peerlogoboss

You're Next (2011) You're Next: When a gang of masked, ax-wielding murderers descend upon the Davison family reunion, the hapless victims seem trapped. Until an unlikely guest of the family proves to be the most talented killer of all.

• You're Next 2011 480p Season
• You're Next
• You're Next Cast

I am newbie to video conversion. Can anyone help me understanding about correct resolution for 240p/360p/720p/1080p.1280x720 720p1280x528 720pfrom googling, I found that resolution for 720p is 1280x720. But, a video is still called 720p even it has 1280x528 resolution.what about 240,360, and 480p?? Do they restricted to height? We take 360p as example:640x360 called 360p but,640x272, are they called 360p???1080p also called 1080p as long as the height is 1920.can anyone made all these clear for me as simple as you can??Im sorry if my question is not clear enough, I tried my best to express this situation.thanks. Just to mess with the OP's head a bit more:the first number refers to the width in pixels, the second number to the height in pixels, so 1920x1080 means that you have 1920 pixels across the screen and 1080 pixels vertically.here's where those other silly resolutions come from.movie piracy. Let's say someone wants to share a copy of the latest batman movie, they can either share the whole dvd or blu-ray, but that file would be huge and many people don't have connections fast enough to allow them to upload and download a 20+ gb file anywhere near what the consider an exceptional time frame or maybe they don't want a file that big on their hdd, so what eventually evolved was people would re-encode the dvd or blu-ray to a lower bit rate.

You're Next 2011 480p Season

But re-encoding to a lower bit rate lowers the quality so people also decided to reduce the resolution.here's where it gets tricky, even though the blu-ray may be 1920x1080 this works out to an aspect ratio of 16:9 or 1.78:1. Problem is that if you go to the IMBD and look to see what the aspect ratio the movie was shot in and ultimately transferred to dvd or blu-ray in is usually 2.35:1 or 2.40:1. So, when you are resizing you need to recalculate the target resolution in order to maintain the aspect ratio of the source.you do this by first cropping out the black bars at the top and the bottom of the source that act as padding to bring the resolution to 1920x1080 and then you resize to the appropriate smaller resolution that have the same aspect ration.

In the 720p range that usually ends up being 1280x536 or something similar. 640x360 called 360p but,640x272, are they called 360p??? If the former is 360p with black bars, then using the naming convention for 1080p and 720p etc, the latter could be referred to as 360p if it's still the same video, only the black bars have been removed.When it comes to HD, most people use 1080p or resize down to 720p as there's not too much ambiguity. For video with a 16:9 or wider aspect ratio, you'd expect the width to always be 1920 or 1280 while the height varies according to the aspect ratio of the picture. For video with an aspect ratio less than 16:9 you'd expect the height to always be either 1080 or 720 while the width then varies accordingly. Yes they could.

I thought about it and edited the last paragraph of my post after submitting it to hopefully make it clearer.The OP was asking to have the definitions, as they're commonly used, explained. I wasn't 'proposing' them. Maybe I didn't do it well, but anyway.The commonly used naming conventions for HD video are based on the 'industry standard' naming conventions, which it could be argued are incorrect (marketing) when only the actual picture area is taken into account. A 1080p video might contain a 16:9 video which is 1080p, but it might also contain a picture which has a 2.4:1 aspect ratio. The 'industry standard' includes the black borders in the 1080p description but the actual picture area is only 800p, so when removing the back borders most people follow the same 'industry standard' naming convention and refer to it as 1080p to avoid (even more) ambiguity.For HD (1080p and 720p) the naming convention is fairly simple.

If the aspect ratio is 16:9 or wider, the width should always be 1920 (1080p) or 1280 (720p) while the height will vary according to the aspect ratio.If the aspect ratio is less than 16:9, then the usual naming convention after the pillarboxing is removed means the height will always be 1080 (for 1080p) or 720 (for 720p) while the width will vary according to the aspect ratio.The same principle applies to 480p or 576p. It's the 'industry' who's adding black borders to the picture and then including them in the description of the resolution, the 'encoding naming convention' just follows the same standard.I sometimes resize video to 900p, so following the 'industry standard' naming convention, I call a video 900p if the width is 1600 and the aspect ratio is 16:9 or wider. The height varies according to the aspect ratio. If the aspect ratio is less than 16:9, then the height must be 900 while the width will vary. Technically it's the 'standard' which is 'silly', unless you're happy to have black bars included in the description of your video's resolution.I don't know if I'd refer to it as 'keeping up with the standard', but rather 'following it', even though the standard is technically incorrect much of the time.

You're Next

You're Next Cast

The 'standard' is to take a wide screen movie, add black bars top and bottom, stick it in a 16:9 frame and call it 1080p. The entire 16:9 frame is included in the 1080p description whether it contains picture or not. The commonly used 'encoding definition' of 1080p describes it the same way, taking the entire 16:9 frame into account, only the black bars are added on playback and not encoded along with the picture.Some people object to the 1080p definition when a video is 1920x800 (black bars removed), yet if I encode the same video with black bars top and bottom to make it 1920x1080 they're happy with an 'industry standard' 1080p description, even though the picture itself is exactly the same. I agree it's technically not 1080p either way, but given the 'industry standard' is to take the whole 16:9 frame into account, whether it contains actual picture or not, the 'encoding standard' uses the same method.