Steve,
480 lines of resolution is SD. The math there is that .9 ratio times 720
equals 648 but that is representative over 486 lines. 640 is the best math
for 4x3 to get 480. (640 *3 / 4 = 480). And we're talking about square
pixels, so that math works out perfectly.
The artful look of the square is the best reason I've ever heard why anyone
would shoot this way. But possibly the fear of downconversion softness is
why they shot SD for an SD spot.
good luck...
-Mark
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Steve Hullfish <steve4lists@veralith.com>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]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
No comments:
Post a Comment