Stills: Pixel Aspect Ratio from File is Wrong

The photo montage I'm working on is D1/DV NTSC Widescreen 16:9 (1.2121). I shoot the pix with my SONY Z5U and the raw stills are all 1440x810 72 dpi, square pixels. To conform them to my PPro project, I change their dimensions to 720x480 and I change the Pixel Aspect Ratio to D1/DV NTSC Widescreen (1.2). But when I import these stills into PPro they all appear squeezed and their aspect ratio comes up as D1/DV NTSC (09091), so I have to manually change it to D1/DV NTSC Widescreen. How can I get these stills to automatically be seen at Widescreen?

Well, the original pix are 1440x810. If I were to change just the height to 480 and Constrain Proportions, the new dimensions would be 853x480 (thereby maintaining the aspect ratio). And this IS square pixels. So changing the dimensions to 640x480 would just thin out the image.

Similar Messages

How do I change a pixel aspect ratio from HD 1920x1080 frame rate 25 to NTSC 640x480 frame rate 29.97

I upload files to a tv channel, but for them to air, they need to have a NTSC 640x480 pixel aspect ratio with a frame rate of 29.97. I currently have a .mov file HD 1920x180 frame rate 25. I deleted the original unedited files so all I have is the .mov file. I need to make my file NTSC 640x408 frame rate 29.97
Thanks please answer ASAP

If you aren't entirely happy with the image quality you get from this in FCP. consider buying Compressor ($49). Down-converting from HD to SD often introduces artifacts. Compressor has a resize filter that does a good job of minimizing those artifacts.
Russ

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.

The (new) Premiere pixel aspect ratio is wrong for my PAL DV cam footage

I've had a Sony TRV-950E DV-cam since 2003. I've been shooting DV PAL in widescreen.
I just bought Elements 12 to edit my footage, and discovered that the pixel aspect ratio for D1/DV PAL Widescreen has been updated to 1.46 (old value 1.42).
The theory behind this change is that video recorded on 720x576 is slightly wider than 16:9 and that the 16:9 portion is 704x576.
Unfortunately this is not correct for my footage! I've captured the video from my DV-cam (by firewire) and opened it in Premere and it is streched to be shown as 1050x576.
So I did a test:
I filmed a steady shot of a perfect circle and captured the video from the camera and opened it in Premiere. The pixel ascpect ratio 1.46 makes the display 1050x576.
The question is: Am I seeing this displayed as a perfect circle now?
This can be tested:
I make a picture of a perfect circle in Photoshop (square pixels) with size 1024x576. I imported this picture into the Premiere project, and match the two circles: The filmed one, and the Photoshop one.
They DO NOT match! The one on the video is slightly stretched in width.
So then I stretch the Photoshop picture in width to become 1050x576. I then import this picture into the project. And now I have a perfect match between the circles!
This means that my DV camera actually records a 100% 16:9 picture on all the pixels 720x576 - and not a slightly wider picture with the 16:9 part being in 704x576 (which is the reason for the change in pixel aspect ratio from 1.42 to 1.46).
I have some HD scenes that I want to import (and downscale) into my SD project also, and I also have a lot of still pictures.
Unless I can change the setup i Elements to the correct ratio 1.42, these stills and sqare-pixel-video (HD) should ideally be streched from 1024x576 to 1050x576 to match (become equally stretched as) all the SD footage.
How do I solve this?
I just bought Elements 12 three days ago.
(I just tried opening the captured video in Windows Movie Maker - and that program must use pixel aspect ratio 1.42 since the video is diplayed correctly as 1024x576 with a perfect circle)
Regards,
Tom from Norway

