Jump to content


Photo

EXPERT ADVICE NEEDED: 16:9 CROPPED TO 2.235:1 OR 16:9+ANAMORPHIC OR A 4:4:4: NATIVE HD CAMERA DIRECT 2.235:1???


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 KETCH ROSSI

KETCH ROSSI
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Director
  • ITALY, now in Hollywood.

Posted 02 July 2006 - 12:41 PM

Hi evry one, looking for strong but expirience and sincere advise on my best available options to get a final product in 2.235:1 wide screen cinemascope projectable image.

As now I stamble accros this options, wich is better?

A) Use of a 16:9 HD camera ( 1/3 or 2/3 ) and crop the image in post.

B) Use of a 16:9 HD camera ( 2/3 only) and use Canon new Anamorphiv converter(HD-EC 235) and HD lenses for a true HD 2.235.1

C) Use of 2.235:1 HD capable camera as the Viper filmstream or Sony f950.

This are my options as I know them, it is obvious that I like to have as much input as possible from all of you in this forum.

I will be shortly moving out of the US and go back home, in Italy for reasons to do much with my unfortunate health conditions and to do the project that is as important and more of wath is left of my life so I wrilly would appraciate much your advices on this important decision to purchase the right equipment for this movie so to get the best resolt possible.

This project will have many famous Cameos and Italy's most beautifull women, so the project will have a subsained ammount of media coverage, also becouse of my condition the story of the project and the fact that I will be donating 50% of the profitts to a US Professor for Medical Research.

So as you can understand this is a project that on one hand will give me tons of free coverage and exposure but on the other it will be like a double edge knife, ready to cut my hand if I do not make carefull use of it.

In site of all of this my Heart and soul are dedicated to this project, and so I ask your support and kindness, also I excuse my self for the typos I know will be ever present.

Thanks much,
KETCH ROSSI
  • 0

#2 Lance Flores

Lance Flores
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 124 posts
  • Producer
  • San Antonio/Dallas/Detroit

Posted 02 July 2006 - 02:20 PM

Hi evry one, looking for strong but expirience and sincere advise on my best available options to get a final product in 2.235:1 wide screen cinemascope projectable image.

As now I stamble accros this options, wich is better?

A) Use of a 16:9 HD camera ( 1/3 or 2/3 ) and crop the image in post.

B) Use of a 16:9 HD camera ( 2/3 only) and use Canon new Anamorphiv converter(HD-EC 235) and HD lenses for a true HD 2.235.1

C) Use of 2.235:1 HD capable camera as the Viper filmstream or Sony f950.

This are my options as I know them, it is obvious that I like to have as much input as possible from all of you in this forum.

I will be shortly moving out of the US and go back home, in Italy for reasons to do much with my unfortunate health conditions and to do the project that is as important and more of wath is left of my life so I wrilly would appraciate much your advices on this important decision to purchase the right equipment for this movie so to get the best resolt possible.

This project will have many famous Cameos and Italy's most beautifull women, so the project will have a subsained ammount of media coverage, also becouse of my condition the story of the project and the fact that I will be donating 50% of the profitts to a US Professor for Medical Research.

So as you can understand this is a project that on one hand will give me tons of free coverage and exposure but on the other it will be like a double edge knife, ready to cut my hand if I do not make carefull use of it.

In site of all of this my Heart and soul are dedicated to this project, and so I ask your support and kindness, also I excuse my self for the typos I know will be ever present.

Thanks much,
KETCH ROSSI


  • 0

#3 Mr. Shannon W. Rawls

Mr. Shannon W. Rawls
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 127 posts
  • Producer
  • Lemiert Park(Hollywood), CA.

Posted 02 July 2006 - 03:52 PM

I answered more of your question here: http://www.cinematog...showtopic=13910

Also remember, Lucas simply cropped "Star Wars" and Mann simply cropped "Collateral" in post. They didn't use any anamorphic adapters. And they both used Sony F900's. That may give some inspiration to you. *smile*
  • 0

#4 KETCH ROSSI

KETCH ROSSI
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Director
  • ITALY, now in Hollywood.

