Confused about pixel aspect ratio and video size

Hello,
I have edited a whole dvd full of video and exported it as MPEG-2 NTSC DV Wide - it says 720 x 480, 29.97 fps. I have brought these into Encore and am trying to make a menu but can't seem to get the menu size right. Since I chose the wide format when making the video, which aspect ratio should I use in Encore? It gives me a choice in the properties menu, but when I go to Project settings it says Codec: MPEG-2 Dimensions 720 x 480. Whenever I bring in a menu background from photoshop, it doesn't fit, and is further complicated by the pixel aspect ratio thing. I have no idea what my background size should be to make it fit properly - the templates seem to all be the 4:3 size. What size should I be using in Photoshop and which pixel aspect ratio?
Is my video codec going to cause me a problem in Encore? I assumed that most tvs nowadays are widescreen (at least not square), so I should do the video wide as well.
Thanks for any help! I am thoroughly confused.

Use a template menu from Encore's library. Then modify as you need. That way you know that it will be the right pixel size and par. You cannot made an incorrectly sized/par'd menu work by setting it to 16:9 or 4:3 in the menu properties. It must be correct, and if so, Encore will usually pick the correct setting.
The Encore project settings for DVD really have no choices: it has to be 720x480 for NTSC. There is no project setting for par. You have to create the menu correctly - just let Encore do that for you by using a template.
Was your video source widescreen? If so, then you'll be fine on your video. If not, you may need to sort that out also.

Similar Messages

Pixel Aspect Ratio and ciphering type of footage-CS6

CS6- updated 12\18\13 V-11.03
Hi All,
A few questions about:
Pixel Aspect Ratio and ciphering type of footage. Bare with me as I touch on two different aspects of what I feel are related:
1. Setting up a Comp-
Having AE decide on the correct footage being used- Via >Import footage,.(to Folder) then drag it on, or into the 'make comp icon' where AE is supposed to do a 'best guess' for the comp settings. Be it square pix or otherwise. What are the second value in brackets ? See pic
2. Interpolation-
When using two diff footage sources- If using two different source footages in a comp. Is this where I should interplolate my footage to match the existing footage and the comp settings (If I have choosen NOT to pre-comp that secondary footage?)
3. Seperating fields-
How come footage that a camera manufacturer claims to be shooting in Progressive 30 or 24p is showing up as interlaced in my comp's CP? The manual to the cam says 30p or 24p or 60i The footage was shot at 30p (for sure)
Here is a screen grab of AE's 'best guess' of that footage, showing it with an UPPER field render; indicative of HD Interlaced footage and then in the inerpolate settings - 'kinda confirming it.
Now for the way out- Render:
4. If that is in fact Interlaced and I then want to reduce the size of that 1920 footage to 66% size... Do I need to do anything in particular at this point?
For some reason I am getting an error on my end when trying to export as an AVI and reducing size to 1280
5. Is this from the Field render of interlaced challenge?
I ended up with a couple of errors and then aborted the whole file and re-imported to start over with this error. Which happend again after a redoux
So I sent it over to Prem Pro to export those MTS Files as a movie and noted AGAIN the reference to Interlaced video. "upper and lower" Prem Pro was able to use the same MTS files and export a working movie. (so those files were not corrupt BTW) Yet Note PP's output reference to that footage again as Interlaced would be...
Thanks for any clarity on those "5" questions... NC