Tom
After much thought and exploration and experimentation, I have come to the conclusion that there is no practical purpose for doing anything other than importing your media into the project and editing/exporting. I find no distortion in doing so, be it in the video samples that you posted or in still models that I created for the pixel aspect ratio 1.422 vs 1.4587 for D1/DV PAL Widescreen.
If you have not already, please read the following about the Adobe DV Widescreen Pixel Aspect Ratio change from 1.422 to 1.456.
Please start in the first link which gives some get subsequent links in it
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/673877
http://www.mikeafford.com/blog/2009/03/pal-d1-dv-widescreen-square-pixel-settings-in-after -effects-cs4-vs-cs3/
Also, you may find the following article on square and non square pixels of interest. It uses the PAL DV Widescreen 1.422 pixel aspect ratio in its discussion.
http://library.creativecow.net/articles/gerard_rick/pixel_madness.php
Aside from the explanation for the rights and wrongs of the matter, this is what I actually observed taking your PAL DV AVI Widescreen and PAL MPEG2.mpg Widescreen into the same Premiere Elements 12 Windows PAL DV Widescreen project. Along with your video files were still images that I created in Photoshop Elements 11 Full Editor:
1024 x 576 document with a red circle on Layer 2 of the Layers Palette
1050 x 576 document with a red circle on Layer 1 of the Layers Palette.
The red circles were superimposed in creation. The difference in the pixel dimensions between the two are evidenced by Layer 1 content peaking through on the left and right.
The gpsot readout for pixel aspect ratio for each of the videos was
a. Your PAL DV AVI 720 x 576 Widescreen = 1.422
b. Your PAL MPEG2.mpg 720 x 576 Widescreen = 1.422
Each of the Photoshop Elements documents (circles) saved as .psd files 1050 x 576 pixels.
When all were taken into Premiere Elements 12 project manually set for PAL DV Widescreen, they looked like the following, no display of distortion.......
PAL DV AVI Widescreen 720 x 576 (now the pixel aspect ratio in Premiere Elements Properties was shown as 1.4587, not the 1.422 seen in gspot before import)
PAL MPEG2.mpg Widescreen 720 x 576 (now the pixel aspect ratio in Premiere Elements 12 Properties was shown as 1.4587, not the 1.422 seen in gspot before import)
Edit Menu/Preferences/General with check mark next to "Default Scale to Frame Size" was in effect.
As for the red circles stills (1050 x 576 to equate to the square pixel version of 720 x 576 widescreen) did not distort when brought into the Premiere Elements 12 Edit area monitor which is established by the PAL DV Widescreen project preset with the pixel aspect ratio = 1.4587.
The jpg version of the Photoshop Elements document (.psd) 1050 x 576 pixels (square pixels) looked like:
And, when this Timeline was exported Publish+Share/Computer/AVI with the DV PAL Widescreen preset, there was no distortion in the export. It looked undistorted as it did before export.
So, unless I am overlooking a key point here, I cannot see a reason why you cannot use the video sources that you presented for sampling as weil as stills with the 1050 x 576 pixel dimensions.
The only time I see any distortion possibilities is if you use a player that does not recognize the 16:9 flag that stretches the 720 x 576 to 1050 x 576 for display after encoding.
Trying to convert Premiere Elements 12 which uses the 1.4587 pixel aspect ratio for PAL DV Widescreen into a Premiere Elements 7 which uses the 1.422 pixel aspect ratio for PAL DV Widescreen is up hill in spite of creative thinking on your side.
Please review and let me know if you are seeing another different from what I am reporting with the samples that you posted.
Thank you.
ATR

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

Pixel Aspect Ratio Discrepancy

My first project after being upgraded to CS4 (with Matrox Axio) was supposed to be very simple and wasn't. A :10 sponsorship billboard with animated background we always use (avi), client supplied logo (tga), and announcer audio track (wav). Set up the project/sequence to be D1/DV 0.9, just like always. Targa file was also 0.9. So far everything is normal. Then rep decides they want a plain blue background instead of the animated one, and would like to add a phone super. Made a solid blue background in the title generator, again 0.9, and when I put it on the timeline, I could no longer see video. Even if I dbl clicked on it, I couldn't see either background or logo in the source monitor. In case the title generator didn't like making a color solid, I re-made the graphic in Photoshop, again 0.9 tga, created a new project from scratch, imported my sources and when I put the background on the bottom track, again I couldn't see any video. I changed the pixel aspect ratio of the tga background to square pixels, put it on the timeline and that worked. I could see the logo again. So I made the phone super in the title generator and thought okay...square pixels. Brought the title graphic onto the timeline, and couldn't see any video. Changed the title graphic back to 0.9, brought it back onto the timeline, and it worked. So I had a background targa graphic in square pixels, a logo targa graphic in 0.9 and a title graphic in 0.9. One more thing that was a new experience for me was that a box popped up that said I needed to scrub through the sequence before it would play in real time. So I did, and it played. Can anyone share with me some logic to this discrepancy? Thanks.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that Adobe changed the PAL pixel aspect ratio from CS3 to CS4?
I've fallen foul of this a couple of time.
There's some information here:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/AfterEffects/9.0/WS3878526689cb91655866c1103906c6dea-7f3aa.htm l
about halfway down the page
and more here:
http://blogs.adobe.com/toddkopriva/2009/07/pixel_aspect_ratios_in_after_e.html
which has some useful links.
Although they're mostly talking about After Effects, this applies equally to Premiere CS4.
HTH
Mark

Changing Pixel Aspect Ratio with Aperture

i was wondering if aperture has a way of changing the pixel aspect ratio from square to DI/DV NTSC or HDV. so far i am using photoshop to do that but would love to do it inside aperture.

Not that I'm aware of. Pixels are pixels to Aperture. You could always crop your images to the right aspect ratio.
If you're looking to burn photos to DVD perhaps iDVD or DVD Studio Pro could resize your images to the proper size.

Export Frame - Pixel Aspect Ratio

The video in my timeline is 720 by 480 (1.2121). When I clip on "Export Frame" in the program window it exports a jpg that is 720 by 480 (0.9091)
I know I can right click on it and "modify - Interpret footage" and correct the pixel aspect ratio.
My question is "Why is it doing this and how can I correct it"?
Is their a setting I'm missing? Why does it change the pixel aspect ratio?

The jpeg is not square. The pixel aspect ratio would be 1 and not .9091, if it were.
I have two computers. On one the "Export Frame" exports the jpeg with the same pixel aspect ratio.
The other machine changes the pixel aspect ratio from 1.2121 to .9091.
I can't find any differences in my settings.

DVCPRO HD 720P: pixel aspect ratios with still images from Final Cut

I am currently trying to get still images from a trailer I am working on with Final cut pro. The footage is DVCPRO HD 720P 24pn and the interlacing and pixel aspect ratios have been giving me a lot of trouble in photoshop. I am able to convert the PAR but it is for preview purposes only...? I need the file to be saved with the converted PAR. How do you do that???
Also, the de-interlacing filter on photoshop doesn't seem to help the quality of the photo.
Anyone have any ideas?
I have searched and searched and only found somewhat related questions, so maybe I am the only one trying to do this...

Why are you doing interlace if you have 720p?

AME Export from HDV source: Pixel aspect ratio squeezed in Queue; ok in direct export.

I have some existing HDV footage that was converted to Cineform codec (CFHD) in an .avi file that I need to export. My target requires Windows media format (.wmv Window Media video 9).
My output settings are the following:
640x480, square pixels, 29.97, lower, VBR, 2 pass unconstrained, 800 kbps.
When I export these files in a sequence directly from Premiere Pro CC (Export button), the pixel aspect ratio looks correct. (It looks ok in Premiere and in the Premiere Export window, too.)
When I export using the Queue button in Premiere to AME CC, the video renders out squeezed, as if the aspect ratio is ignored.
I can also see the squeezed video in the AME preview window when the file is rendering.
This worked OK previously in Premiere 5.5.
Is there a setting that controls this and allows normal rendering from the Queue?
Using the Queue is much preferred to avoid bottlenecks in workflow.
System: Windows 7 enterprise 64 bit, Lenovo W510, Core i7, 16GB ram.
Nvidia Quadro FX 880M
Premiere Pro CC: 7.2.1(4)
Adobe Media Encoder: 7.2.0.43 (64-bit)
Not sure if I am using the Mercury Playback Engine GPU Acceleration.
Thanks.

I'm using CC, updated today. (see system info at top).
I'm starting to wonder if the codec info is not read correctly when using the Queue (Cineform codec). I took your suggestions and created a new sequence with one clip and used the same settings. I opened the export settings window in two separate ways:
Export settings in Premiere (Ctrl M). All is good in the Source tab. PAR is interpreted correctly:
I sent the export to the queue, and from the job in AME clicked the "Custom" link to retrieve the same settings window.
However, the Source video PAR is not interpreted correctly:
This must be related to why the render from the AME queue is not correct.

