This content has been marked as final. Show 7 replies
The last time I used a Canopus system the codec reported wide screen footage as square pixels. It should make no difference as long as you're rendering to the Canopus Codec. While it's not exactly perfect, the 856 X 480 frame size is roughly the square pixel equivalent of 720 X 480 wide screen. Everything should work out just fine.
Thanks for your reply, so in your opinion there is no problem in this case and I can work on footage without any problem? But how can I import footages with their genuine specification in After Effect? There must be a way.Thanks
The Canopus CoDecs do not embed aspect ratio flags, hence the behavior is normal. You could create a custom interpretation rule if it's really crucial to you...
>But how can I import footages with their genuine specification in After Effect?
That is the actual specification for the Canopus widescreen codec.
Thanks for your help, but if it is ok why there is interlacing problem in video? I think it is a little complicated, would you please explain it more for me? What do other people do who work with Edius and After Effect? What settings should I choose for composition, should I put in on 720x480 widescreen 1.2 or I should choose different frame size? Should I go to interpret window and define new field for footage? What about export settings? I really get confused. I dont know if I should change field from Off to Lower or Upper field? And if I changed, wouldnt make problem for video output?
You should separate fields if the video is interlaced. You may either work in a square pixel comp or a rectangular pixel comp. AE will handle all PAR correction internally without problems as long as the footage is properly interpreted.
For render, if you are going back to canopus for editing you should render with the same frame size and specs as the footage. You may choose to interlace the output if you desire. I presonally haven't rendered anything as interlaced for years. I used to shoot film and I hate the look, but it's a matter of choice.
I'm not sure what you're referring to as the interlacing problem. This is the first that I've heard of that. If you mean that the footage looks interlaced in AE then that's probably the case. If you separate fields properly then there should be no interlacing problem. Interlacing has nothing to do with pixel aspect ratio.
Interlacing does have something to do with comp size if your footage is a different size vertically. For example, if you put NTSC DV footage which contains 480 scan lines (480 pixels high) in a D1 comp 486 scan lines (486 pixels high) and you don't separate fields in that footage, then you render introducing fields in the proper order for your D1 capture solution, the field order in the original footage will be reversed. The solution there is to move the footage down 1 pixel. This is kind of a mute point anyway because if you're moving video around in the frame, scaling it, or rotating it in any way you should be separating fields on all interlaced footage. There's no exception to that rule.
Thanks Rick, I should test different format to find which ones are better for working in After Effect and Edius.