Quote:
Note: next time you will encode an anamorphic picture, tells to tmpgenc it is 16:9, and you want it 16:9 and good luck for the A/R of the output. |
Quote:
Quote:
Beside that, in the beginning of this discussion, I just questioned why we have to set the source to 4:3 (like you said). I didn't say it was wrong or write. You answered me with " :arrow: Anamorphic means 4/3". That is what I didn't agree. And as this "4/3" didn't mean the AR or the resolution, them I still not agree with that. But we are going to nowhere with this... so, as you said, the end. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You can turn the idea as you want in your mind, for tmpgenc point of view your source is 4/3. period. Quote:
|
Don't mean to heat this debate but I want to learn, you know :)
Quote:
Tmpgenc help isn't very extensive on this topic but I understand that centering on the screen an image that's alerady anamorphic will result in a correct output aspect ratio wichever the source A/R selected. Even Center (keep aspect ratio) should work as potentially needed bars would be already in place.. Of course, not shure about this.. :?: |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Note: to compare quiclkly the arrangement method, you can go in "Clip frame" (in advanced settings), in the second tab (video arrangement) you can change the method and see the impact on the preview directly. |
Quote:
Quote:
But I think you did... Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You are doing exactly what you said that I would do! :mrgreen: You set a wrong AR in the source and then you tell TMPG to ignore that setting. Try to set "keep aspect ratio" and then encode two samples... one with 16:9 and other with 4:3. Now tell me which one has the wrong aspect. |
The basic rule I use is that I always use "Full Screen", and let AviSynth feed in the correct aspect to TMPEG.
That will guarantee that TMPEG won't try to do any corrections on the source, like if you set "Full Screen (keep aspect)", etc. -kwag |
Quote:
If you do the test suggested by Muaddib, then "16:9" will have the correct aspect (and "4:3' is shrinked horizontally 8O 8O). I never saw that on whatever video editing tool I used. (I mean the horizontal steching). Muaddib is right (about tmpgenc) but the problem is that... tmpgenc does the same error than anyone that is a noob in video does : to make a confusion between 16:9 and anamorphic ! What they call "16:9" is in fact "16:9 anamorphic" (the exact word that should be used insteed of just "anamorphic"). And it was called "16:9 anamorphic" because it is not a 16:9 picture ! Anamorphic means 4:3. I can't change the definition of the word (anamorphic = "distorted image" you can check in whatever dictionnary you want). If anamorphic means 16:9, tell me in wich way it is distorted ? Edit: I wonder what they call "2.21" :? |
Quote:
Following this way o thinking of not letting TMPG do any corrections on the source, I think the best setting would really be "center" (without the "keep aspect ratio" of course). That's because if we set "Full Screen" and for some strange reason :confused: we screwed up with the script and didn't feed TMPG with the correct frame size, then TMPG will resize the source to fit the frame size we set. If we had used "center" TMPG would had not touched the source (just centered it), making it easier to detect the problem, especially if we are encoding a 4:3 fullscreen. :idea: |
Quote:
Come on... Now is the TMPG designer that screwed up the meaning of anamorphic and committed a noob error? No man, they didn't screw up with anything. That setting is doing exactly what it's supposed to do. That is setting the source aspect ratio. Just look at the name of the setting! It can't be clearer! It's called "Source aspect ratio". So here comes the million dollar question... If we agree that all anamorphic streams have a 16:9 aspect ratio... How should we set the "source aspect ratio" setting of a source that is anamorphic? Now about the "horizontal stretching" that you didn't understand... What you think TMPG was going to do if you say that you have a 4:3 aspect ratio source and you ask it to keep this aspect ratio when encoding a 16:9 frame? It was going to do exact the same job of a widescreen TV (that is 16:9) when you say you want to play a 4:3 stream and keep the right aspect... That is put black bars on the sides to preserve the 4:3 aspect. Quote:
