Downsides of 16:9? [Archive]

Kjetil Haugen

09-10-2008, 06:06 AM

Shooting coming up. Still afraid of this 16:9 format. It was off limits for so long. 2:1 has been stable and working throughout the workflow..

What are the downsides of shooting 16:9 as of today? Are all applications (RC,RA,RR) compatible with this frame size now? Is it reliable? Will I run into trouble down the line? Are there any reasons whatsoever why I should not shoot 16:9?

Thanks

Alexander Christ

09-10-2008, 06:31 AM

go for 16:9, http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=17640&page=3

Jeff Kilgroe

09-10-2008, 09:37 AM

There is only one downside to shooting 16:9... It fills up those CF cards a little faster. ;)

Go for it.

Steve Gibby

09-10-2008, 09:46 AM

I've been shooting 16x9 for months now - with no problems. Most of what we do is destined for HDTV, so 16x9 makes the most sense. As Jeff said, it fills up cards and drives faster but IMO it is worth it.

Steve Freebairn

09-10-2008, 10:44 AM

If you use 8GB CF cards, then you can't record RC36 at 4k 16x9, but that's just a limitation, not really a problem, you could get 16gb cards or use a drive.

paul engstrom

09-11-2008, 11:24 AM

i can't get mine to do rc36 4k 16x9 to the drive. any ideas?

p

Kjetil Haugen

09-11-2008, 11:47 AM

i can't get mine to do rc36 4k 16x9 to the drive. any ideas?

p

4k 16:9 RC36 on drive is limited to 25fps I think.. Maybe that's it?