Problem with pixel aspect ratio

I searched but found no answer.
I have several Maya renders which are at a resolution of 720x486 and a pixel aspect ratio of 1.2. I composited my image sequences in after effects interpreting that 1.2 pixel aspect ratio. I then exported a quicktime movie using no compression at 24fps at a resolution of 720x480 NTSC 16:9.
When I import this video into Encore 2.0 It comes out as full screen. Not only is it full screen, but when I preview the dvd, the video is blurry with scan lines and black bars on the left and right side. The menu however, is widescreen (I used a template as a test)and perfectly clear. I tried to select the asset and go to file>interpret footage, but this option is grayed out. I have also tried exporting an avi from after effects and importing that into Encore. It still will not let me set the pixel aspect ratio. I have read that After Effects does not embed the pixel aspect into exported videos. I have also read that I should export mpeg2 videos for use in Encore, however I do not see this option in After effects or Premiere Pro.
What am I doing wrong? Any help is appreciated. If I left any information out that could be useful, please let me know.

(Ack, for some reason I typed "DVI" and really meant "DV")
Thanks for the response. I don't really care if I preserve the 4:3 aspect ratio. Or does my GL1 not use square pixels and I just never noticed it? It's strange I've never seen this problem until FCE HD.
I have tried exporting a number of ways from FCE, including Export > QuickTime Movie... and Using QuickTime Conversion... For the latter, I typically set it to export as 720x480. I always export as video. The final export contains video clips as well as still images within the video.
I am a bit embarrassed having to ask this question. I've been working with still images in photoshop for over a decade and worked a lot with video during that time as well.
Thanks again.

Premiere exports in incorrect pixel aspect ratio

My Panasonic camera shoots quicktime .mov JPEG videos in a 720X408 px resolution. I am having a very hard time editing them in Premiere, because I cannot get it to export them in a correct pixel aspect ratio.
Maybe you can figure out what I'm doing wrong. Here's what I do.
First, when opening a new project, the closest frame size I can choose is 720x480. So I choose that. I import the .mov file into it, and put it on the time line. At that point it looks like this:
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/812/premierewindowoc9.jpg
Correct aspect ratio and no deformation.
When I try to export it as a .mov file, I do the following: I click on settings (in the file save dialogue), and go to video settings. I can choose any pixel aspect ratio, it all produces the same results, but for example, let's say, DVCPRO (1.5) (that's the closest to the size I need).
I can manually set my frame size to be 720x408 px, assuming that now the frame size will be exactly the same size as my video and no deformation will occur.
However, the result I get is this:
http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/6730/exportedmoviehl5.jpg
I've drawn arrows on that to make it clearer. So, I have a movie that's 720x408px. Premiere exports a frame sized 720x408, but then for some strange reason shrinks the actual video down to 483x480!!??!! Leaving completely unnecessary black bars on the sides.
Why does it do this?
When I export it with frame size 720x480, it doesn't add black lines on top and bottom as you'd expect. It does exactly the same thing you see in the image above.
I have tried many other combinations too. I have tried exporting it as every other available pixel aspect ratio, also as an avi file, nothing makes any difference. It always shrinks the original video in width, and adds black bars to the left and right.
What am I doing wrong??

