Infoseite // 16:9 with Final Cut Express 1.0.1

Frage von Echolot:


Hello, I hope you can help me:
I have a NV-GS250 Panasonic camcorder of the (rather old) Software Final Cut Express 1.0.1 and an iMac Intel Core Duo.
With the camcorder, I have until now always filmed in 4:3. Now I would like once in 16:9 recording, but there is a problem:
If I were in Final Cut Express in the settings to 16:9 switch, the first of the Canvas window 4:3 in a 16:9 window converted. Even the dubbing of the camera to the computer is without problems:
zum Bild
When I finished the sequence, but then on "File / Export / Final Cut film ..." as "Final Cut film" file and export in Quicktime Player and go to display the video in 4:3, as a completely distorted:
zum Bild
Only when I use the video in Quicktime player into a 16:9 format conversion, the video is displayed properly. Missing the exported video just a "marker" so that other programs do not recognize that it is a 16:9 format?
I know no more wircklich next,

Echosounder



Antwort von ambrus:

"Sounder" wrote: When I finished the sequence, but then on "File / Export / Final Cut film ..." as "Final Cut film" file and export in Quicktime Player and go to display the video in 4:3, to be totally distorted.
Only when I use the video in Quicktime player into a 16:9 format conversion, the video is displayed properly. Missing the exported video just a "marker" so that other programs do not recognize that it is a 16:9 format?

It's all right, synonymous your conclusions, that is no reason for concern. You could of course equally synonymous with the export QT conversion.

If anything surprised me here, then no more than that the old version on an Intel Mac runs, but all the better ;-)



Antwort von PowerMac:

404ERR



Antwort von Echolot:

Hello,
First thanks for the replies.
That with the "Easy Setup" menu, I've already adjusted to 16:9, and as I said works flawlessly synonymous. Only when you export the movie will be shown in 4:3. If I with the Quicktime player will bring to 16:9, the movie looks so synonymous that should look like, it only takes a fairly long.
I will be in the future directly into Final Cut Express in a 16:9. Mov file convert.

Regards,
Echosounder



Antwort von PowerMac:

Or an inexpensive upgrade to 3.5. It is then about four times as fast. And no bugs and is more synonymous to the system / workflow integrated.



Antwort von Echolot:

Hello,
the 3.5er Vrsion I wanted to buy anyway. Can I use the version 1.0.1 on the 3.5er upgrade?
That would of course spitze, because I am only 1 / 3 of the price of the 3.5-full version would have to pay ....



Antwort von Echolot:

Hallo, hab da still a question:
Can I use Final Cut Express 3.5 on my Mac actually operate? In the description of Final Cut is that an AGP or PCI Express Quartz Extreme graphics card, or Intel chipset Grafic needed. For me, there is somehow only a ATY Radeon X1600.
My Calculator is an iMac with Intel Core Duo 20 "screen, 1GB of RAM, 250 GB hard drive and an ATI Radeon X1600 graphics card. Is Final Cut Express HD on my calculator so, or not? And can I get the old 1.0.1 - simple version with an affordable upgrade to broaden 3.5?
Questions about questions ......
MfG, echo sounder



Antwort von sk8connection:

"Sounder" wrote: Does Final Cut Express HD on my calculator so, or not?

100pro. Even Final Cut Pro 5.1 (Intel) runs on a Book G4 (PowerPC) and lubricated, in exactly the same calculator as thou hast him of course. Conversely, it would be unlikely. Tip: RAM upgrade to 2 GB.



Antwort von Pianist:

"Sounder" wrote: When I finished the sequence, but then on "File / Export / Final Cut film ..." as "Final Cut film" file and export in Quicktime Player and go to display the video in 4:3, as a completely distorted:
"Distorted" in this context is called "anamorphic" and is completely correct. This is the "true" 16:9 and the picture is only when playing zurechtgestaucht. Only then yes, you have really a winning resolution. Many television monitors and can own it, but it is synonymous with the DVD playback. When sending the broadcast in the respective processing mode, which you can see, for example s.Beginn and s.Ende a "place" or any other 16:9-broadcasts. ARD and ZDF will benefit because of their still-Pros PAL encoders.

Matthias






Antwort von Echolot:

But the video in Quicktime Player (see picture) is 4:3 and not 16:9! It looks as if the 16:9 back to a 4:3 picture is stretched.
Here again the comparison:

The Distorted Picture 4:3. That's never 16:9?:
Screenshot

Das (für mich) 16:9 Picture:

Screenshot

For me, the bottom picture in 16:9 format, the top 4:3. 16:9, it is synonymous in the Final Cut is playing, when you export it will be 4:3 (see top picture). Only when I am there in Quicktime player into a 16:9-Picture Converter, so it looks like the bottom picture. 16:9 If I have to file but then with iDVD will burn to DVD, escheint everything 4:3, so distorted. Slowly, I really do not know more next:
In Final Cut Express: 16:9
After export as mov-file *: 4:3
After conversion in Quicktime Player: 16:9
In iDVD: 4:3
When I put the whole movie with iMovie HD, everything works flawlessly .....
Is it perhaps simply that the Final Cut version 1.0.1 is just too old? It can not be that my 16:9 movie into a 16:9 format must encode (which takes incredibly long), so I consider it synonymous in 16:9, and not as distorted 4:3 can view it.
MfG, echo sounder



Antwort von Pianist:

"Sounder" wrote: The Distorted Picture 4:3. That's never 16:9?
I have it but you just said: This is an anamorphic 16:9 in a 4:3 frame. In the PAL analog world there are only 4:3. So if you 16:9 without loss of resolution will show, one grabs the 16:9-anamorphic picture in the 4:3 frame and transported it, and where is always synonymous. For example, on your home television. And then it is only there when playing flattened.

You have to be exactly you like about what you want to achieve technically: Should a 16:9 picture on a television in the best possible quality can be played or should it be reduced in the Internet? If the latter, then it must be the same course as presented and the 16:9 black bars weggecroppt be. But then you have the picture anyway greatly reduced, so that there is no resolution loss there.

Would not you just look at the corresponding Wikipedia article through to the technical basics to understand?

Matthias