Thanks for the details Rick.
Thanks for the insight on #1
Ref #2, You should never change the interpretation of Pixel aspect ratio on footage unless you know for a certainty that it is wrong. For example, open Photoshop or Illustrator and create a new document that is 720 X 480 pixels and AE will always interpret the image as rectangular pixels because that is a standard rectangular pixel frame size.
Unless you specifically created the image in Photoshop with rectangular pixels it is square pixels so the interpretation must be changed to avoid distortion.
--Did you mean to write:
Unless you specifically created the image in Photoshop with SQUARE pixels using a rectangle layout? I am not trying to bust your blz here, I am trying to understand the unknown. (for me)
So it may very well be AE mis-guessing the footage and the Upper first is a mistake on AE's part and I need to test it to find out? On that note...
Ref#3, Separating fields must be done right. Some 1080P footage is interpreted as having fields. This may be incorrect and if there is a question you MUST test the footage. Test the footage by making sure that the fields are being separated
How do I make sure the fields are being seperated? Does the window as in pic two from the top of my post confirm that or is there another test?
Then I do the following:
then selecting the footage in the project panel and choosing Create Composition from Selection, then opening the Composition settings, doubling the frame rate and stepping through the footage a frame at a time. If the footage is really interlaced then each of the frames will be different. (IE: 29.94 to 59.94fps) OK
If the field order is reversed then motion will be in the right direction then reverse, then go back to the right direction. ---I did not understand? Are you referring to Upper and Lower reverse? Direction, as in fwd and back in Time line? Sorry unlclear on my end...
Oh and HFR footage? HFR? High frame rate??
One last thing, Do all cameras shoot anamorphic, or could they as AE is showing my MTS files; are Square? (1.00) Pic #1
@Dave- You -
At 1080, a lot of footage is interlaced, and evidently your camera made interlaced footage
Me- How do you know? because of the 2nd pic and upper field first indication?
You-Even if you know for a fact that it was shot 30p, the camera captures the entire frame... but it records it as two fields. They give it a fancy name: Progressive Segmented Frame.
Me- Is this typical false advertisement of the sales divison of brands like not telling you what CMOS or CCD is in a cam just slapping HD 1080p on the side of the box?
You-AE will treat it as an entire frame if you interpret it as having a field order of None.
Me- Won't that be a problem mis leading AE on an interpret?
Thanks Gents for the precise details.
Best
NC

A Little question about Pixel Aspect Ratio

This doubt has been bugging me since I started edit HD formats.It's about pixel aspect ratio.
Let's supose I have received some material in HD format,for instance.But I will deliver this material in another format, DV NTSC,for instance.
The Pixel aspect ratio format of the material what I received and the way how I will deliver are different.What can I do to avoid this problem? Do I need to apply some plugin to solve this problem or when I export the final sequence Final Cut does this automatically?
thank you

The software takes care of it for you.
As long as your conversion maintains the overall aspect ratio (ie 16:9), it is irrelevant what the individual pixels are doing.
For example, if I convert DVCProHD 720p to ProRes 720p, it will look fine even though the DVCProHD started out with 960 pixels in the x dimension and the ProRes will have 1280.
x

Aspect Ratios and Video Distortion

I am trying to take a video that was recorded at 1440x1080 and shrink it down to 192x144. When I currently do that, it extremely distorts the video. How do I avoid this?

OK. Got it.
What I would do if I were you is create a sequence at that size, 192X64.
Bring your footage in and scale it down to fit in that little space. You might find that you pan around the larger frame instead of scaling it all the way down. For example, if you scaled it way down to about four times the size, you could show 1/4 of the frame, then another 1/4, then another, etc. Or, you could focus on the very best part of each frame. Kind of like zooming way in.
In this way, you will know exactly what it will look like upon export to 192X64.
This first image is actually a frame from a 1920X1080 video scaled down to fit the forum software requirements, The second image is what might look good on the matrix board.
Now, it doesn't look bad on my monitor, but how it will look on the scoreboard is something you will have to decide.
Keep in mind that with a ratio of 3 to 1, you really want to shoot your video very carefully to make the interesting parts a lot wider than they are tall. Shooting basketball players.... Well.... They better be laying on the court.