Tina,
Lets see if we can get kitty onto YouTube.
There are four issues, that you will need to overcome:
1.) Project Preset to begin. Stanley lists the possible choices in post #8, based on the specs of your camera. You will have to determine which of these you used to record the files. These are *probably* set in your cameras menu area, and if you have not changed them, are probably still set. That will get you started in the right direction - but wait, theres more...
2.) It seems that your camera uses Motion-JPG as the encoder to create these files. There are at least two good Motion-JPG CODECs available, Lead and Morgan. Plus, your camera may well have come with its own Motion-JPG CODEC. The CODEC is what allows your camera to encode/compress the video data, and also what allows programs like Premiere to decode that data. Did your camera come with a CD/DVD with software on it? If so, the installation of that software *should* install any proprietary CODECs to your system. Now, if this was the case (or soon will be the case, when you locate that CD/DVD), Premiere *possibly* will be able to use that CODEC to handle the footage from your camera. If it does not, then it is *possibly* only a matter of purchasing, downloading and installing one of the two mentioned Motion-JPG CODECs. Both are relatively inexpensive, and Premiere *usually* can work with either, though your exact footage might not permit this. This is usually because a camera mfgr. chose to do their own thing. Thats why any disc that came with the camera is the first place to start.
3.) Now, you are in Premiere, have the proper CODEC installed on your system, and have Imported the footage into a Project with the proper Presets. If all is working, and I hope that it is, you just edit your footage.
4.) You have been working with Presets established based on your footage. That is likely not exactly what you will want to upload to YouTube. This is where Export comes into play. Unfortunately, YouTube seems to change the specs. weekly. About the time that someone publishes fool-proof details and settings for YouTube, they (YouTube) change everything. The best advice is to search as many fora, as you can for Export Settings for YouTube. Look at the dates for all articles. You really will only care about the most recent - very recent.
Going back up the list, there is another possibility. That would be to use a 3rd party conversion program to convert your footage to a DV-AVI Type II file. Often, with the proper CODEC installed, Premiere can do this internally, though not always, and even when it works, there can be problems. I use DigitalMedia Converter (Deskshare) a shareware program for most of my conversions. There are many freeware, and shareware, conversion programs available. Many get mentioned in this forum. Many get glowing reviews. Some are easier to use, than others.
Some balk at the thought of owning Premiere Pro and then having to use some 3rd party software to get their footage into a robust NLE, that they paid good money for. The fact is that Premiere Pro was designed to work primarily with DV-AVI Type II files, from mini tape cameras - the point made by several. That does not mean that it cannot work with other file types. It does, though not always without problems. Sometimes just passing the material through a conversion program will clear up all problems and no one is the wiser. I often use Premiere Elements, Pros little bitty brother, to convert some file formats, because it is more tolerant of many of these, than is Pro.
Good luck, and sorry that I do not have a current suggestion for Export to YouTube. Since it is a hot distribution medium, you should have no problem finding the correct settings for today - be sure to check the date of all articles, as the specs change all the time and in a heartbeat.
Let us know if you have any more questions. For "how things are done in Premiere," I recommend the Premiere-wikia: http://premierepro.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
for tutorials. Most that you could want to do will be there someplace. The current YouTube setting might be an exception, just because every time the Wikia gets updated, that info is out of date.
Hunt

Still Photo Aspect Ratio Confusion

Apologize for asking a question on this topic as I have been through the forum and realize the topic of aspect ratio comes up often. I have not however seen this question answered. Quick background:
-Working with HD Video footage imported as SD as I am burning non-HD dvd's and I have heard the conversion in IDVD and Toast from HD is not great;
-Using photos imported from Aperture in FCE;
-Sequence is NTSC anamorphic as I want 16:9 but without HD;
My question is about the aspect ratio of still photos when I bring them into the timeline. I have experimented with saving photos in different aspect ratios: 853x480 and 720x480. When I import into FCE the 853 shows a square pixel and the 720 shows a NTSC pixel. From what I have read this is due to the way FCE interprets the aspect ratio and assigns an pixel aspect. When I view each in the viewer they both look correct when I click the corresponding pixel aspect from the top of the viewer. It is when I move these to the timeline that I get confused. The 853 gets an adjustment of 18.52 and the 720 gets an adjustment of 33.33. What do these adjustments actually represent? Is it a percentage, a number of pixels, something else? When I read about it in the Manual it seems to state that FCE adjusts for the difference between the still and sequence, but then why does it adjust the 720 since it has the same pixel aspect as the sequence? I then tried changing the Pixel aspect of the 853 in the browser to NTSC and moving it to the timeline. I get the same 33.33 adjustment. The 33.33 does not look correct in either of them, but when I change it to 18.52 it looks correct (with the pixel aspect at square, with it not checked it looks "skinny" or squished).
Only thing I can think is that it has something to do with the anamorphic adjustment and the squeezing that goes on with it as 18.52 as 853 (widescreen) is 18.47 percent wider the 720.
At this point I am really not sure how these will display when I make a dvd and display on a widescreen tv. I would prefer not to do this by guessing or looking at the picture, but instead by understanding what FCE is doing and making sure I have the settings and adjustments correct.
Sorry for the long message, but would really appreciate any advice

