Frage von Benjamin Br:
Hello!
I have an event with 2 cameras filmed.
Camera has a 4:3 aspect in the record, while the other is in 16:9 mode has.
I want to but both tracks at the intersection without the use of continuously changing aspect to have, or distortion of the image in a camera.
How can I s.geschicktesten employ ...
Are there tools to convert videos of 16:9 in 4:3? therefore a tool that virtually un the left of the right building something and then performs the 4:3 format is stretched ... (offers itself, as the camera recorded in 16:9 (Panasonic NV-GS500), a much higher resolution than the camera recorded in 4:3 (SonyMV-600i ))...
Antwort von Pianist:
Camera has a 4:3 aspect in the record, while the other is in 16:9 mode has. Why did you do that? Now you just have to try, what type of conversion you fewer quality problems. This can be seen from a distance not say.
Matthias
Antwort von thos-berlin:
I think the different format have not deliberately revealed, but through misuse and / or negligence. Is synonymous yes no preference, now mut material has to be what is available ...
Since the GS500 mE no HDV camera is, you have the 16:9 picture in the same resolution (720x576), such as the Sony camera, but in a different pixel ratio. So go when cutting the edges of left and right image information is lost, the arithmetically "stretched", so again the 720 pixels in width are available. This is then a slight blur in the horizontal (The Vertical remains so, as it is).
The necessary tools are better in cutting programs installed and read as: 2D editor or similar.
"Stand-alone tools" that I do not know.
Antwort von JMitch:
Hello!
How can I s.geschicktesten employ ...
Are there tools to convert videos of 16:9 in 4:3? therefore a tool that virtually un the left of the right building something and then performs the 4:3 format is stretched ... ... it should be possible with AviSynth:
http://avisynth.org/mediawiki/Main_Page/de
(synonymous with Slashcam times after bspscipten search)
gruß cj
Antwort von AndyZZ:
Put your project as 4:3 Project. The imported clips are obviously 4:3 properly interpreted. The imported clips 16:9 also land on the undistorted Timlin, they just stand right and left of the image edge. So you go s.rechten information and the left lost. If necessary, you can place the picture with keyframes, position, if you s.einem edge have important information that does not afford to lose.
This solution ensures a consistent quality of the image.
Second Variant:
Put a 16:9 Project s.and import the 16:9 and 4:3 clips.
16:9 is no problem. The 4:3 clips you need to enlarge unfortunately, until the right and left Clipränder your fill 16:9 Picture. This is the image information see above and below Cliprand lost, and the image quality suffers visibly.
I would decide on option 1, because the picture quality.
Antwort von Wiro:
I would decide on option 1, because the picture quality. Hello,
Andy has since quite naturally.
It is indeed not reasonably enlarge a small picture to make it big s.das adjust, but vice versa.
I understand the emerging time and again these discussions are not quite so. Avisynth, VirtualDub, and was super because everything to "help tool" is always listed. Every sensible editing program recognizes and interprets the different format and auto correct it properly synonymous. You need no auxiliary tools.
Gruss Wiro
Antwort von Peter06:
I think it is because it is suspected that the auxiliary Tolls provide a better quality of conversion.
Antwort von Wiro:
;-)
This is like when you look at a Mercedes, respectively and then built the first spark by other crawling out of the box is replaced, because it believes that the make a better spark.
;-)
But it can each in its own way to be unhappy.
Gruss Wiro
