These are standups for an SD show hence the 4x3 and SD nature of the camera's use.
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hullfish <steve4lists@...> wrote:
>
> I don't buy that. I mean I know it's CLOSE to real SD, but...
>
> The difference between square pixels and 601 pixels is .9 right? The math (720x.9) works out to slighly more than 640. And 480 is a little shy of 486.
>
> Avid used to claim 640x 480 was broadcast SD, but it's really 720x486. With 720x480 being DV and DVD.
>
> So it's CLOSE to SD, but I say it's NOT SD. The bigger question is WHY shoot 4:3 SD when you have a 16:9 camera? For the artful look of the square? :-)
>
> Steve Hullfish
> contributor: www.provideocoalition.com
> author: "The Art and Technique of Digital Color Correction"
>
> On Jan 25, 2012, at 4:38 PM, Terence Curren wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hullfish <steve4lists@> wrote:
> >
> > <<it has a 640x480 setting. So that's actually LESS than SD.>>
> >
> > Not actually. If it's square pixels that is SD.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
No comments:
Post a Comment