Jump to content


Photo

ultrascope=techniscope


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 blake williams

blake williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 July 2010 - 09:58 AM

Hi.
Does anybody know if Ultrascope is a 2perf anamorphic format like Techniscope??
Thanks
  • 0

#2 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 14 July 2010 - 02:08 PM


Does anybody know if Ultrascope is a 2perf anamorphic format like Techniscope??


Ultrascope is an anamorphic lens system built by Arri.
The lenses were designed by Jan Jacobsen.

I doubt that Insane is your real name.
Per the forum rules change your moniker to your real name.
  • 0

#3 blake williams

blake williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 July 2010 - 02:35 PM

Ultrascope is an anamorphic lens system built by Arri.
The lenses were designed by Jan Jacobsen.

I doubt that Insane is your real name.
Per the forum rules change your moniker to your real name.


yes.. but does anybody know if Ultrascope is a 2perf anamorphic format like Techniscope??


I can see why the name thing might be important...call me blake williams
  • 0

#4 Chris Burke

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

Posted 14 July 2010 - 03:24 PM

yes.. but does anybody know if Ultrascope is a 2perf anamorphic format like Techniscope??


I can see why the name thing might be important...call me blake williams



there is little confusion on the terms used here. Utltrascope is an anamorphic lens system like Leo said. Techniscope is 2 perf, which is not anamorphic. To be anamorphic, the horizontal dimension of a frame is stretched, usually two times. 2 perf is a spherical or a flat format that has a natural wide shape. You use regular lenses with 2 perf.
  • 0

#5 blake williams

blake williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 July 2010 - 03:42 PM

there is little confusion on the terms used here. Utltrascope is an anamorphic lens system like Leo said. Techniscope is 2 perf, which is not anamorphic. To be anamorphic, the horizontal dimension of a frame is stretched, usually two times. 2 perf is a spherical or a flat format that has a natural wide shape. You use regular lenses with 2 perf.


Hi chris, thnx for the reply

doesnt 2perf use some rear anamorphic elements? is it really just a cropped spherical
  • 0

#6 Bruce Taylor

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

Posted 14 July 2010 - 03:46 PM

2 perf is a spherical or a flat format that has a natural wide shape. You use regular lenses with 2 perf.


Exactly. Techniscope camera footage has to go through an optical printing or DI process to create a correctly formatted 4 perf anamorphic projection print. I think that's where the confusion is: techniscope is a flat acquisition format, but an anamorphic projection format.
  • 0

#7 blake williams

blake williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 July 2010 - 04:15 PM

Exactly. Techniscope camera footage has to go through an optical printing or DI process to create a correctly formatted 4 perf anamorphic projection print. I think that's where the confusion is: techniscope is a flat acquisition format, but an anamorphic projection format.


hi Bruce,
I know about the stretching to 4perf in post. what got me puzzled about ultrascope was this pic of the rear element of an ultrascope lens. is this opening supposed to cover a full 4perf frame with a 2x anamorphic image? looked a little too rectangular to me

Attached Images

  • ultrascope.jpg

  • 0

#8 Bruce Taylor

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

Posted 14 July 2010 - 05:41 PM

is this opening supposed to cover a full 4perf frame with a 2x anamorphic image? looked a little too rectangular to me


The photo is not terribly clear, but it certainly appears to be a rear mounted anamorph element, which is usually set up for a 2x squeeze on a 4 perf frame. It looks just about identical to the rear anamorphic attachment I have for my Lomo zooms.
SN850835.JPG

Attached Images

  • SN850834.JPG

  • 0

#9 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 14 July 2010 - 06:20 PM

doesnt 2perf use some rear anamorphic elements? is it really just a cropped spherical


Nope, nothing anamorphic at all in 2-perf photography. That's part of what made it so cost-effective and easy to use. Its natural aspect ratio is 2.66:1, so you really don't need to do any squeezing at all in camera.



-- J.S.
  • 0

#10 blake williams

blake williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 14 July 2010 - 06:33 PM

The photo is not terribly clear, but it certainly appears to be a rear mounted anamorph element, which is usually set up for a 2x squeeze on a 4 perf frame. It looks just about identical to the rear anamorphic attachment I have for my Lomo zooms.
SN850835.JPG


thanks for the pics bruce. your lomo attachment also looks very rectangular but I guess its just covers a 4perf frame in the center of the glass and not necessarily all the way out to the horisontal edges.

so your rear anamorphic attachment has its own focus right?
can you tell me please how a spherical lens with a rear anamorphic attachment differs from a spherical lens with a front anamorphic attachment and finally how the two differs from a real anamorphic lens?...if you have the time that is :-)
  • 0

#11 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1599 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 14 July 2010 - 09:46 PM

Most anamorphic zoom lenses are spherical zooms with an anamorphic rear, due to the difficulty of maintaining image quality and focus through various focal lengths with an anamorphic front. Anamorphic primes can have the anamorphic elements in front of a spherical rear. The difference is that an anamorphic rear will not produce quite the same "anamorphic look" ie flares and oval bokeh etc. It simply stretches up the spherical image to fill the scope frame. While the zoom focal lengths remain the same the angle of view is effectively half that of the equivalent anamorphic prime. I believe Hawk have produced a zoom with front anamorphics but don't quote me on it.
  • 0

#12 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 15 July 2010 - 04:06 PM

so your rear anamorphic attachment has its own focus right?
can you tell me please how a spherical lens with a rear anamorphic attachment differs from a spherical lens with a front anamorphic attachment and finally how the two differs from a real anamorphic lens?...if you have the time that is :-)


The front anamorphic has a horizontal squeeze. So a 50mm anamorphic lens will have a horizontal angle equivalent to a 25mm lens.

The rear anamorphic has a vertical stretch. So a 25-250mm spherical zoom with a rear anamorphot becomes a 50-500mm anamorphic zoom.
& the rear anamorphot has its focus permanantly focused.

Jan Jacobsen's patent for rear anamorphics seems so basic, I think he is the inventor of them.

Since this is the second time I mentioned him here:

http://in70mm.com/ne...obsen/index.htm

http://in70mm.com/ne...story/index.htm

http://in70mm.com/ne...tuary/index.htm
  • 0

#13 blake williams

blake williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 16 July 2010 - 08:02 AM

Most anamorphic zoom lenses are spherical zooms with an anamorphic rear, due to the difficulty of maintaining image quality and focus through various focal lengths with an anamorphic front. Anamorphic primes can have the anamorphic elements in front of a spherical rear. The difference is that an anamorphic rear will not produce quite the same "anamorphic look" ie flares and oval bokeh etc. It simply stretches up the spherical image to fill the scope frame. While the zoom focal lengths remain the same the angle of view is effectively half that of the equivalent anamorphic prime. I believe Hawk have produced a zoom with front anamorphics but don't quote me on it.

well an anamorphic rear adapter is a no go for me then.. you can take anything but my anamorphic bokeh :-)
I own two anamorphic front adapters. the problem im having is that I would like to shoot with 300-500mm and they stop functioning at about 200mm.
does rear adapters also exist in 1.5x and 1.75x squeeze?
does a rear adapther have to be manifactured specifically for the lens youre using?
  • 0

#14 blake williams

blake williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 16 July 2010 - 08:08 AM

The front anamorphic has a horizontal squeeze. So a 50mm anamorphic lens will have a horizontal angle equivalent to a 25mm lens.

The rear anamorphic has a vertical stretch. So a 25-250mm spherical zoom with a rear anamorphot becomes a 50-500mm anamorphic zoom.
& the rear anamorphot has its focus permanantly focused.

Jan Jacobsen's patent for rear anamorphics seems so basic, I think he is the inventor of them.

Since this is the second time I mentioned him here:

http://in70mm.com/ne...obsen/index.htm

http://in70mm.com/ne...story/index.htm

http://in70mm.com/ne...tuary/index.htm


so ultrascope was basically a purely rear anamorphic adapter based format?.. it should be named poor mans anamorphic :-)
  • 0

#15 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 19 July 2010 - 04:05 PM

so ultrascope was basically a purely rear anamorphic adapter based format?.. it should be named poor mans anamorphic :-)


Not really. The zoom, 300mm, 400mm and 600mm have rear anamorphics.
While the 40mm, 50mm, 85mm and 135mm have front anamorphics.

The rear anamorphics require quite a bit of space between the back of the lens and the focal plane, so they have to be used on longer focal lengths.
  • 0

#16 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 19 July 2010 - 06:20 PM

The rear anamorphics require quite a bit of space between the back of the lens and the focal plane, so they have to be used on longer focal lengths.


Yes, because the mirror shutter takes up some of that space....





-- J.S.
  • 0


Tai Audio

Glidecam

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Wooden Camera

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Opal

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks