# Can I get 1440×540 Aspect ratio???

Discussion in 'Digital Video' started by tfaulkner, May 21, 2008.

1. ### tfaulkner macrumors newbie

Joined:
May 21, 2008
#1
I have filmed some footage in 3-D; 2 cameras 65mm apart. However to edit it, I need to put the footage next to each other on a aspect ratio of 1440×540 any ideas?

Thanks

Ted Faulkner

2. ### huntercr macrumors 65816

Joined:
Jun 6, 2006
#2
1440x540 is not an aspect ratio. That's your number of pixels. It's very likely your aspect ratio is 16:9. What kind of cameras are you using? What software were you planning on using to merge the 2 into 3D? I assume you're going to use shutter glasses or something to view it, right?

3. ### oceanzen macrumors regular

Joined:
Dec 4, 2006
Location:
#3
Actually (anything x anything) is an aspect ratio, technically speaking.

If you divide 1440 by 16 you get 90
If you divide 540 by 90 you get 6
So the aspect ratio could more clearly be described as 16x6 or 8x3

Although to complicate things I'm guessing your aspect ratio of 1 image s not actually 1440x 1080 (that's how HDV stores an image intended for 1920x1080 playback.)

So you also need to account for a 1.33 stretch widthways to get each image to 16x9,.

Hope this makes sense

4. ### huntercr macrumors 65816

Joined:
Jun 6, 2006
#4
I'm sorry to call you on this, but you're wrong. Don't be hard on yourself... it happens all the time.

The resolution in the example is 1440 x 540. The ASPECT ratio is completely separate from resolution. Consider this example:
on a "standard" old VGA computer monitor, 640x480 is displayed in 4:3, but on an SD television NTSC is 720x480 is displayed in 4:3. SAME aspect ratio, different resolution. My Tivo records in 480x480 but at that same aspect ration of 4:3. Get it? Load a clip ito FCE/FCP and turn on and off "display as square pixels" and you'll see immediately the difference.

So, he was saying his aspect ratio was 1440x540, which is suspiciously like half of HDV 1080i, so I asked what software he was going to use to "3d-ify" it.

Oh well... good luck to everyone. Hopefully this works out .

5. ### P-Worm macrumors 68020

Joined:
Jul 16, 2002
Location:
Salt Lake City, UT
#5
Oceanzen was right, 16x6 is an aspect ratio. Just not a common one.

P-Worm

6. ### hazmatzak macrumors regular

Joined:
Apr 29, 2008
#6
The issue is not whether AxB is an aspect ratio; it's that pixel dimensions by themselves do not automatically tell you the aspect ratio of an image. For example NTSC DVD is 720x480. But that can represent either a 16:9 or 4:3 image. And then PAL DVD uses 720x576 for both 16:9 and 4:3. So saying that 720x480 is 3:2 is "correct" but not useful by itself -- it's not what most people really want to know.

To make matters even more complicated, it's the center 704x480 of that 720x480 that most closely represents the 4:3 frame.

7. ### oceanzen macrumors regular

Joined:
Dec 4, 2006
Location:
#7
I get what you're saying The resolution isn't necessarily the aspect ratio due to the fact that it might be anamorphic, ie unsquare pixels with a stretch factor of 1.33 or whatever.

8. ### JNB macrumors 604

Joined:
Oct 7, 2004
Location:
In a Hell predominately of my own making
#8
"x" indicates dimension, in this case width times height (in pixels), resulting in a resolution
":" indicates ratio, or relationship of one value to another, in this case aspect (16:9, 4:3).

Two completely separate things, really.