Has anyone else encountered a problem with poster frames not recognising a video's pixel aspect ratio

I'm discovering a strange effect with some of the .mp4 videos I've upload into iBooks Author. They're Pal SD 4:3 .movs with a 16:9 pixel aspect ratio and they play out fine on the iPad. However the iBooks software seems to be ignoring the pixel aspect ratio of the poster frame. This leads to the situation.
1) When I drag my video into iBooks author all looks good - the video is 16:9 and if I choose to set a poster frame (or leave it at default) it looks 16:9 in the iBooks Author.
2) I preview my book and it opens in iBooks on the iPad. But now the poster frame aspect ratio is 4:3
3) I click on the video to start playing and it immediately jumps to 16:9 aspect ratio and plays out fine.
4) If it scroll down a couple of pages and then scroll back the video poster frame has now reset itself to 4:3
This sounds like a bug to me. Anyone else had it? Do you know if it's possible to report bugs without having a Developer licence?
Thanks for any help
Rob

While there is no formal bug reporting method similar to what devs have w/apps, iBA does have a 'Provide iBooks Author Feedback' menu item.

Urgent MPEG2 question (pixel aspect ratio)

Is a composition that is set as a D1/DV NTSC Pixel Aspect Ratio (0.91) able to be exported as a MPEG2 file?
I have a very large, very complicated project file with a D1/DV NTSC Pixel Aspect Ratio and I'm trying to save it as a MPEG2 file type because it has the best compression for the quality and need the file sizes to be small. However when I go to the MPEG2 Format Options when exporting, it only has Standard 4:3 (0.80), Square Pixel (1.00), Widescreen 16:9 (1.067), and Widescreen 2.21:1 (1.326).
Is there way I can have this project in MPEG2 format and not have letterboxing, stretching or cropping?
Thank you,

What version of AE are you using?
What are your composition's dimensions? Did you use the NTSC DV composition preset?
First off, if file size is your only concern, then you should encode to h.264, not mpeg2.
Mpeg2 is mainly used for DVD production. H.264 is a much more advanced codec for the sake of making a good-looking & small file.
If playback is computer-based (not DVD), you'll probably want to nest your D1/DV comp inside a square pixel equivalent, and then render that file to a Quicktime (Animation codec @ best/full quality). Then, use Adobe Media Encoder, or your encoding software of choice, to make the compressed (h.264) version.
That being said, and if you are going to mpeg2 for DVD, then how are you going about encoding the file out of AE?
You should be selecting the "MPEG2 DVD" output module.
Keep in mind, that, if you are going to DVD, a better procedure (to provide maximum quality) would be to render to the Animation codec first, and then compress (2-pass VBR encode) that prerenderd movie to mpeg2.

CS5 Pixel Aspect Ratio Problems...

Hello All,
I am working on porting over an existing .mov file importer from Windows to Mac while also upgrading it from CS4 to CS5 (and also rolling in the creation of a hand-written 64-Bit QuickTime file handling library to boot, ouch).
In my current test bed I am having problems with certain 1920 x 1080 .mov files. Some 1920x1080 files that I have get imported properly, some files that I have get imported with the wrong aspect ratio. I have verified that both files should be displayed using square pixels and have also verified that when the selector is sent that calls SDKGetInfo8( ) that I am setting the following for **all** of the above-mentioned test files:
SDKFileInfo8->vidInfo.pixelAspectNum = 1
SDKFileInfo8->vidInfo.pixelAspectDen = 1
I have stepped line-by-line through SDKGetInfo8( ) and the stretched and non stretched clips seem to yield exact same traces through this function. However, the files that are being imported with the wrong aspect ratio, of course, preview in a stretched format. Also, in the informational area of the Source Bin, when the *stretched* clips are selected the information that is provided for these clips is:
NameOfTheStretchedClip.mov
Video, 1920 x 1080 (1.7778)
00:00:9:13, 23.976 fps
etc…
For the clips that aren't stretched, the (1.7778) is (1.0). I am not the biggest expert on the actual usage of Premiere, so I can only assume given the values displayed and the respective visual result of the clips when previewed that this value displayed in the UI is the pixel aspect ratio and not the frame ratio as the clip with (1.7778) is stretched and the clip with (1.0) is not, yet both are 1920x1080 clips. What to me is suspect is that 1920/1080.0 is 1.7778 and so somewhere for the clips that are being stretched the pixelAspect ratio values seem to be getting derived using the pixel dimensions and not the values vidInfo.pixelAspectNum and vidInfo.pixelAspectDen that are explicitly set to '1' as shown above.
Thus my question is, aside from setting in SDKGetInfo8() the following values:
SDKFileInfo8->vidInfo.pixelAspectNum = 1
SDKFileInfo8->vidInfo.pixelAspectDen = 1
Where else are the pixelAspect values supposed to get set?
Alternatively:
- During which other selector calls *CAN* pixel aspect ratio get set? As I mentioned, I am porting existing code, so perhaps these values are getting set elsewhere that I am presently unable to find.
- Is there some setting that might get set at the import of a file that says to derive the pixel aspect ratio from the pixel dimensions that might be getting triggered for the clips that are being imported as being stretched?
Thanks in advance for any help!
Josh

