PAR of Panasonic MiniDV recordings?
 

I have quite a few old MiniDV tapes which I captured as .avi files, using the camcorders the footage was originally recorded on as the deck, a Firewire cable, my old Windows 7 PC with Firewire port, and the WinDV software. As far as I understand, Firewire is the recommended method to capture MiniDV, so the files I have seem to be a good basis.

I am unsure about the exact aspect ratio, though. The recordings are PAL, so they have a resolution of 720x576. When I import the .avi files into Hybrid, it says that the pixel aspect ratio (PAR) is 16:15. So, if I convert this to square pixels, I get a resolution of 768x576, which is 4:3 exactly. That was easy enough - or so I thought.

Because now someone pointed out to me that most MiniDV camcorders from back in the day did not actually record in 1.33:1, but in 1.37:1. Therefore, the correct pixel aspect ratio would be 12:11, not 16:15 as Hybrid claims. If I convert 12:11 pixels to square pixels, I would get a resolution of 786x576.

I originally recorded the footage with two camcorders, a Panasonic NV-GS17 and a Panasonic NV-GS21. I have no idea whether they recorded with a pixel aspect ratio of 16:15 or 12:11. I searched the manual (which is available online in PDF format), but can't find any mention of pixel aspect ratio, neither under the technical specifications nor anywhere else.

Does anyone know which original pixel aspect ratio I have to assume for these MiniDV recordings?

DV back in the day had two aspect ratios, 4:3 and anamorphic 16:9 which uses the same resolution but a wider pixels, Though both are non square pixel formats. Which recordings do you have? If unsure post a short clip.

Reads like you are concerned with how the image will display.
Also reads like you believe that different camcorders used different pixel aspect ratios.
We don't know what your camcorder used, it may even not be published
DV has standard resolutions and image aspect ratios from which pixel aspect ratios can be inferred.
Analog displays were quite variable due to variations in scan vertical and horizontal adjustments.
Camera lens attachments can cause minor (and major) changes as well.

Do a test to determine what your camcorder is doing.
Video a perfect circle that fills the visible image area.
Capture/ingest that image.
Measure it on a display that allows you to determine the actual pixel coordinates of the circle top and side edges in the video (not the display's physical coordinates). Many NLEs do this.
Calculate the effective ratio; e.g., if the circle is 300 pixels high and 321 wide you have a ratio of 1.07

I really doubt any manufacturer of MiniDV camera in 1995 would have used Academy ratio of 1.375:1 established in 1932, ignoring more recent ITU-R Rec. 601 standard from 1980, which explicitly specified 720 horizontal pixels and 4:3 ratio.

Makes me wonder if I did the right thing rendering NTSC MiniDV to 720x540 when deinterlacing and creating the .mp4 in Hybrid…

Where this 540 came from?
Default DV transfer gives the following:
"Width":"720",
"Height":"480",
"PixelAspectRatio":"0.889",
"DisplayAspectRatio":"1.333"

On a side note. Why converting? What does it give?

I’m doing it because when I deinterlace (can’t really have interlaced footage outside a television) to mp4 in Hybrid, I can’t get a 4:3 flag to work consistently or at all. I know 720x540 is a correct output resolution for working with Analog deinterlacing/.mp4 conversion, so I assumed it applied here as well.

DV used two screen aspect ratios, 4:3 and 16:9 as I mentioned in my earlier post.

https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/att...1&d=1762327895

Yes, you can do that, but the consensus is to keep number of of horizontal lines and not to increase them. I.e. your output should've been 640x480 instead of 720x540.
On the other hand, this limitation is related to the actual analog TV standard, which would expect 480 lines here and there is no point to inflate your frame to 540 line as they would be reduced back to 480. :)
Obviously, nowadays this constraint is irrelevant.