16/9 Distortion discovery or not?

FCP 603

I have a project filmed in both 4/3 and 16/9 (filmed with the dvx-b). Of course, i placed the 16/9 clip into the time line before anything else.
In fcp6 this clip dropped into the TL gave me the setting choice of conforming the TL or The clip.

The action made my TL switch to 3/2 anamorphic as expected.

I began editing and finally came to a shot from the 4/3 reel. I drug the clip to the TL and it showed up in the canvas as a shot too narrow to fit the aspect (pillar bars left&right).

So i double clicked the clip to distort it -33.33 instead of the +33.33 that it was set at and then it became too vertically squeezed. I got the -33.33 distortion from a ken stone tutorial.

So i tried to set it to 0 and guess what? The clip fit so perfectly that it would appear i filmed it that way. No Tall and skinny or short and fat and the clip is not scaled to fit.

Is this a new discovery?
Why was the 4/3 shot distorted to +33.33 anyway?
Where does the -33.33 come in if this works better?

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

The distort value of -33.33 is normal if you put a 4:3 clip into a 16:9 anamorphic timeline. That's what gives the clip the pillarbox effect so you see the entire height of the 4:3 clip with black at the sides. Note that the Scale is set to 100%.

A distort value of 0 means the pixels on source clip are exactly matched up to the pixels in the sequence. Again the Scale is set to 100%. That's what you want with a 4:3 clip in a 4:3 sequence or a 16:9 clip in a 16:9 sequence.

So if you're seeing that the 4:3 clip looks correct with a distort at 0 and Scale at 100% then either the 4:3 footage was actually shot 16:9 or you were shooting some abnormally thin people that now look normal when they're horizontally stretched out!

Martin Baker
[www.digital-heaven.co.uk]
Unique plug-ins and tools for Apple Pro Apps

The DVX is a 4:3 only camera. Did you shoot with an anamorphic adapter or in the camera's widescreen mode?

here is what i am seeing happen. the overlays are a bit off but you will still get the picture.

CLIP

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

"Discovery"? This is basic anamorphic 16:9 behaviour.

[www.lafcpug.org]


www.derekmok.com

Just looking at the video you posted, it looks like you have the camera set to widescreen mode. The DVX makes a widescreen image (unless you have an anamorphic adapter) by chopping off the top and bottom 60 rows of pixels so your raster is 720x360. They are still 4:3 chips.

So in a 4:3 (12:9) timeline, it appears as letterbox 16:9 image. In a 16:9 timeline, It actually stretches the 12 out to 16 while the 9 (which is actually only 6.75) remains 6.75. So you have the same black bars top and bottom.

yep thats what i thought mok and maybe i am just wowing at this.

However i never get a clip that when dragged into the TL that defaults to negutive33.33. Instead i get positive 33.33 when dragging a 4/3 clip to my 16/9 anamorphic TL.
Its the positive 33.33 that i am wondering about.

In all of the tutorials i have read they speak about negative 33.33 as the value that fcp adds ( jude and ken stone). I just never see that happen. It is always is POSITIVE 33.33.

I dont know if this has to do with the 3:2 dv format or not. I just wonder where i am getting the positive 33.33 from if the norm in judes or kens workflow is negative 33.33.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

by the way i have no anamorphic adaptor. its 16/9 squeeze.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Stop calling me "Mok". I'm not your damned waiter. I've had enough of this crap.


www.derekmok.com

i dont see where in this post i called you mok. and i have no idea how mok and waiter relates.
I know i have in previous post and i didnt know it bothered you at all. WOW

are we cool derek?

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

mei wen ti

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

J.Corbett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> yep thats what i thought mok and maybe i am just
> wowing at this.
>

That's where.


www.shanerosseditor.com

Listen to THE EDIT BAY Podcast on iTunes
[itunes.apple.com]

u are correct. well i am calling him derek from now on.

shane, do you know where i am getting the positive 33.33 from rather than the negative i have seen in tutorials.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Nope. If I did I would have commented.


www.shanerosseditor.com

Listen to THE EDIT BAY Podcast on iTunes
[itunes.apple.com]

Quote

derekmok Wrote:

Stop calling me "Mok". I'm not your damned waiter. I've had enough of this crap.

When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

Anamorphic clip in non-anamorphic timeline = -33.33 Distort - Aspect Ratio. (Letterbox crunch)

Non-anamorphic clip in anamorphic timeline = 33.33 Distort - Aspect Ratio. (Add scale-up to match true anamorphic clips)


www.derekmok.com

Thanx derek, It makes perfect since. I know there was some rule to this.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"