16:9 recording question

[backpackerx]

Ok, from what I've read there are several ways that video cameras accomplish 16:9 widescreen. Some letterbox the image during recording, some digitally compress then stretch, some do it natively.

So, what's the difference between methods? My camera (Optura 20) says it does this digitally, which I take to mean it compresses/ decompresses. What method gives you the best picture for widescreen. It seems like letterboxing etc. actually cuts down the data and thus the image quality, is that true?

Any help/explaination would be appreciated.

[backpackerx]

Anyone?

[Montego]

"True" 16:9 is accomplished only in really high-end cameras. You are right that consumer cameras that "squeeze" the picture lose resolution when played back on the TV. The Consumer camcorders that just add black bars look fine on a standard TV, but when played back on a 16:9 TV are not good, since it is still 4:3 footage.

I've been reading up on this a bit recently and there is a company called Century optics that makes an anamorphic adapter that will even fit my small 37mm filter size for my Sony camcorder(they make other sizes as well). Shooting with an adapter like this will give you full resolution. You just import your footage into your NLE as 16:9 even though you shoot at 4:3. Note that you cannot shoot the full range of your zoom lens because of vignetting, but from what I've read these adapters work well, cost is around $350. www.bhphotovideo.com sells them. You can find more info here:

http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/dv/16x9/16x9_37mm.htm

I love widescreen and I'm going to get one of these sometime this summer.

[backpackerx]

Hey, thanks for the info. I'll have to check that out.

[Philip Colmer]

The bottom line here is that without moving to High Definition, widescreen is a fudge. In order to achieve compatibility with 100% TV sets, widescreen images have to be horizontally stretched from the traditional 4:3 ratio.

So the question, really, is how best to get the squashed version.

The early camcorders did this by masking off bits from the top & bottom so that the viewfinder shows you what the widescreen image will look like. This is the cheapest solution but you are now losing quality in both directions - the image will get stretched vertically AND horizontally.

As Montego has pointed out, Century Optics do an anamorphic adapter. What this does is optically compress the image horizontally so that the full CCD is used to record the image. The downside is that the image in your camcorder's viewfinder will look squashed - it is probably something you get used to :-)

Prosumer camcorders are now starting to get CCDs capable of handling 16:9 in native resolution. Sony, for example, have got a whole batch of them and the prices are pretty reasonable.

--Philip