test sequence as DV 16:9 (anamorphic) Targas.

When I load them into an SE 16x9 DV project, they turn up - as expected - as 4:3. Then I just hit F8, and change the aspect to 16:9 in Clip Properties. I thought maybe you might have overlay turned on, but Clip Properties is still fully populated. then Did you bring these in as a sub-project, perhaps? That would do it.

[Adrian@Stufish]

what exactly do you mean by 'rendered as DV 16:9 (anamorphic) Targas' ?
the available camera preset in LW is 'D1 (NTSC Widescreen)', the outpurt format is 'LW_TGA24(.tga), AFIK the 'DV' bit only enters into it once you'r encoding.
Am I left thinking that I've got a faulty SpeedEdit install ? - I'm on SE 1.2 build 070620

[SBowie]

what exactly do you mean by 'rendered as DV 16:9 (anamorphic) Targas' ? the available camera preset in LW is 'D1 (NTSC Widescreen)', the outpurt format is 'LW_TGA24(.tga), AFIK the 'DV' bit only enters into it once you'r encoding.I used a Mirage preset, which corresponds to the 16X9 720x480 anamorphic NTSC format (which you see most often in connection with DV cameras, hence the preset name.) Your LW output should be identical for all practical purposes.

Am I left thinking that I've got a faulty SpeedEdit install ? - I'm on SE 1.2 build 070620I tried both 1.0 and 1.2. You didn't respond to my sub-project query. That's the only way I can think of to prevent the full control tree from showing up. If that's not it, I'm stumped.

[ScorpioProd]

I tried both 1.0 and 1.2. You didn't respond to my sub-project query. That's the only way I can think of to prevent the full control tree from showing up. If that's not it, I'm stumped.
But Steve, don't image sequences always come in as a subproject?

The control panel he posted looked like a subproject to me.

[Lightwolf]

But Steve, don't image sequences always come in as a subproject?

Not if you select the first image of a TGA sequence and drag it onto the timeline (unfortunately TGA only afaik).
The subproject thing is very unstable with long sequences anyhow.

Cheers,
Mike

[SBowie]

?? Errr .. no. They can, but only if you drag the folder in. Targas will load just like an AVI or other 'movie' type clip.

[billmi]

only if you drag the folder in.

That sounds like the culprit right there.

[SBowie]

My thinking too, but you can't really tell from the screenshot.

[Adrian@Stufish]

Well' y'all right in that dragging the directory onto the timeline causes it to not give the full control tree. If I open the directory and wait for the list to populate with the thousands of file names and then frag the first one onto the time line, I can then indeed access the control tree.
Trial and error then finds I have to set the image width to be 964 pixels to get it to fill the screen. Sorry but that aint right. For a start they are 720 px wide images with a pixel aspect ratio of 1.2 (as opposed to 0.9 for standard). So 720x1.2 is 864.
NTSC or PAL widescreen images are 720 px across are they not ? they are displayed with a non square pixel aspec ratio but there's still 720 of them, and I should not be getting Speed Edit to 're-size' them by some seemingly random amount befor compressing them into a movie file which is still 720 px wide and carries a tag to tell the playback device to stretch the pixels by x1.2 to display the image.
Can anyone explain what's going on? - surely a 720x486 image sequence loaded into an NTSC 16x9 project should fill the image area. full stop. no stretching needed. thats how NTSC or PAL widescreen works isn't it? - yes you might want a way to 'not stretch' still images & display them with a black border - but you would be re-sizing them (down to 600px wide) to do that.
The output I get is doing a damn good job of convincing me that the images are being degraded by being resized badly a couple of times.

[Lightwolf]

NTSC or PAL widescreen images are 720 px across are they not ?
With square pixels that is 768 pixels.
I really wonder what is going on at your end, because I've edited a few TGA sequences in 16:9 PAL projects without any issues...

Cheers,
Mike

[Adrian@Stufish]

obviously my fault for using the built in standard cameras in an obscure product called lightwave by some cowboy company called - what was it, 'Newturk' or something?
D1(PAL) 720x576 aspect 1.0667
D1 (PAL Widescreen) 720x586 aspect 1.4222
D1(NTSC) 720x486 aspect 0.9
D1(NTSC Widescreen) 720x486 aspect 1.2

- just a minute, don't they make SpeedEdit as well, and sell the pair bundled as a seamlessly co-operating package?

Seriously, I'm as baffled as you. My renders are using the LW standard D1 NTSC Widesceen camera resolution, I've got (I think) the latest SpeedEdit, but when I drag TGA image sequences into a speededit project set up as NTSC DV 16x9 I have to re-size them by hand to fill the screen. I can't belive that's how it's supposed to work!

