2. Do we know how we want to do things?
Very well. Assuming that we have some experience in SD post-production and that we are very clear about how we have been handling the processes, a good entry point is to evaluate how we have been handling the HD material that comes to us occasionally.
In many cases the HD material we receive works without any problem, usually when it has originated with the same PAL or NTSC frame rate. The problems start when someone decides to move a switch in their camera and record footage at 23.98 fps, or in a progressive mode. Do your staff know how to identify these situations and give them proper management?
The issue of proportion has certain aesthetic connotations. In many environments the use of letterboxes to accommodate 16:9 material on 4:3 screens is perceived as a production value. In fact, it is common for an unnecessary and capricious letterbox to be applied to 4:3 images by cutting off heads and damaging frames without mercy.
In some markets, 4:3 images flattened on a 16:9 screen are considered the most normal. I remember a very long editing session in which the editor strictly refused to adjust the ratio of 16:9 images so that they looked correctly on a 4:3 screen because, according to him, doing so would be "damaging the HD". If our people have information problems of this kind we will not be able to make correct decisions.
In conclusion, the best time to learn about HD is now. And as the grandmothers say, for yesterday it is late. Let's close this topic with another little story: Suppose we have problems with the material recorded by Antonio's camera. The way to solve them is not to establish as a company rule that the material of Antonio's camera does not serve us. Perhaps it would be better if we trained enough to let Antonio know that recording tv footage in 24p is not the right thing to do.
