Jump to content


Photo

5D Anamorphic Panavision Feature


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#1 Chris Saul

Chris Saul
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 July 2010 - 02:07 PM

I'm going to shoot a low budget feature in a few weeks and I'm thinking of shooting it on the 5D in Ananmorphic. I was wondering if anybody has experience with this or knows someone who does. I want to know if anybody has recommendations for lens support and if anybody has a way to fit the Panavision follow focus to the 5D? I would love to learn about any bit of advice. Thanks!

info@chrissaul.com
  • 0

#2 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11941 posts
  • Other

Posted 02 July 2010 - 02:35 PM

Be careful that the anamorphics cover that large sensor without going mushy at the left and right.

Also, that's going to cost you an absolutely enormous amount of resolution!
  • 0

#3 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 02 July 2010 - 02:38 PM

Be careful that the anamorphics cover that large sensor without going mushy at the left and right.

Also, that's going to cost you an absolutely enormous amount of resolution!


Not to mention the enormous amount of fun you will have keeping the image focused properly. Do yourself a favor and think exhaustively before you commit to the idea. Shoot a test, project it on a big screen and go from there.
  • 0

#4 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 02 July 2010 - 02:43 PM

Try the 7D as well, you will be needing that side-by-side comparison. It very likely will be easier to manage.

Edited by Saul Rodgar, 02 July 2010 - 02:44 PM.

  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19762 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 July 2010 - 02:59 PM

I'm going to shoot a low budget feature in a few weeks and I'm thinking of shooting it on the 5D in Ananmorphic. I was wondering if anybody has experience with this or knows someone who does. I want to know if anybody has recommendations for lens support and if anybody has a way to fit the Panavision follow focus to the 5D? I would love to learn about any bit of advice. Thanks!

info@chrissaul.com


As others have hinted, it's a bad idea on a number of fronts. First of all, a 35mm cine anamorphic has a 2X squeeze and is designed to cover a 22mm x 18.5mm area -- your Canon 5D sensor is 36mm x 24mm so you will get some vignetting. Plus the Canon records 16x9 1080P and your image will have a 2X squeeze to it. So assuming the lens even fills all 24mm of your vertical 1080P frame, you will be cropping a 1920 x 1080 frame on the sides to about 1290 x 1080 to get a 1.20 : 1 frame (which when expanded by 2X horizontally, becomes a 2.40 : 1 image.) And considering the Canon HD recording only resolves about 750 lines, the rest of the detail is really aliasing, cropping even more seems like a bad idea. Of course, shooting spherical 16x9 1080P on the Canon and then cropping top & bottom to get 2.40 for theatrical projection isn't a whole lot better but at least you can use spherical lenses.
  • 0

#6 Oliver Christoph Kochs

Oliver Christoph Kochs
  • Sustaining Members
  • 323 posts
  • Film Loader
  • Germany

Posted 02 July 2010 - 03:48 PM

I have played with some anamorphic lenses and had the best affordable results with the Iscorama 1,5. I used the attachment only. It has a 58mm thread so it works with Canons own 50, 85 and the old 100 macro lens. On the taking lens it has to be focused to infinity. On the anamorphic lens focussing starts at 1,5 meter (5 foot). If you can live with that for your film it's a recommendation. I mostly can't.
  • 0

#7 Mathew Rudenberg

Mathew Rudenberg
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 02 July 2010 - 04:10 PM

I believe Hawk's new range of anamorphic lenses have a 1.3x option - designed for converting 16x9 into 2:35 without any resolution loss

Still probably won't cover the whole 5D sensor, so you may be better with the 7D.
  • 0

#8 Bruce Taylor

Bruce Taylor
  • Sustaining Members
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 July 2010 - 04:43 PM

There just seem to be so many reasons not to do this. One other significant issue would be depth of field. Not only is the 5D going to have shallower DOF than the 7D, it will be much more shallow when you use anamorphic lenses, a spherical 50mm horizontal field of view is about the same as a 100mm 2x anamorphic- I don't know how you would keep things sufficiently in focus on the 5D (not even mentioning the fact that a 35mm cine lens won't cover the sensor).