What they call 16:9 is 16:9 aspect ratio. Quote:
Quote:
It's distorted in a way that this frame (that we know doesn't have 16:9 dimensions) need to be distorted into a 16:9 box to be viewed correctly. |
To clear this a bit up in an example of PAL:
We got physical DVD conform sizes of - 720(704)x576 - 352x576 -352x288 Lets imagine the case of 704x576. The physical size is 704x576, means finally a 4:3 (1.33:1) proportion on TV. The main question now is WHAT is inside these 704x576, means whats the content of the image? Do these 704x576 contain a full recognisable unsqueezed image content? Like this: (dont take care of the green border its the overscan area) http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/i.../2005/02/1.jpg Or do these 704x576 contain a full recognisable unsqueezed image content but with black bars? Like this: http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/i.../2005/02/2.jpg (this image IS!! 4:3 out of a letterboxing from a 16:9 origin = black bars WITHIN the 4:3 image!) All these images above do have a 4:3 aspect ratio. Why? because they are NON ANAMORPHIC, means NOT horizontally Squeezed in a significant way. So when re-encoding these, we choose as Source 4:3 and also as target 4:3 Now lets assume the case IF we got an anamorphic image within our 704x576 pixels. http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/i.../2005/02/3.jpg This is anamorphic, means horizontally squeezed, means it has to be stretched on TV (not in the encoder) by a factor of 1.333 horizontally, to obtain a perfect 1024x576 image proportion finally on a 16:9 TV/Beamer device ;) If I want to keep it that way, then I do choose in TmpgEnc as Source 16:9 and also as target 16:9, because I do keep the anamorphic 16:9 state. What do I have to do IF I want to make an anamorphic Image to bekome a 4:3 one as IF I want to safe Bitrate for example? Easy: I do choose 16:9 as source as my source is anamorphic (squeezed) and choose 4:3 as target by keeping the aspect ratio. This will result in a letterboxed 4:3, means a 16:9 image proportion within the effective 4:3 704x576 pixels: http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/i.../2005/02/3.jpg :arrow: http://www.digitalfaq.com/archives/i.../2005/02/2.jpg Conclusion: The encoder itself DOESN'T care whats within the 704x576! The encoder ONLY recognises the 704x576 as a total pixel area. If in the encoder the option 16:9 as target is choosen (no matter if CCE, TmpgEnc, mencoder, Qenc etc) THEN this means that a 16:9 flag will be set in the header of the mpeg file while encoding. WHICH causes the playback device (SAP) finally to stretch (undistort) the encoding by a factor of 1.333 horizontally finally to match the 16:9 Image area of the TV/Beamer. ... And thats what Phil meant ... Heres also some info about AspectRatios etc. http://www.incredible.de.tf/aspectratios.html |
All the problem comes from this :
Quote:
The second one is what I call a screwy stupid usage of the word "16:9" (done in tmpgenc and A LOT of noobs article) insteed of "16:9 anamorphic" or just "anamorphic". I can repeat this for ever : an anamorphic picture is not 16:9, it is 4:3 and MUST be undistort to be seen as 16:9. As Muaddib said "we know (it) doesn't have 16:9 dimensions". We... the humans. Not the computers nor the TV set. For them, as as long you do not tell them "this is a 16:9 frame", they treat and display them as 4:3 :!: |
Quote:
Quote:
People do think IF they see a movie incl. black bars on top and bottom than that this is a case of 16:9 ... and it isn't. 4:3 = NOT squeezed horizontally (non-anamorph) 16:9 = Squeezed horizontally (anamorph) And I dont know why we always do bring doubts about such facts again on top as so many threads already dealed with that where discussions and conclusions already have been made :?: :wink: |
Quote:
4:3 - 16:9 and 16:9 anamorphic are THREE different things ! Ok, I drop it, do as you want. But do not ask yourself this : "And I dont know why we always do bring doubts about such facts" The doubt is created by the usage of a single word for two different things. Note: I'm sure you know some 16:9 SAT TV broadcast channels (like new HDTV Euro1080). Are they anamorphic ?. :roll: |
In an "encoder language" (and we are talking about encoding in here) 16:9 output means a SQUEEZED image including a 16:9 Stream-Header-Flag which lets stretch or letterbox the squeezed anamorph picture by the SAP to fit CORRECT a ....
16:9 TV proportion :arrow: stretching horizontally means 1024x576px (seen digitally) or ... 4:3 TV proportion :arrow: squeezing vertically means 768x432 incl. adding black borders at top/bottom. All ---16:9--- DVB broadcastings are broadcasted in a squeezed state! The DVBviewer appl. does show that flag in the Informationspanel and de-squeeze them like a SAP. There do exist many 4:3 broadcastings (and movies seen in a whole) where a 16:9 effective moviearea was letterboxed into the 4:3 image = black borders. AND THATS the confusion! MANY MANY TV-Magazines do describe some Movies as broacasted in 16:9 but they are just 4:3 using black borders at top/bottom = a detail-fake. 16:9 regulary means a squeezed/anamorph image within the choosen resolution when encoding 4:3 means NON squeezed, so non anamorph 16:9 Letterboxed in 4:3 is a conversion-word misusage where the Image comes in effective non squeezed 4:3 incl black borders. I do think very clear that we both do mean the same thing! As I also know all your other threads and skills about that in here. :wink: |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Like the other misuse that you point just after : Quote:
When you buy a 16:9 TV set, it does not have a "squeezed" screen, it has a rectangular 16:9 screen. When you make a 16:9 screen for your projector, you do not buy a 4:3 piece of elastic material that you shrink horizontally. You buy directly a 16:9 material. 16:9 is one thing, 16:9 anamorphic is an other. And I'm sorry to continue to tell that 16:9 anamorphic is "a sort of" 4:3 picture. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
ok, if you see it like that THEN a 16:9 Stream is a squeezed Image so it fits in a 4:3 total technical image proportion like 704x576 (=768x576) ... which will be stretched finally on your 16:9 TV back to its real 1.78:1 state. But anyhow .... in mpeg encodings 16:9 means regulary squeezed/anamorph ... thats a fact ... sorry but I dont want to push it more now. Quote:
If the projector is feeded via analogue component or svideo signal, then the projector deals with 625Lines at 50hz! If the projector will be feeded via RGB VGA connection (like via PC) then the effective resolution will be directly provided to the LCD panel, like 1024x768 at 75hz. Quote:
Do set in CCE "16:9" and this means that the encoder gets the message that a squeezed picture input has to be encoded in a kept state where a 16:9 flag has to be included so the SAP "recognises" that he deals with a 16:9 anamorph input where the result is a letterboxing to 4:3 or a DIRECT squeezed deliverence to the TV set is given where the TV set stretches the signal to its 16:9 image state finally. |
(related to 1080i DVB broadcasting):
STOP! Youre right! (in case of HDTV) as the resolution of HDTV is 1920x1080i and 1280x720p So thats an "effective image of 16:9"-encoding, means the new HDTV Format. BUT all my explanations where based on the encoding techniques and defenitions of NON!-HDTV where the Output mainly is purposed for 625/50Hz devices playback at 14.769 Hz @ 52.000 = 768x576(seen digitally). HDTV Devices do not follow those known analogue Playback devices signal technique as theyre capable to show digital input directly. |
Quote:
All that because "encoders" can't speak basic english... :lol: |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
To complete there is also one more (strange?) possibility. What do I have to do IF I want to make a 4:3 fullscreen image to become a 16:9 one? Easy: I do choose 4:3 as source, as my source is fullscreen and choose 16:9 as target by keeping the aspect ratio. (<-- that is what Phil was doing setting the source as 4:3) This will result in a "letterboxed" 16:9 with black bars at the sides, means a 4:3 image proportion within the effective 16:9 image. This image still has 704x576 pixels. Do you know why? Because in the end, this frame is an anamorphic picture! That has to be finally stretch (undistort) horizontally to match the 16:9 Image area of the ws TV/Beamer. BTW, setting the encoder this way, we are also using it as an editor. We can easily do that with an AVS script and feed the encoder with the 4:3 active image proportion within the effective 16:9 anamorphic frame already edited, and encode a 16:9 to 16:9. |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.