Michael,
sorry to disagree, but for sure I was not clear, and the topic is quite complex. So I decided to provide an overview (as much as I can...) of the various combinations of clips inserted into various sequences with all settings - possibly on my web site (I'm afraid other posters are getting bored about all this math).
But since this is taking quite a bit of time, let me just tell you now where I disagree about your findings. When I'll have my overview completed I hope that will better explain what I mean.
_Your point 1_.
I'm pretty sure you (unwillingly) are importing your 16:9 square pixel NTSC clip into a +4:3 CCIR pixel NTSC sequence+ (not your original 16:9 anamorphic NTSC sequence). Please check your sequence settings by selecting the sequence in the browser in list view and reading the Frame Size, Pixel Aspect, and Anamorphic fields.
a. If your sequence is in fact +4:3 CCIR pixel NTSC sequence+, by applying the formulas you get:
- PARclip for +16:9 square pixel NTSC+ clip = 853/853 = 1 (as for any square pixel clip)
- but PARseq is not 1 (as you write) but 640/720 (square/actual pixels) = 0,8888
- Adjust = PARseq/PARclip = 0,8888/1 = 0,8888.
- Since Adjust is <1 Motion Aspect Ratio = - 100* (1/0,8888 -1) = -12,5 as you experienced on FCE. BTW this means that the imported clip has to be squeezed vertically by 12,5% (as opposite of horizontally).
b. If your sequence instead really is +16:9 anamorphic NTSC+ as you seem to imply, then 18,52 is correct as you confirm yourself with "Agree that in the four cases you list it agrees...": it is in fact the 2nd case in my 4 cases list.
_Your point 2_.
Here I suppose the sequence is +16:9 CCIR pixel NTSC+ which has PARseq = 853/720 = 1,1852.
But I'm not clear what you mean by "720/640 NTSC clip". My guess is that you mean a +4:3 CCIR pixel NTSC+ clip,
then PARclip = 640/720 (square/actual pixels) = 0,8888
then Adjust = PARseq/PARclip = 1,1852/0,8888 = 1,3333 and Motion Aspect Ratio = 100*(1,3333 - 1) = 33,33 as you experienced
_Adjust formula_.
I think this formula in your earlier message is incorrect: Aspect Ratio (in Motion/Distort) = - 100 * (1/Adjust-1) if Adjust ≤ 1; seems like the formula: Aspect Ratio (in Motion/Distort) = 100 * (Adjust-1) if Adjust ≥ 1 works at all times including <1 as follows 100*(.875-1)=-12.5.</div>
This not true (well it is true only for Adjust = 1...). As an example if Adjust = 0,8888 then 100*(0,5-1) = -11,12 (wrong value for this pixel adjustment), while -100*(1/0,8888-1) = -12,51 which is the correct vertical squeeze !!
Why 2 different formulas are needed ? because when Adjust is >1 a +horizontal squeeze+ by Adjust is necessary to fix the pixel aspect ratio misalignement, when Adjust is <1 a +vertical squeeze+ is necessary by 1/Adjust... (figures will help as soon as they are ready for... publishing).
I'm sorry these posts are so long, I try to make them as clear as possible, but the topic is a bit messy and, even if only fractions are involved in this math, their actual meaning is not always intuitive...I'd really appreciate any comment also by more experienced users of FCE/FCP...
Thanks
Piero

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

Pixel aspect ratio incorrectly identified in Properties

Premiere Pro/CS4 Mac
I created an animation using CInema 4D and rendered it out using 1:1/square pixels. If I open the file in QT Player, it shows up as 720 x 480 and fills the enire screen... all is well. But when I import it into PPro and look at the file in Properties, it reports it as .909 pixel aspect ratio, which is not square.
This is a problem as I want to put this onto a DVD. If I render an MPG2 file out of PPRo and set the pixel aspect ratio option to Square, the resulting file
does not fill a 720 x 480 screen; there is black on both sides.
If I use .909/standard pixel ratio, it fills the screen when I view it in QT PLayer, but I am worried that Pro is messing with the image...
I can import the same original file in AE and use the Interpret footage option to force square pixels, but that is not an option for this work. Any idea why Pro misindentifies the aspect ratio and is there any way to fix that? Or is this a total non-issue as far as any potential degradation to the file itself along the way through the workflow?
thanks for any assistance.
Dennis

You wrote:
Can you set up a Sequence/Project Preset as Desktop and choose Square Pixels? You can then Export to what you need.
Do you mean create a new project? This project is essentially finished - a few weeks of work creating it, so I can;t redo all from scratch with a new project template. I don;t think you can change a Project Preset once a project is created, correct? And PAR is not one of the settings that I can change in the project settings at this point.
I can export using SQUARE pixels, but the resulting file looks wrong when I view it in QT Player. I guess the only question now is how much damage/degradation will be done having created the original animations that make up this project using square, then bringing them all into Pro (I guess having used the wrong PAR in my preset) and rendering them out in .909.
Any thoughts?
best.d

Stills: Pixel Aspect Ratio from File is Wrong

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for