Other potential issues are 5D (or 7D) workflow and final output formats-- is the Canon really the best option? A feature is such a huge undertaking, it just seems that using standard image aquisition (film or digital), storage and proven conventional workflows would benefit you in the long run.
  • 0

#9 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11941 posts
  • Other

Posted 02 July 2010 - 04:47 PM

If you were obsessed with the idea of doing this, it's easier to mount PL lenses (or any other kind, frankly) on a GH1, because of the microscopically short FFD of the micro 4/3 format which provides lots of leeway. The slightly smaller sensor might help you out with both depth of field and coverage.

I would definitely see if I could find a 1.5x adaptor instead. Then, you'd actually be improving image quality, as opposed to completely murdering it. I saw one test that showed the Panasonic 1.5x adaptor for the DVX100 certainly didn't cover the 5D adequately, at least on anything other than wide lenses.

P
  • 0

#10 Rob Vogt

Rob Vogt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 437 posts
  • Other
  • New York

Posted 02 July 2010 - 06:34 PM

Not to mention that Panavision won't let you rent just lenses. Even if you have a camera with a PV mount they wont let people rent lenses without a camera. They even turned down Steve Soderbergh and his PV mounted RED.
  • 0

#11 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19762 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 July 2010 - 06:40 PM

Not to mention that Panavision won't let you rent just lenses. Even if you have a camera with a PV mount they wont let people rent lenses without a camera. They even turned down Steve Soderbergh and his PV mounted RED.


What do you mean? He shot "Che" and "The Girlfriend Experience" with Panavision anamorphic lenses on the Red One.

Panavision rents just lenses & accessories but people renting entire packages have the priority.
  • 0

#12 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 02 July 2010 - 06:50 PM

What do you mean? He shot "Che" and "The Girlfriend Experience" with Panavision anamorphic lenses on the Red One.

Panavision rents just lenses & accessories but people renting entire packages have the priority.


Agreed, I did read that they were moving away from renting PV lenses and the PV to Canon EF adapters for Canon 5D customers, but not that they were not renting lenses and accesories only anymore.
  • 0

#13 Mathew Rudenberg

Mathew Rudenberg
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 02 July 2010 - 07:38 PM

Agreed, I did read that they were moving away from renting PV lenses and the PV to Canon EF adapters for Canon 5D customers, but not that they were not renting lenses and accesories only anymore.


I know a while back (3 or 4 years ago) I had pv lenses on a mini35 for a feature, but when it came to pickups we had to go superspeeds because Panavision was 'no longer renting lenses without bodies' (or at least that's what the producer told me... maybe he was just too cheap :) )

It wouldn't surprise me if they waive that rule for bigger names though.

Also, it's interesting that Shane Hurlbut moved his support from Panavision to alternative rentals, and says that the primo lenses he used for act of valor 'are not available any more.' Is it possible that Panavision is now limiting his access to their lenses?
  • 0

#14 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19762 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 July 2010 - 07:54 PM

Well, certainly Panavision is a bit in flux these days so I'm not surprised that their policies are in flux as well.
  • 0

#15 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11941 posts
  • Other

Posted 02 July 2010 - 08:50 PM

Scratching my head slightly here, but do you get the "nice" anamorphic artifacts (elliptical bokeh, horizontal flares) with a front-element adapter?
  • 0

#16 Chris Keth

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

Posted 02 July 2010 - 09:32 PM

I was at woodland hills yesterday and spoke to Bob Harvey and he showed me that panavision already has a mounting system that lets you use their lenses, follow focus, and accessories. They won't rent it out widely, though, because it tends to further the undercutting of a lot of their business. They want it to go with packages as an insert camera or go out if the director or DP has a really good relationship with panavision.
  • 0

#17 Chris Saul

Chris Saul
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 July 2010 - 09:36 PM

As others have hinted, it's a bad idea on a number of fronts. First of all, a 35mm cine anamorphic has a 2X squeeze and is designed to cover a 22mm x 18.5mm area -- your Canon 5D sensor is 36mm x 24mm so you will get some vignetting. Plus the Canon records 16x9 1080P and your image will have a 2X squeeze to it. So assuming the lens even fills all 24mm of your vertical 1080P frame, you will be cropping a 1920 x 1080 frame on the sides to about 1290 x 1080 to get a 1.20 : 1 frame (which when expanded by 2X horizontally, becomes a 2.40 : 1 image.) And considering the Canon HD recording only resolves about 750 lines, the rest of the detail is really aliasing, cropping even more seems like a bad idea. Of course, shooting spherical 16x9 1080P on the Canon and then cropping top & bottom to get 2.40 for theatrical projection isn't a whole lot better but at least you can use spherical lenses.


Thanks for the info! I'm not as technical as I should be but maybe you can help me a little more. I spoke with Guy at Panavision Hollywood and he told me that I get more resolution, 20% more. I did a test with a 75mm Anamorphic Primo Prime and it looks amazing and when I unsqueeze it, it becomes something like 3800x1080. Here's a link.

http://www.chrissaul...OS/ER_CUT_3.mov

Guy made it seem that it covers the sensor. Do you think I had no cropping issues because it was a 75mm? Let me know what information I'm missing because this is my first feature and they really love the idea of trying to give it the anamorphic look. I was thinking if I stayed at a f8 or f11 I might be okay with Depth of Field and if I cropped the edges in camera and not use the whole 3800x1080 that I could bring it to a 2.40? Correct me if I'm way off, I'm still student.

Thanks,
Chris Saul
www.chrissaul.com
  • 0

#18 Chris Keth

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

Posted 02 July 2010 - 10:01 PM

Thanks for the info! I'm not as technical as I should be but maybe you can help me a little more. I spoke with Guy at Panavision Hollywood and he told me that I get more resolution, 20% more. I did a test with a 75mm Anamorphic Primo Prime and it looks amazing and when I unsqueeze it, it becomes something like 3800x1080. Here's a link.

http://www.chrissaul...OS/ER_CUT_3.mov

Guy made it seem that it covers the sensor. Do you think I had no cropping issues because it was a 75mm? Let me know what information I'm missing because this is my first feature and they really love the idea of trying to give it the anamorphic look. I was thinking if I stayed at a f8 or f11 I might be okay with Depth of Field and if I cropped the edges in camera and not use the whole 3800x1080 that I could bring it to a 2.40? Correct me if I'm way off, I'm still student.

Thanks,
Chris Saul
www.chrissaul.com


If you used a 7D or a 1D, your worries about vignetting would be over. You would be using right about the intended sensor size with a little extra on the sides to crop away.
  • 0

#19 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 02 July 2010 - 10:04 PM

I did a test with a 75mm Anamorphic Primo Prime and it looks amazing and when I unsqueeze it, it becomes something like 3800x1080. Here's a link.

http://www.chrissaul...OS/ER_CUT_3.mov



Are you sure that is unsqueezed? That looks awfully squeezed to me. You wouldn't be able to project that too well at a movie theater without some crazy letter-boxing. If you keep it at f8 you should be OK.
  • 0

#20 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19762 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 July 2010 - 10:18 PM

I can take a 720 x 480 frame and uprez it to 72,000 x 48,000 pixels, that doesn't mean anything... sure, you can enlarge a 1920 x 1080 file size in the horizontal direction only, but you haven't gained any actual resolution in the horizontal, just that you enlarged it in one direction. You can't get more resolution than what you originally recorded.
  • 0


Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Opal

CineLab

Visual Products

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

CineLab

The Slider

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

Opal

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

CineTape

Glidecam

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC