Re: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-28 Thread Jay dedman
I have been looking for a workflow which will allow me to move quickly from my HDV video (Sony FX1) from the non square format to square format for the web, Blip etc. Visual Hub is a compression app (not free) that will do batch compression. Just create your different settings...and it goes

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-28 Thread Mike Hudack
: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio By way of brief introduction, I am a long time lurker, first time poster and trying to find time for a videoblog. I have been looking for a workflow which will allow me to move quickly from my HDV video (Sony FX1) from the non square format to square format

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-16 Thread Jay dedman
If I'm an average video guy who just wants to make video, how would I know whether I'm conforming or not? I have a vision, my camera shoots at this resolution, I can output files in the same resolution from my video editor, so how am I *not* conforming? Im not sure if this is related, but

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-16 Thread Mike Hudack
pretty soon. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Cammack Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 7:10 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio --- In videoblogging

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-15 Thread Jake Ludington
Repost your question here: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/blip-users/ Will do. What kind of file do you have that has the dimensions of 1440x1080? Every HDV camcorder on the planet records at 1440x1080. :) 16x9 = 1920x1080 or 1280x720 or 640x360 or 480x270 or 320x180 16x9 also =

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-15 Thread Michael Verdi
Right - was just going to say that it sounds like HDV. You have to compress that first into some sort of quicktime or wmv, converting it to square pixels in the process so that it's one of those resolutions that Bill said - 1280 x 720, 640 x 360, etc. - Verdi On Jan 15, 2008 4:27 PM, Jake

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-15 Thread Jake Ludington
Right - was just going to say that it sounds like HDV. You have to compress that first into some sort of quicktime or wmv, converting it to square pixels in the process so that it's one of those resolutions that Bill said - 1280 x 720, 640 x 360, etc. But that doesn't really address my

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-15 Thread Michael Verdi
You have to get the answer from the blip guys but I don't think the intent is for you to upload your full rez video. You compress your video and they host it (plus lots of other features). - Verdi On Jan 15, 2008 4:43 PM, Jake Ludington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right - was just going to

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-15 Thread Jake Ludington
You have to get the answer from the blip guys but I don't think the intent is for you to upload your full rez video. You compress your video and they host it (plus lots of other features). If I upload 1920x1080 or 1280x720 both are available for download at full rez and look correct in their

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-15 Thread Jake Ludington
Verdi, that's my point, exactly. My Canon HV-20 shoots 1440x1080. This is why I asked Jake what he has that's going to play it back. There's no reason that I can think of that blip should support those frame dimensions. I'm not asking them to support 1440x1080 at 1.33:1 on the Web, I am

RE: [videoblogging] Re: Blip.tv and 1.33 aspect ratio

2008-01-15 Thread Jake Ludington
Good arguments, however, neither 1440x1080 nor 720x480 Anamorphic are meant to be viewed (as you stated in your other post, so I'm not telling you anything new) in those dimensions in square pixels. Since blip delivers video to computers, which use square pixels, IMO, there's no reason they