CompuServe Thread

#PAR & S-VGA aspect ratio

8 messages in this thread
#164057From: T-Spect LeApr 10, 1995 11:52 PM
752/480 = 1.5666…. 640/480 = 1.3333…. I'm very confused about the calculation of the PAR and the NTSC out rendering. Now I'm setting the AR of 0.851 for 752×480 output. To minimize rendering time & increased productivity, I decided to 3DS VIBCFG the rendering screen to only 640×480. I set the custom ratio of 640x408x.851 (just same as the 752×480) [So far that AR is 640/408=1.568] However, when I use the 3DS's SAFE AREA feature, I noticed that they don't match between the two! I JUST DON'T KNOW THE EXACT FORMULA TO CALCULATE THE DISPARENCY. But I manage to eyeball and came w/ the ratio of 0.72 . The calculation was [640x[/]408×0.72=1.129, not 1.333] Is this corrrect or not? If it is, then how could it logically be? (The safe area window matches w/ the AR @ 752x480x.851 .)
#164121From: Angelo Guarino [DTI Inc]Apr 11, 1995 10:37 AM
T-Spect, There are two points to clarify about aspect ratios, Vibrant drivers and 3DS that might be of some help. 1st, the formula for pixel aspect ratio is 1 pixel aspect = ——————– (width/height)*0.75 Therefore, for 640×480 its "1", 720×486 its "0.9" and 752×480 its "0.85". 2nd, the way the vibrant drivers work is that they will set the absolute max image size if you have it set. Therefore, if you Vibnrant setting for your VGA card is set to 640×480 and you have Vibrant set during the rendering, the image will still only be 640×480 even through the selected resolution is 752x480x0.85. Therefore, you need to make sure you have the renderer set to NULL .. that'll do it. Ang, President Dynamic Technologies, Inc. An Autodesk Systems Center for Multimedia in MD
#164296From: T-Spect LeApr 12, 1995 3:06 AM
Thanks for the consise formula & feedback. >……the image will still only be 640×480 even through the selected resolution is 752x480x0.85. Therefore, you need to make sure you have the renderer set to NULL< My point of configuring @ 640×480 and try to match that of the PAR's AR was that I hate small dispay. I want everything to fill the screen as much as possible. Another big important reason was the rendering time. After serveral runs, I saved ~2-4 min./frame for just rendering at 640x408x0.72 then at 752x480x0.85 . [This applies to the initial design/preview stage. The final rendering, of course, will be at full 752x480x.851 w/ NULL] The couple of minutes might be insignificant, but it does add up the wait time. – TSL
#164131From: Don LandisApr 11, 1995 10:47 AM
Lets start from the beginning as you are missing some basic understanding of what is going on here: The aspect ratio involves conversion of the horizontal pixel count for a [non-square] pixel of different resolution NTSC. To fill the NTSC screen we must also maintain an aspect ratio of 4 units wide by 3 units high. The vertical pixel count works out nicely to 480 as the number of horizontal scan lines in each video frame is approximately 480 in the active picture area ie. 525 less blanking and mask = approx. 480 to 492. Therefore computer hardware manufacturers commonly choose the vertical pixel count of 480 as a matter of economics and technical convenience in constructing the NTSC output device. Given that the NTSC AR is 4/3 then 4/3 * 480 would conveniently give us 640. Sound familiar? 640×480 VGA resolution. This is when the pixels are square. But, what if the hardware mfg wants to sell a higher horizontal resolution? He can without additional expense by keeping the vertical pixel count at 1 pixel per scan line and more finely divide the scan line horizontally by more than the 640 pixels. Now we have a problem as the pixels are no longer square. The aspect ratio of the pixel must be defined. This is how it is done: eg. 640/480 * 1.0(AR)= 4/3 by the same method 752/480 * 0.851(AR) = 4/3 You can supply the algebra to do the conversion but replacing the pixel AR with ? you can solve for this by the equation ((4)(Vertical pixels)) / ((3)(Horizontal pixels)) = ? or pixel aspect ratio Doing this for the Targa+ resolution of 512X486 is ((486)(4)) / ((512)(3)) = 1.266 targa+ pixel aspect ratio. As for your safe frame issue: The NTSC video picture is further cropped by 10% of the active picture area unlike computer screens which usually have a black border. You do not need to account for this in computing the pixel aspect ratio. However, do use it as this is a convenient tool to guage your graphics placement to be sure all graphic elements are visible on most TV sets when viewed. Furthermore, please be sure you render to a "NULL device" when using these non square pixel resolutions. This will enable an accurate safe frame display on your square pixel computer monitor displaying the editor or keyframing screen in 3DS.
#164295From: T-Spect LeApr 12, 1995 3:06 AM
First of all, thanks very much for the fast response to this technical issue. The AR formula was very useful to clarify the confusions. It was very easy to understand & I put it to action rightaway. My point of config the Renderer @640×480 was to save precious rendering time & fill the screen as much as possible. So I used your suggested formula for 640×408: ((408)(4)) / ((640)(3)) = .85 > PAR's aspect ratio! [1632 / 1920 ] By the way, I'm using the regular Trinitron monitor and planning to get the XBR. I just can't afford $3-9K for the BVW series nor the PVV series. It had needed features (overscan, blue, ect..) , but not important enough as RAM, hds, ect.. Do you think the consumer XBR Trinitron is good enough?
#164449From: Don LandisApr 12, 1995 9:41 PM
To speed up test renderers I just do any small screen size that centers to half the screen area, usually 320×240. It's usually to check the motion anyway. Monitors are a personal thing. I don't favor the Sony XBR series but I do have a PVE1344Q here and it is fine in component mode. Too much ringing in composite though. So I'm not 100% on this monitor. The Panasonic 1350 is a better quality picture overall but not as focused as the Sony. It's colors seem warmer.
#164504From: T-Spect LeApr 13, 1995 2:22 AM
Thanks for the reply, continuing the related topic: >Too much ringing in composite though.< Speaking of ringing. I noticed that the PAR ntsc output had quite a few ringing on virtually on all fine details of the image. My collegues have the same problems and I think you do to. Do you know why it cause this?\ Any tips on minimizing it?\ How come I don't see such problem on national broadcast TV? – TSL
#164301From: Richard J. SmithApr 12, 1995 4:30 AM
NTSC is 4/3 or 1.3333 ,640/480= 1.33333/1.333333 =1