Still Shot Question - for HDV Use

1. LDianeJohnson
   Member

   

   As a newbie to video but veteran of still photography, I understand the need for a 16x9 aspect ratio for shooting the video.

   However, a bit unclear as to how to shoot stills to incorporate into my video. I can shoot at very high to low resolutions. It seems to me that a 72 pixels per inch level is too low to give even a 16x9 ratio a good look on even small TVs.

   Please tell me how many pixels per inch would offer a high quality still image. Then, I can shoot more intelligently.

   If I shoot a picture at only 72 ppi with the 16x9 ratio it makes for a grainy picture except for on the web;) I don't want to use more hard drive space than necessary, yet want to produce a good High Definition movie with stills incorporated.

   Thanks in advance or your assistance!

   D. 

   Posted 4 years ago #

2. Don
   Member

   

    buy more hard drives....

   Why shoot lowest res possible? no cropping or panning (aka Ken Burns Effect) options...No movie posters.....

   Ever wonder why major studios hire stills photographers? To get high res photos!

   A portrait oriented shot off my 10 mp dslr can be used for a 16x20 300dpi print, and a 800x600 72 dpi web page AND a still on video and still be horizontally cropped on a panned and zoomed video clip.... 

   Posted 4 years ago #

3. LDianeJohnson
   Member

   

    Thanks D0n,

   I am getting closer to my answer. I do not wish to shoot at a 72ppi level for HDV if it requires a high resolution to meet the needs of future folks who view via huge HV TVs. As the saying goes for builders, "measure twice, cut once" that is my motto for anything I do.

   The question remains...what is the optimum still-shot pixels per inch for video? I can certainly shoot 300+ for print publication. Is HDV in need of that high or an even higher resolution to be equal, or superior to Hollywood movie/network standards? That is what I am shooting for.

   Thanks for your reply and others who have an interest in this aspect of videography.

    D. 

   Posted 4 years ago #

4. jburkhart
   

   

   72 dpi is the standard for video, both SD and HD. It always has been, and will look as intended on even the largest of HDTV screens.

   Coming from a print background, that resolution is woefully inadequate for most if not all print applications. It works just fine for TV though. There is no practical benefit in capturing material higher than 72dpi for any video project in any part of the process.

   Hope that helps...

    JB

   John Burkhart
   Editor-in-Chief
   Videomaker

   Posted 4 years ago #

5. LDianeJohnson
   Member

   

   Dear jbukhart,

   I am blown away. Just to confirm, 72ppi with my Photoshop images set for 16x9 (in.) this is all that is needed for a still for High Definition video? 

   I know it is "woefully inadequate for most of if not all print applications". That is why I am asking and double asking this question. It does indeed help that you have written to me about this but it is most disconcerting to me. I just cannot believe, but trust you, that 72 ppi is all that is needed for what we all have been told about HDV!! I appreciate your message and have already done the 72ppi at 16x9 (inches...same aspect ratio) yet am still stunned that 300 or more per inch is not required... especialy if viewed on an HD TV with a huge screen.

   Will do. That's what I have. Thanks so much for your quick turn-around message to me.

   All the Best, Diane 

   Posted 4 years ago #

6. Don
   Member

   

   72 dpi is the standard for video, both SD and HD. It always has been, and will look as intended on even the largest of HDTV screens. Coming from a print background, that resolution is woefully inadequate for most if not all print applications. It works just fine for TV though. There is no practical benefit in capturing material higher than 72dpi for any video project in any part of the process. Hope that helps...  JB

    You're right about the resolution.... but any software program from photoshop to ilife, to motion picture maker (sorry I don't know all the pc software available) can take a high res image and down convert it to 16x9 72 dpi. but there are lots of good reasons to shoot at the highest quality available.

   You point doesn't make anymore sense in todays multimedia environment. The practical uses for me, starts with needing to print a dvd cover, but since my business includes video and prints and web, I guess my needs are different. I also find still images, at high res, can be cropped and zoomed and panned, to create wonderful video clips that would require many hours to set up with lighting and dollies and steady cams on video....

   Shoot a 5 shot (5x10mp stills) panorama of an empty church before the wedding ceremony for example then pan it, zoom in on special details, etc....

   1 camera, 1 tripod, ten minute set up...1 hour after the shoot in post and you got stunning opening and closing video for a wedding video for example. 

   Posted 4 years ago #

7. LDianeJohnson
   Member

   

   Thanks guys,

   I have two terybite drives that will work well and will bump up my still shot resolutions for safety sake. 

   While on the subject of storage....how do I offload clips to my hard drive when the Final Cut Express/iMovie programs want them resident on my HD?

   Should I offload once a movie is finished, and/or can I direct the camera upoads to go to the external hard drive for later access?

   Finally, a question of where the clips reside as opposed to their showing up in Final Cut Express screen. That being...when I have a clip in my bin is it drawing upon the original resident on my computer or external to draw upon or does it make a copy and put it into the program? That would mean there are duplicates on my resident hard drive...so can I delete one?

   I may be way off base here but trust your advice and judgement.

   Thank you!!!!

   Diane 

    

    

   Posted 4 years ago #

8. jburkhart
   

   

   Yep. Diane. 72dpi is all it takes. Honest :) You will want to save those images onto your hard drive and import them to Final Cut. It won't make an additional copy of those photos, but link to the file where you put it on your hard drive.

   Don: I agree that taking higher resolution stills has all sorts of benefits for the reasons that you state above. But I think we're getting confused on resolution measured in dpi, and resolution measured in pixels.  Dpi is only pertinent to image creation on paper media. Anything that you bring into video will be changed into 72dpi To clarify:

   I bring in a 1920x1080 pixel (hd size) photo into a non linear editor at 300dpi. The NLE changes the resolution to 1920x1080 at 72dpi automatically. Why waste the additional memory required to store a 300dpi image, unless I know for sure that it's going to be printed on paper at some point?

   However, bringing in a 4000x4000 pixel image at 72dpi so that I can zoom and pan around it makes perfect sense, and opens up a lot of creative possibilities.

   So Higher resolution in pixels is always good, higher resolution in terms of DPI is a waste for video.

   Posted 4 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Supported video provider:

youtube, myvideo, funnyordie, gametrailers, collegehumor, dailymotion, glumbert, liveleak, redtube, googlevideo, sevenload, metacafe, clipfish, vimeo