Return-Path: Received: from atl4mhob15.myregisteredsite.com ([209.17.115.53] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 5244780 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 23:46:00 +0200 Received: from mailpod.hostingplatform.com ([10.30.71.206]) by atl4mhob15.myregisteredsite.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r98LkcrR027810 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 17:46:38 -0400 Received: (qmail 22668 invoked by uid 0); 8 Oct 2013 21:46:38 -0000 X-TCPREMOTEIP: 60.225.197.206 X-Authenticated-UID: chris@chriszwar.com Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.3?) (chris@chriszwar.com@60.225.197.206) by 0 with ESMTPA; 8 Oct 2013 21:46:37 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\)) Subject: Re: [AE] [OT]: format for 8640x1920 clip for video wall? From: Chris Zwar In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 08:46:35 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <0D5B2FED-5CF0-4BC0-A461-1C7009AF1DDB@chriszwar.com> References: To: "After Effects Mail List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510) On 09/10/2013, at 8:31 AM, scott.aelist wrote: > A client is asking me to deliver a video for video wall made up of 8 = HD panels oriented vertically. [][][][][][][][] > They don't seem to know much about delivery specs, but they think they = want a 8640x1920. Is this common? I want to send them a test file but I = can't even get h264 to do that resolution (i believe it maxes out at = 4096?).=20 8640x1920 would be your composition and working size. As you've = mentioned, many video codecs don't go over 4K, and so you're best off to = render and work with image sequences. If render times and disk space are tight, you'll probably find that you = can work at 75% of that and scale up the end result without any visible = artefacts. You'll need to know the playback device and the delivery specs. I don't = know of anything that will play back a single 8640x1920 file. They will = have to be using something like Watchout, which means you're splitting = up your "master" comp back into smaller individual files for it to play = back in sync, or some other competing system. If it were 10 years ago = you'd be splitting it back into 8 individual 1080x1920 files, but these = days computers and drives are faster, and the signal can be split = between multiple monitors more easily, so if they have a beefy new = system you may only have to split it in half (4320x1920) and give them 2 = files- but even that will be problematic as it's still over 4K. Funnily = enough Watchout has been optimised for Quicktime animation codec, so it = plays back huge uncompressed files better than much smaller compressed = ones. If you render a "master" as an image sequence, you can continue working = until they tell you exactly how they want the final delivery - just = allow a day to split it up, compress it if necessary, and deliver the = result. -Chris=