2:1 anamorphics on s16mm?
Posted 24 December 2008 - 03:18 AM
It has got me thinking with the ease of making a 2K-DCP with that aspect ratio, and also most likely the only theater run of the film would be locally at these digital screens anyways... I think 3.3:1 would look good, but maybe I am just being a little to far out? What do you think?
Posted 24 December 2008 - 03:29 AM
Posted 24 December 2008 - 04:00 AM
I really like the artifacts from shooting anamorphics and I plan on intentionally flaring the lens for many scenes which would exaggerate some of that. I guess the real question is can I really shoot with 2:1 anamorphics on s16mm and and get away with screening 3.3:1... or would I be better off just shooting 1.85:1 with spherical lenses?
Just thinking out loud! ; )
Posted 24 December 2008 - 04:26 AM
Otherwise you can letterbox S16 to 2.35 and do either an optical or digital blow-up to 35mm. That way your film can play anywhere. I've seen an optical blowup a couple of years ago and I was very impressed, it held up very well on the big screen.
Posted 24 December 2008 - 06:11 PM
Posted 29 December 2008 - 03:21 AM
and projection...how does it influence what one can project...?
Posted 29 December 2008 - 06:36 AM
Anyone with any corrections feel free to join in.
Posted 29 December 2008 - 11:46 AM
4-perf 35mm print projection is either matted widescreen (usually masked by the projector to 1.85) or anamorphic widescreen (a 2X squeezed image on the print is stretched by 2X; the print area is around 1.20 : 1 and the unsqueezed image becomes around 2.40 : 1 on the screen.) And both formats have an offset image in order to have room on the left for an optical soundtrack.
So no what what format you shoot, you have to end up as one of these two 35mm print formats if you plan on striking release prints.
Putting anamorphic lens on a Super-16 camera could only cause an improvement IF it caused you to crop the 1.68 negative LESS to create one of these two 35mm print formats. Unfortunately, a standard 2X anamorphic lens is too much of a squeeze for a 1.68 negative -- you end up with a 3.36 : 1 image that would have to be cropped on the sides to get a 2.40 image, so there is no quality advantage compared to cropping top & bottom to get a 2.40 image when using normal spherical lenses on a Super-16 camera.
It's all about negative real estate more or less.
Using these new 1.33X Hawk Vantage 35mm anamorphic lenses on a Super-16 camera would get you more negative area for a blow-up to 2.40 than cropping Super-16 top & bottom to get it. However, you'd have to deal with a lack of short-enough focal lengths to get wide-angle shots on the smaller negative.
Posted 31 January 2009 - 03:24 PM
Edited by Jann Döppert, 31 January 2009 - 03:25 PM.