Comments

farss wrote on 11/17/2007, 7:14 AM
If I take Vegas's 16:9 PAL screen size of 1049x576 I get 1.82:1, pretty close to your figures. However that's the whole of the frame including what I think is called ' picture essential' which might not be meant to have vision in it. If I downconvert HDV to SD I get two small black bars on this side which seems to agree with that theory.
The academy "16:9" or widscreen frame is 1.85:1 so these numbers are kind of rubbery.

Bob.
Chienworks wrote on 11/17/2007, 7:17 AM
Yep, it would seem.

Just a tad annoying as all the programming tweaks i did for DV widescreen have to be redone for HD. Oh well, at least 99.999999% of the work is done by the computer, not by me.
Spot|DSE wrote on 11/17/2007, 7:55 AM
Given that 1.67, 1.77, 1.85, 2.20, 2.35 are all "widescreen" vs considering 16 units wide for each 9 units high...it's very rubbery.
You might want to Google "Kerns Powers" for some insight if you're truly curious.
kkolbo wrote on 11/17/2007, 10:02 AM
No doubt there is some fudge factor in it, but don't forget that you have to throw pixel aspect ratio into the equation. You can not calculate it like the values are square pixels, they are not. If they were, then 7210 x 480 would not be 4:3. ...

There is math involved and engineering choices made; mostly by folks smarter than me. I just learned to accept the fact that the item with the larger mass has the most gravitation pull, but smaller women tend to attract more men and fat ol' men like me actually repel. It just makes my brain hurt. I think I will go lie awake and contemplate if there is a doG.
mark-woollard wrote on 11/17/2007, 10:47 AM
>>I think I will go lie awake and contemplate if there is a doG.

Ah yes, the agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac.
teaktart wrote on 11/17/2007, 11:20 AM
I think I'll go say a prayer to my Dog right now....
farss wrote on 11/17/2007, 3:34 PM
For a trip down memory lane and a bit of interesting technical stuff checkout the American Widescreen Cinema.

Bob.