Posted 02 July 2006 - 04:22 PM

I answered more of your question here: http://www.cinematog...showtopic=13910

Also remember, Lucas simply cropped "Star Wars" and Mann simply cropped "Collateral" in post. They didn't use any anamorphic adapters. And they both used Sony F900's. That may give some inspiration to you. *smile*


Thanks Shannon, I think I read one of your reviews on stabilization systems, as I also was looking to purchase one.

Thanks much.

KETCH ROSSI
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 July 2006 - 06:55 PM

You shouldn't cross-post. Your questions about shooting HD for 2.35 are spread out over several posts and so are the answers to your posts. It's a mess now.
  • 0

#6 KETCH ROSSI

KETCH ROSSI
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Director
  • ITALY, now in Hollywood.

Posted 02 July 2006 - 07:03 PM

You shouldn't cross-post. Your questions about shooting HD for 2.35 are spread out over several posts and so are the answers to your posts. It's a mess now.


Sorry David, this are my first post and have not no How, but I will not post any new ones, so not to make any more mess.

It was done with no malice and only to friendly participate in your topics and try to get your advices in bettering ny options as the project i work on it is so important for me I want to get help from people like your self to give there opinions and direct me thoards the right purchase of my camera.

Sorry again
KETCH ROSSI
  • 0

#7 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 July 2006 - 07:36 PM

But why make this post now when we already answered your question on the other posts you made? Do you want us to repeat ourselves? Several of us gave you answers... and then you ask the same question again on this new post. So I'm not sure if you're going to hear anything new.

As for purchasing a camera, it would be helpful to know how much you hope to spend on the camera and lens and separate recorder. An F950 plus an HDCAM-SR recorder is something like $180,000, not including an HD zoom lens, which may be another $25,000. Is this even in your ballpark?
  • 0

#8 KETCH ROSSI

KETCH ROSSI
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Director
  • ITALY, now in Hollywood.

Posted 02 July 2006 - 10:51 PM

Hi David, I do not know wich post was first, the point is that wen you need info. you ask and it is wath I deed I ask and you guys have been ansering, sorry that this is upseting you, it was never my intention to make nay of apset, my intention was only to get sincere advice with no gain anlike that of the rep of each manufaturer.

After you anser this post I will know that you have read it and I will cansel the topic.

KETCH ROSSI
  • 0

#9 KETCH ROSSI

KETCH ROSSI
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Director
  • ITALY, now in Hollywood.

Posted 03 July 2006 - 12:47 AM

[quote name='KETCH ROSSI' date='Jul 2 2006, 08:51 PM' post='113022']
Hi David, this post was first, the point is that wen you need info. you ask and it is wath I deed I ask and you guys have been ansering, sorry that this is upseting you, it was never my intention to make any one apset, my intention was only to get sincere advice with no gain anlike that of the rep of each manufaturer.


KETCH ROSSI
  • 0

#10 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 03 July 2006 - 01:10 AM

I'm not upset, I'm just confused. I don't know why after the replies you got to your question in at least three other threads, you then started a new one with the same question. Now there are too many threads going at once addressing your project. This is why you don't cross-post the same question.

I hope you got the answers you needed somewhere in all of those different posts.
  • 0

#11 KETCH ROSSI

KETCH ROSSI
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Director
  • ITALY, now in Hollywood.

Posted 03 July 2006 - 09:18 AM

I'm not upset, I'm just confused. I don't know why after the replies you got to your question in at least three other threads, you then started a new one with the same question. Now there are too many threads going at once addressing your project. This is why you don't cross-post the same question.

I hope you got the answers you needed somewhere in all of those different posts.


Hi David, yes I did in part, know I like to cancel some of the posts but do not know how.
  • 0

#12 KETCH ROSSI

KETCH ROSSI
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts
  • Director
  • ITALY, now in Hollywood.

Posted 05 July 2006 - 01:37 PM

Hi,

THIS WILL BE MY LAST POST ON THIS TOPIC AND WILL NOT COME BACK TO THIS TOPIC.

I WANT TO THANK EVERY ONE FOR THE ADVICES.

I'm PURCHASING THE "VIPER FILMSTREAM" AS EVERY ONE HERE SUGGESTED.

SO AGAIN, THANKS

PS.
WILL POST FROM ITALY WILE SHOOTING
  • 0


Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

Abel Cine

Opal

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Opal

Paralinx LLC

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

CineTape

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks