jumper Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Hi, Our backplates are 1828x1556, pixel aspect 2. What do people do when rendering tp the above format? I read somewhere that rendering non-square pixels causes havoc with anti-aliasing. Do people un-squeeze the bg - then render to that format - and then live with the softening that occurs when the cg is re-squeezed back to anamorphic, or render directly to anamorphic? Thanks Stephen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stu Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Personally I'd un-squeeze the footage before working with it so that you remove that level of abstraction (re-squeezing the CG afterwards is a small price to pay for the benefit of working 1:1 throughout the execution of the shot IMHO). stu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaurav Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 (edited) Hi, Our backplates are 1828x1556, pixel aspect 2. What do people do when rendering tp the above format? I read somewhere that rendering non-square pixels causes havoc with anti-aliasing. Do people un-squeeze the bg - then render to that format - and then live with the softening that occurs when the cg is re-squeezed back to anamorphic, or render directly to anamorphic? Thanks Stephen pixel aspect ratio 2 ? That sounds more of a squeeze ratio to me. IMHO pixel aspect ratio should be 2.35. For your plates 1828x1556, Image aspect ratio is 1828/1556 = 1.1748. afaik standard anamorphic squeeze ratio is 2:1. So the pixel aspect ratio should be 1.1748x2 = 2.349 = ~ 2.35 . Unless squeeze ratio is different for the system which captured the plates. My preference would be to render anamorphic for the benefit of keeping it up uniform with the plates. Not sure about the aliasing occurring for the non square pixels but i would test both the cases and check to confirm it. If at all there is some difference, Perhaps i would try render bigger image may be 1.25x or 1.5x which is 2742x2334, keeping the same aspect ratio and scale it back in cmp to see if that helps with image quality at all. Rendering bigger image may also depend on the size of the cg in the plate. I would test render compare and choose accordingly to be on the safer side. Render gods may shine some light on the anti-aliasing of non square pixel. Cheers, EDIT - Ah .. Sorry , just realized where i was getting confused with the pixel aspect ratio. you are right, pixel aspect should be 2:1 and final display ratio after stretching should be 2.35:1. Edited March 14, 2012 by vectorblur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.