4 ms·

I am an author of this video, you can feel free to ask anything – I covered algos that I have used in video description, you can find them there

janekm 7y ago
I was wondering if you tried to run something like warp stabiliser on it first to avoid the wavy effect?
- shirman 7y ago
  I wanted to see what could happen with a video without any manual editing, wavy effect could be removed in after effect, it is not a hard task, but just a question of a manual work :)
jacobwilliamroy 7y ago
Why did you crop it? 25% of the picture is gone.
- dylan604 7y ago
  This is an age old question when converting 4:3 footage to 16:9. Do you keep the original aspect ratio (OAR) in the converted footage to keep the purists happy (small percentage of audience), or do you fill the frame with as much picture as possible to avoid mattes to keep the average content consumer happy (much larger % of audience)? At the end of the day, the producers will make the decision that they feel will please the largest group of viewers. I have personally been involved with these types of projects. The purists are the smaller section, but they are much more vocal on the internet. While reading forums and tweets and other soapboxes, these purists will eviscerate you publicly. However, using other metrics (sales figures, independent surveys, etc), the numbers show that the overall product is well received. There are so many people online that believe they know everything, but know nothing; yet these people are the most vocal. I was once accused of uprezing existing video tapes rather than re-scanning the film like the company claimed. Never mind that I was personally carrying the film to the transfer house. We took pictures of the employees with the film, took shots of the film on the shelves in the vaults, and wound up making "making of" type documentaries showing the process of the film on the telecine, interviewing the colorist transferring the film, showing the artists doing the restoration, and the sound department working with the audio from the original optical track, etc. Still, the know-it-alls kept on yelling.
  - jacobwilliamroy 7y ago
    Are there any merits to removing 25% of a film, other than higher sales?
    - dylan604 7y ago
      Your choices are to keep the OAR as 4:3 so that you have ~240 pixels of pillar bars on the left and right of the image (for HD), or crop into the image to make it full frame. The average viewer tends to not like mattes of any type. They tend to prefer a full frame image to fill up the pixels on their screen. Because of this, producers will make the decision to crop into the picture to get a full image. The same decision happens when making a 16:9 (1.78) image from content that was shot in the common 2.35/2.40 aspect for feature films. To get those images to 16:9 so the image is full screen requires cutting of pixels from the sides of the original. Content shot at 1.85 requires even less cropping. Even true 4K content is cropped slightly to fit the 16:9 aspect of UHD. It was even worse when television was only 4:3. Content in 2.35/2.40 would crop so much of the content, a shot of 2 people could remove one of the people from the frame entirely. They would use the Pan&Scan technique to slide the image around in the frame to reveal the 2nd person. This was one of the reasons for the slate at the beginning of a movie saying that the video had been reformatted to fit the screen.
      - basch 7y ago
        Video containers (or the stream itself) should really have a "center of frame" coordinate for each frame, and let playback devices crop based on that center. Maybe this already exists in some standards and im unaware.
        dylan604 7y ago
        For digital files, ideally, the file only contains active pixels so that the file is the frame size of the image. However, for video formats with a clearly defined standard (TV/Broadcast/DVD/Blu-ray/etc), the video frame size must be what is defined in the spec. This is why the mattes exist to fill in the space to make the content fit the space required.
- shirman 7y ago
  I did it just to be more useful to watch on mobile phones :)
withinboredom 7y ago
Is there any way you can upload the 4k original video somewhere downloadable? Happy to mirror it for you if bandwidth is an issue. The YouTube compression is terrible and doesn't really do it justice.
ProbablyRyaan 7y ago
Do you plan on upscaling the Patterson Bigfoot footage? (Kinda joking... kinda not).
- MockObject 7y ago
  I don't know why this is being downvoted. I'm interested to see if a zipper could be noticed! And what about the Zapruder film?

janekm 7y ago

I was wondering if you tried to run something like warp stabiliser on it first to avoid the wavy effect?

shirman 7y ago
I wanted to see what could happen with a video without any manual editing, wavy effect could be removed in after effect, it is not a hard task, but just a question of a manual work :)

jacobwilliamroy 7y ago

Why did you crop it? 25% of the picture is gone.

dylan604 7y ago
This is an age old question when converting 4:3 footage to 16:9. Do you keep the original aspect ratio (OAR) in the converted footage to keep the purists happy (small percentage of audience), or do you fill the frame with as much picture as possible to avoid mattes to keep the average content consumer happy (much larger % of audience)? At the end of the day, the producers will make the decision that they feel will please the largest group of viewers. I have personally been involved with these types of projects. The purists are the smaller section, but they are much more vocal on the internet. While reading forums and tweets and other soapboxes, these purists will eviscerate you publicly. However, using other metrics (sales figures, independent surveys, etc), the numbers show that the overall product is well received. There are so many people online that believe they know everything, but know nothing; yet these people are the most vocal. I was once accused of uprezing existing video tapes rather than re-scanning the film like the company claimed. Never mind that I was personally carrying the film to the transfer house. We took pictures of the employees with the film, took shots of the film on the shelves in the vaults, and wound up making "making of" type documentaries showing the process of the film on the telecine, interviewing the colorist transferring the film, showing the artists doing the restoration, and the sound department working with the audio from the original optical track, etc. Still, the know-it-alls kept on yelling.
- jacobwilliamroy 7y ago
  Are there any merits to removing 25% of a film, other than higher sales?
  - dylan604 7y ago
    Your choices are to keep the OAR as 4:3 so that you have ~240 pixels of pillar bars on the left and right of the image (for HD), or crop into the image to make it full frame. The average viewer tends to not like mattes of any type. They tend to prefer a full frame image to fill up the pixels on their screen. Because of this, producers will make the decision to crop into the picture to get a full image. The same decision happens when making a 16:9 (1.78) image from content that was shot in the common 2.35/2.40 aspect for feature films. To get those images to 16:9 so the image is full screen requires cutting of pixels from the sides of the original. Content shot at 1.85 requires even less cropping. Even true 4K content is cropped slightly to fit the 16:9 aspect of UHD. It was even worse when television was only 4:3. Content in 2.35/2.40 would crop so much of the content, a shot of 2 people could remove one of the people from the frame entirely. They would use the Pan&Scan technique to slide the image around in the frame to reveal the 2nd person. This was one of the reasons for the slate at the beginning of a movie saying that the video had been reformatted to fit the screen.
    - basch 7y ago
      Video containers (or the stream itself) should really have a "center of frame" coordinate for each frame, and let playback devices crop based on that center. Maybe this already exists in some standards and im unaware.
      - dylan604 7y ago
        For digital files, ideally, the file only contains active pixels so that the file is the frame size of the image. However, for video formats with a clearly defined standard (TV/Broadcast/DVD/Blu-ray/etc), the video frame size must be what is defined in the spec. This is why the mattes exist to fill in the space to make the content fit the space required.
shirman 7y ago
I did it just to be more useful to watch on mobile phones :)

withinboredom 7y ago

Is there any way you can upload the 4k original video somewhere downloadable? Happy to mirror it for you if bandwidth is an issue. The YouTube compression is terrible and doesn't really do it justice.

ProbablyRyaan 7y ago

Do you plan on upscaling the Patterson Bigfoot footage? (Kinda joking... kinda not).

MockObject 7y ago
I don't know why this is being downvoted. I'm interested to see if a zipper could be noticed! And what about the Zapruder film?