- my outstanding problem is that even with sequences with a fixed camera, if I put them into a standard format NTSC project they playback OK [but squashed], but if i 'shoehorn' them into a widescreen NTSC project I have antialiasing issues in 'stationary' areas of the i,age - which to me indicates that something is amiss.

[Lightwolf]

but when I drag TGA image sequences into a speededit project set up as NTSC DV 16x9 I have to re-size them by hand to fill the screen.
Erm, what if you change the aspect ratio in SE and don't resize the images?

Cheers,
Mike

[SBowie]

Well' y'all right in that dragging the directory onto the timeline causes it to not give the full control tree.Don't do it that way. For Targas (only), just drag the first image in the sequence (myfile0001.tga) right from it's folder onto the timeline - hit "g" to expand the 'pseudo clip' that loads to it's full length, then hit F8. Set aspect to 16:9 in the Image Settings (one time) and you're done.

[SBowie]

Seriously, I'm as baffled as you. My renders are using the LW standard D1 NTSC Widesceen camera resolution, I've got (I think) the latest SpeedEdit, but when I drag TGA image sequences into a speededit project set up as NTSC DV 16x9 I have to re-size them by hand to fill the screen. I can't belive that's how it's supposed to work!Targas don't contain pixel aspect ration infor in the file header, so SE has no way to know whether it should interpret your sequence as 4x3 or 16x9. The former is far more common, so it presumes that case by default. As the error when you actually intend the later can be rectified with about 3-4 clicks, it's a reasonable enough way to go I think.

I'm not a huge fan of the concept of anamorphic 16:9 (those pixels are awfully fat) but it seems to work surprisingly well all the same. You could probably get a slightly more automatic result by using a custom square pixel resolution in LW (1024X576?) - that would likely load correctly into the SE project ... but maybe more trouble than its worth.

[Lightwolf]

You could probably get a slightly more automatic result by using a custom square pixel resolution in LW (1024X576?) - that would likely load correctly into the SE project ... but maybe more trouble than its worth.
Not a good idea, because then SE would need to scale. And while the scaler is good for a realtime software based scaler... it ain't that good.

Cheers,
Mike

[Adrian@Stufish]

Thassmorelikeit - I'd been looking at image size instead of layer settings - probably because the aspect ratio dropdown doesn't actually have a straightforeward 16x9 line to select, or anything about NTSC or PAL widescreen - but selecting the one that says '16x9 HDTV Video', when you let go leaves the tab saying just '16x9' and (fingers crossed) things look as though it fits rather better.
Thanks all, now all I have to cope with is the embarassing pause while the bin window recovers the thousands of filenames when I open the directories instead of dragging therm onto the timeline and therefor making Speed Edit think they are sub-projects. (seems to crash over about 3,000 frames though!)

[billmi]

Seriously, I'm as baffled as you.


You just need to bring in the files as an image sequence (drag in the first file in the sequence) rather than as a sub-project of individual images (dragging in the folder) and then set the correct aspect ratio in the control tree. No scaling is required. I do this regularly - .tga sequences rendered as widescreen into SpeedEdit - just set the aspect ratio to widescreen and go - no scaling is necessary.

[SBowie]

Thanks all, now all I have to cope with is the embarassing pause while the bin window recovers the thousands of filenames when I open the directories ...I don't think you have to wait, actually - though I haven't tried a really long file sequence.

[SBowie]

Not a good idea, because then SE would need to scale. And while the scaler is good for a realtime software based scaler... it ain't Imho it's a toss-up - whether scaling (if we can call it that) actually rendered square pixels to fill a frame of equal proportions is going to look worse than the reverse - the horizontal (over?)stretching we know and love as anamorphic 16:9.

[billmi]

Thanks all, now all I have to cope with is the embarassing pause while the bin window recovers the thousands of filenames when I open the directories instead of dragging therm onto the timeline and therefor making Speed Edit think they are sub-projects. (seems to crash over about 3,000 frames though!)

I checked this earlier today, dealing with a project I'm working on right now. As Steve mentioned, you don't have to wait for the bin window to kick up icons on all the files before you can drag.

Granted I was only dealing with a few hundred frames, not thousands, but when I tested dragging the folder (initially I thought you could just drill into the subproject to tweak the aspect ratio, but that won't work, because bringing in the whole folder they are separate clips, not seen as a sequence) that actually took noticably longer for SE to process. Might be different with that many more frames though.