Hi Zac,
I am taking a look at this issue further with the aid of an additional engineer here that has more experience with QuickTime files.
First off, upon viewing the XMP metadata of the stretched file in the Metadata Viewer available inside Premiere, the Video Pixel Format is, in fact, listed in the XMP metadata as 1.78.
However, the time signature on the stretched .mov file, as listed in information of the QuickTime atoms, was 23976 / 1000. On a whim we used Dumpster to change the time signature to 24000 / 1001 to see what would happen. After altering the time signature in the Atoms of the file in this fashion, in Premiere the aspect ratio is now shown to be (1.0) in the source information in the Source Bin and the video is imported in the proper unstretched format (or - better stated - played back via our PlayMod in the proper unstretched format). However when viewing the metadata in the Metadata Browser in Premiere, the "Video Pixel Aspect Ratio" is still showing 1.78. This seems to confuse the issue further as now this time signature alteration in the Atoms of the QT file has fixed something and is now seemingly overriding the order of operations you mentioned as the XMP metadata still seems to list an improper format, yet everything else is seemingly behaving fine.
BTW - Clips with other time signatures don't seem to have this problem.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
Josh

Really bad text quality,photoshop, is it pixel aspect ratio?

when doing dvd's i often use psd files for menus or title boards, quite often at 16x9, now the problem lies with the quality of the text in photoshop and when transferred to dvdsp. In photoshop with a 1024 x 576 sq pixel canvas the text looks crisp and sharp, however when transferred to dvdsp the text feels like it has gone through a verticle interlace, each letter is chopped up and shifted stretched and compressed. Going back to photoshop and making a 720x 576 comp with a widescreen pixel aspect ratio seems to do the same thing but this time in photoshop aswell. The text quality problem is not the usual dvd compression issue that is frequently discussed on these boards where text looks fuzzy, this looks much worse than fuzzy or jpeggy
Is there a standard, a combination of aspect ratio and canvas size in both photoshop and dvdsp? It is really frustrating.
Thanks in advance
Henry

My issue is particular to the crossover between photoshop and dvdsp, it may also be particular to pal dvd's and relating to the pixel aspect ratio, if you try and create a 720 x 576 document in photoshop with widescreen aspect ratio turned on and try adding text you will notice the issue. This also crosses over into dvdsp no matter what i do unless the image uses square pixels in p/shop the text is awful. I was really wondering if anyone else had found a combination of setups that avoid this wierd occurance in both programs.
The issue is not the standard 'my font looks bad on an apple display' issue which is often discussed on this forum, i understand that apple display resolutions are so far superior to standard def tv's that it is impossible to compare. The typesize on these projects are 24pt bold sans serif so well above the 18pt generally accepted standard and the canvas size is pixel perfect for pal resolution no images have been reduced or enlarged. The font looks almost illegible rather than just fuzzy.

Exporting 1080i, Pixel Aspect Ratio Problems

Hello everyone,
I've been dealing with a lot of different format projects recently: SD, HDV 720-24P, and HDV 108050i.
For now, these projects are intended for internet delivery. I've not had too much problem exporting the SD and HDV 720-24P projects, but the HDV 108050i has been very frustrating.
When I export SD and HDV 720 in compressor, I set the pixel aspect ratios to NTSC and square, respectively. But when I try to set the pixel aspect ratio for the 1080i to "1080i 16:9" (which I believe is 1.333:1), it rejects my choice, choosing "default" instead. When compressor finishes exporting, my 1080i movie looks very squished horizontally.
The only success I have had is in exporting via Quicktime conversion, where I duplicate my compressor settings, but do nothing to the pixel aspect ratio (since there is no option to change it in quicktime, it seems). The movies I have exported with Quicktime have been fine. I don't know if it makes a difference, but when I try to export these 1080i clips, I am in the proper 1080i "easy setup."
I know almost nothing about this pixel aspect ratio business, but I believe it is the cause of my problems (since I am using the proper 16:9 aspect ratio for movie width x height).
My Questions:
1. If I am understanding the problem correctly, how do I get compressor to acknowledge the right pixel aspect ratio for my 1080i footage, rather than the incorrect "default"?
2. If am not understanding the problem correctly, what might be going on?
3. Can anyone point me to a useful resource about pixel aspect ratios? I've been searching the forums and online, and I thought I was getting a grip on things but it seems I am still way over my head. For example, what is the significance in Final Cut Pro of changing your viewer or canvas to not show square pixels? Do you need to format for square vs. non-square depending on the final delivery destination (not the source format)?
Thanks!
Message was edited by: Haberdasher

Sorry to bump, but any ideas?

How do you export a Pixel Aspect Ratio Corrected Image? (CS5)

I have a still pulled from Premiere Pro CS5, but it's in DVCPRO HD Pixel Aspect (960x720) I pulled it up in photoshop, which corrects it for preview purposes, but I want to export the corrected (1280x720) Image... The only way I've found so far is to create a new document with the corrected Aspect and drag the image to it, then export it... BUT I have a bunch of images to pull from these videos, is there a simpler way?
Thanks,
Aza

Aza,
There are two "Aspect Ratios" with many Video Images.
First, one has the Aspect Ratio of the Image - what you listedwith the 960 x 720. That is the width (in pixels) and the height (in pixels).
Then, there is the Pixel Aspect Ratio. Many Video Images do not use Square Pixels (PAR = 1.0), but instead a Pixel Aspect Ratio. This will be something like PAR = 1.212 (SD Widescreen), PAR = 0.9 (SD Standard), etc..
With a non-Square PAR, PS will display the Image with Square Pixels, as the computer uses Square Pixels.It will then warn you, that the display is in Square Pixels.
What is the PAR, that you wish to use? This can be altered via Image>Pixel Aspect Ratio, and PS will honor that, if you Save_As PSD, TGA, and several other formats, that support non-Square Pixels. What format do you need?
Good luck,
Hunt
PS - For more discussion on Video PAR, this ARTICLE should be useful.

HD frame sizes and pixel aspect ratios

I have 1920 x 1080 HD footage shot on the Canon 5D Mark II and trying to add some filters to it in AE and then render as a 1280 x 720 file. None of the DVC PRO HD presets seem to get me to this frame size and when I've rendered to that frame size the renders come out distorted, indicating to me that the pixel aspect ratio is off. The DVC PRO HD preset renders a 960 x720 movie. I've been told that these will play at 1280 x 720 but am nervous about this as the work is for an event and I don't want anything to go wrong. I can't figure out how to render a movie that has the right dimensions and the right pixel aspect ratio.
One workaround seems to be to render at 1920 x 1080 and import it into Final Cut and make it 1280 x 720 there. But of course this is an extra step.
Any advice out there? Thanks in advance,
Loch

I don't quite follow. Feel free to define a custom composition size as you see fit. Indeed AE does not provide presets for everything, but given the plethora of possible output targets, this cannot be the goal of such an exercise. You should only use the DVCPro preset, if you plan on roundtripping without modifying the resolution, i.e. writing the modified clips back to a tape with the same specs/ via the same deck. The more interesting question here is, whether the stuff will actually be played via such a deck on the event or if it e.g. will be output from a BluRay disc via a Playstation or something. In the latter case they'd probably even prefer it to remain at the original full HD res for output via HDMI without extra conversions, as the 960x res would be of no use to them...
Mylenium

