PDA

View Full Version : 2 Cam Mix - 1 Cam 4:3 + 1 Cam 16:9


bosscheech
2009-07-04, 02:47 AM
I'm doing a 2-cam mix, consisting of my master which is 4:3 and another filmers' which is 16:9. Would it be better to render the mix to 4:3 or 16:9? I've rendered a show I shot in 16:9 to 4:3 unintentionally, and it didn't turn out bad. Not sure if 16:9 to 4:3 is better or vice versa.

Also, my source (4:3) is filmed from further away than the other source, if that makes a differece. Any info/opinions are welcome and appreciated. Thanks

xjsb125
2009-07-04, 06:52 AM
What program are you using to edit the videos?

AAR.oner
2009-07-04, 08:43 AM
i would probly crop the 4:3 to 16:9 and render the whole thing as a 16:9 video

neither way is particularly "better", its more whether you want to crop the top/bottom of one source or the sides of the other source

ROACHVILLE
2009-07-04, 06:32 PM
never stretch 4x3 to 16x9 it looks horrible and will never match. crop the left and right side iof the 16x9 and you will have a nice match with the 4x3....

AAR.oner
2009-07-04, 08:57 PM
i didn't say stretch, CROP the 4:3 to 16:9...if using a decent cam/filters, you won't know the difference

bosscheech
2009-07-04, 08:58 PM
never stretch 4x3 to 16x9 it looks horrible and will never match. crop the left and right side iof the 16x9 and you will have a nice match with the 4x3....

Yes I'm planning on doing that. I've asked a bunch of people and several of them have said that. I'm sure that'll look good. If not I'll just do a short 2-3 minute long "test-mix" to see how 16:9 to 4:3 would look.

Silver Stallion DVDs
2009-07-04, 11:20 PM
I've done some of these projects and have always opted to crop the 16:9 footage to 4:3. Unless the person shooting the 4:3 footage is thinking in terms of it being cropped for 16:9, I think the chances of getting some nice footage are reduced considerably. However, you can usually still get nice footage from 16:9 footage that's cropped to 4:3. And of course, you have the option of sliding the crop box left and right.

YMMV

saltman
2009-07-07, 05:16 PM
I would crop the 4:3 to 16:9. You can also slide the cropped area this way to find the sweet spot. Why make a video that is going to look horrible on an HDTV? Trust me, if you make it 4:3 you are going to regret it in the future if not immediately.

DanielG
2009-07-08, 12:43 PM
Depending on how the 4:3 video is shot, if you crop it to 16:9 you might get heads chopped off...

I was just watching Michael Jackson - Live in Bucharest on tv tonight. It was shot in 1992 and in 4:3. Some idiot decided to convert it to 16:9 by cropping the top and bottom off the video. The picture quality looked poor and often you'd see Michael dancing without a head. lol.

Anyway, there's no correct answer - just personal preferences. You're in a good position as you have 2 angles, so you can always switch to the other camera if one shot is negatively affected by a crop.

AAR.oner
2009-07-08, 09:42 PM
^^they obviously didn't know what they were doin, since you can adjust the crop upwards & downwards [and use keyframes so its constantly changing] giving you the best frame lines


but like you said, there is no right answer -- its all personal preference

Vallo
2009-07-09, 04:33 AM
Since your source (4:3) is filmed from far away, I guess you got a full stage view and so I'd crop it to 16:9 as you'd just lose audience's heads and sky (or ceiling...)

KustMichaels
2009-07-16, 06:27 AM
Last time I had this I cropped 16:9 from the 4:3, since that was the lesser loss of relevant pixels. A lot of by hand adjustments had to be made though.