[Lightwolf]

Imho it's a toss-up - whether scaling (if we can call it that) actually rendered square pixels to fill a frame of equal proportions is going to look worse than the reverse - the horizontal (over?)stretching we know and love as anamorphic 16:9.
Depending on your monitor there is actual stretching though, at least for CRTs just the timing changes (one advantage of analogue).
Failry similar to 35mm anamorphic, where the lens used for the projection changes.

Cheers,
Mike

[SBowie]

I'm still of the view that the world would be a better place if we'd gone a 720P route instead of the current morass. :)

[Lightwolf]

I'm still of the view that the world would be a better place if we'd gone a 720P route instead of the current morass. :)
Yeah, but that wasn't really feasible with the tech back then, as well as the bandwidth.
And to be honest, if you look at the mess that 720p is (or 1080i for that matter) - it makes SD look like a piece of cake.

Cheers,
mike

[SBowie]

Yeah, but that wasn't really feasible with the tech back then, as well as the bandwidth.I didn't really mean "back then" - I meant more recently, as in 720P as the HD standard (maybe a couple of frame rates permitted, if really necessary), vs. the current muddle. Comparatively, it's a bargain, bandwidth-wise. :)

And to be honest, if you look at the mess that 720p is (or 1080i for that matter) - it makes SD look like a piece of cake.Neither situation is very appealing ("Standards" .... sigh.)

Anyway, enough thread-hijacking for me ... over to you!

[dzpvideo]

That's kind of odd. I just rendered a test sequence as DV 16:9 (anamorphic) Targas.

When I load them into an SE 16x9 DV project, they turn up - as expected - as 4:3. Then I just hit F8, and change the aspect to 16:9 in Clip Properties. I thought maybe you might have overlay turned on, but Clip Properties is still fully populated. then Did you bring these in as a sub-project, perhaps? That would do it.

When you go to clip properties you have to go to size and then increase the X size to ??????? AND that's the magic question for me.... according to my calculations the number should be 854.... but this number does not fill the Speed Edit output display.... still some black bars on the right and left. If I stretch it out to fill the screen then the number is 940.... so which is the correct DV 16x9 aspect ratio to use... 854x480 or 940x480??? IT WOULD REALLY BE NICE IF the selected clip properties box had a magic button for "convert to 16x9" and it would be done and it would be the correct aspect ratio!

Dave

[SBowie]

IT WOULD REALLY BE NICE IF the selected clip properties box had a magic button for "convert to 16x9" and it would be done and it would be the correct aspect ratio!Errrm - like this one, Dave? :)

http://www.vtworx.com/Resources/anamorph.jpg

(Actually, to be honest - I didn't have to manually set the 16:9 switch this time - the fact that the project was 16:9 seems to have been enough to tip the balance of the auto-aspect option. I switched it to 16:9 manually though, just to show where it was.)

[Twrch]

I did not want to start a new thread because my issue is so close to this one.

I've got a targa sequence redered from LW. I can put the folder on the timeline and it puts it as a subproject just like descibed above. However, when I go the other route and go inside the folder and put the first frame up, all I get is a still picture of the first frame.

Why don't the other frames follow?

[Lightwolf]

Why don't the other frames follow?
Keep alt pressed while you drag the first frame onto the timeline, otherwise it picks a single image from your sequence.

And yes, I think it should be the other way around (alt to pick a single frame).

Cheers,
Mike

[SBowie]

Why don't the other frames follow?If you're running 1.51, hold down Alt before dragging (I think I have that right.)

[SBowie]

And yes, I think it should be the other way around (alt to pick a single frame).Whereas I really think a different qualifier (Shift? Ctrl?) should be considered because - as-is - Alt comes very, very, very close to conflicting with Inherit.

[Lightwolf]

Whereas I really think a different qualifier (Shift? Ctrl?) should be considered because - as-is - Alt comes very, very, very close to conflicting with Inherit.
True, ctrl for single frames makes more sense, especially if you look at how ctrl is being used in general as a selection modifier.
Have a modifier for frame sequences makes no sense at all. Especially since picking single frames out of a sequence usually requires more attention, and thus isn't really slowed down by an extra key press.

Cheers,
Mike

[Twrch]

Thanks for the info. I had an inkling that I needed to hold something down but never tried ALT. A senior moment you might say. :foreheads

[Lightwolf]

Thanks for the info. I had an inkling that I needed to hold something down but never tried ALT. A senior moment you might say. :foreheads
No worries... it happens to me all the time... and I know what to do - I just never expect it :cursin:

...getting old.

Cheers,
Mike