Still image pixel aspect ratio wrong in exported video (but correct in Premiere renders)

I've saved a targa still image from my footage and added it to the bin. It's properties show as follows:
Image Size: 1440 x 1080
Pixel Aspect Ratio: 1.3333
This correctly matches my sequence settings as I'm working with 1080p widescreen footage.
The image appears as expected in the Program window both before and after rendering previews. However, once I export my sequence as a video file, the still image is squashed (displaying incorrectly):
A work around would be to stretch out the still to a width of 1920 in Premiere so that the export displays it back at its normal aspect ratio - which works - but I don't understand why I should have to do this.
The other solution I found was to go to the bin and 'Modify > Interpret Footage' and although "Use Pixel Aspect Ratio from File" already shows the correct settings, to actively reset it (to the same pixel aspect ratio) with the 'Conform to' option:
This works too.
Surely a bug?
(using Premiere Pro CC)

Thanks for the quick reply. But then why does the still's properties (in my bin) show the pixel aspect ratio as 1.3333 (not square pixels, 1.0) and should it not appear incorrectly in both the preview renders and the exported video ? This seems inconsitent to me.

DV-PAL pixel aspect ratio & Quicktime confusion...

Hi all,
Hoping someone can clarify some things for me! Here's the situation...
I'm extracting some clips from a DVD, for another editor to put together a showreel. The clips are all off the telly in 4:3. I extracted the clips using MPEG Streamclip, the Quicktime Export option and the Apple DV PAL codec 720 by 576.
First question - it offers me an 'unscaled' output option of 768 by 520. Why 768? Is this something to do with Quicktime only using square pixels and DV PAL video using rectangular?
Second question - Assuming the other editor will be using Final Cut to put the showreel together, which is the most convenient picture & pixel aspect ratio to provide the clips in? I know I can change the pixel a.r. if I drop the clips into a Final Cut timeline and fiddle with the sequence settings. Is that necessary or helpful?
I'm pretty sure the DV codec is the best to use for this exercise, but any thoughts welcome...
Cheers,
Ilan

It can be very confusing. Here's a great place to start....
http://documentation.apple.com/en/finalcutpro/usermanual/index.html#chapter=70%2 6section=13

How do I control aspect ratio and pixel dimension in iMovie 10

When you created a new movie in iMovie 9 the program would ask if you wanted 4:3 or 16:9 aspect ratio and when you saved the movie it would ask about the size of the file and pixel dimensions. How do I controll these in iMovie 10?

I think they screwed up - but I have solved the problem by deleting it and reinstalling version 9.0.9 which you can get from the support at http://www.apple.com/uk/support/mac-apps/imovie/
Frankly I don't see the point of Theatre and I don't use iCloud so reverting back to a version that actually works seemed a good option!

Captivate videos - aspect ratio and skin

1. When I import video into captivate, it correctly keeps the same width and height of the source video IF I do not use the haloSkin. If I use the haloSkin (which is always visible and creates a frame around the video), the video itself shrinks to put the skin around it, but it also loses its aspect ratio and becomes squished vertically. There's no easy way to adjust the video so it uses the proper aspect ratio or even width and height without manually eyeballing it. Am I missing something?
2. Are the video skins customizable? If I wanted to do something simple like change the haloSkin to be colored black instead of white, is that possible?
Thanks,
Keith

1) The haloSkin subtracts 20 px from the width and 50 px from the height of event videos, which is not only counter-intuitive but obnoxious because it does indeed mess up the aspect ratio of your video as you noted. So a 640x480 video object with the skin applied has a video area of 620x430. Fortunately the 20 and 50 are absolute, and don't change with the size of the video object. This means that you can just add 20 to the width and 50 to the height of the video object to get your video back to the correct size. (a video object with dimensions 660x530 and the haloSkin applied has a video area of 640x480)
2) I'm unaware of any way to edit the skins.

Confused about pixel aspect ratio and video size

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for