Jump to content


Photo

Anamorphic Bokeh


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 David Regan

David Regan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 218 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • New York

Posted 12 December 2007 - 09:19 AM

So in an attempt to understand lenses a little bit better, there is something that has me puzzled regarding bokeh in film shot with anamorphic lenses. I certainly do not have an eye yet to be able to distinguish if a film has been shot anamorphic or spherical easily, but the one way I've seen to tell (I think) is in the bokeh. I first noticed a while ago a squeezed bokeh, and wondered if that ment it was shot anamorphic. I did some research and film had been. A few times since I've noticed again, and checked, and the films with the squeezed bokeh were shot anamorphic. So perhaps its just a coincidence, but assuming it isn't, my question is, why doesn't the bokeh get unsqueezed? Because isn't it just part of the image like anything else, with the 2x squeeze factor, so why doesn't it return to looking more spherical when released?

Thanks
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

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

Posted 12 December 2007 - 11:27 AM

Because it is even more squeezed than the 2X squeeze of the main subject, so when unsqueezed, it still looks squeezed.

This:
Posted Image

Gets unsqueezed into this:
Posted Image
  • 0

#3 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 12 December 2007 - 12:38 PM

That squeezed bokeh is one of the main reason why I like anamorphic so much better than spherical, the out-of-focus background always has such a painterly feel to it.
  • 0

#4 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 12 December 2007 - 04:30 PM

Only things on the plane of focus are actually squeezed exactly 2x. Things further from that point get increasingly squeezed.
  • 0

#5 David Regan

David Regan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 218 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • New York

Posted 13 December 2007 - 08:59 AM

Ahhh so Max is fact there is a different squeeze ratio relative to the plane of focus what you mean in your post on Anamorphics, "The breathing is so prominent because of the change in compression, unless one is really stopped down...?"
Because that seems rack focusing would be nearly impossible to get away with unless as you say you are really stopped down, because wouldn't objects not only come in/out of focus, but they would get squeezed/unsqueezed in the shot?
  • 0

#6 David Mullen ASC

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

Posted 13 December 2007 - 11:41 AM

Not impossible, but you do have to think about it, you can't just ping-pong the focus during the scene and hope no one notices.
  • 0

#7 Jonathan Bowerbank

Jonathan Bowerbank
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2815 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 13 December 2007 - 12:50 PM

Always a fan of the Cooke bokeh, it's a good one to be able to recognize :)
  • 0

#8 Jonathan Bruno

Jonathan Bruno
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Student
  • Orange, CA

Posted 10 July 2008 - 01:51 AM

There are a lot of good examples of extreme changes in focus with a very wide aperture in Sunshine, shot by Alwin Kutchler. Check out the scene right after Kanaeda fixes the solar panels. Sorry I can't add a pic.
  • 0

#9 Stephen Price

Stephen Price
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Digital Image Technician
  • London

Posted 02 August 2008 - 03:41 PM

This may be stupid but i'll ask any way... If you attach an anamorphic lens to the camera port offset by 90 degrees from the normal position, will the squeezing effect become horizontal instead of vertical, would the squeezed anamorphic bokeh appear horizontal? would flares become vertical?

Thanks
  • 0

#10 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 04 August 2008 - 10:32 AM

Some of the fellas here shot some tests on a 1-perf, horizontal squeeze system. IIRC, it was Mitch and the guys at Abel. He could give you eyewitness info on it.
  • 0

#11 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 August 2008 - 01:53 PM

Not me, although I do recall someone talking about a crazy 1-perf format as well as a Vista-16, which was 16mm stock shot sideways for a very long frame.

Too crazy for me.
  • 0

#12 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1675 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 04 August 2008 - 06:08 PM

Not me, although I do recall someone talking about a crazy 1-perf format as well as a Vista-16, which was 16mm stock shot sideways for a very long frame.

Too crazy for me.



Mitch, has Abel received the anamorphics you mentioned a while back?
  • 0


Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Opal

Metropolis Post

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Tai Audio

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Opal