Jump to content


Photo

aspect ratio


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Louis

Louis
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 103 posts
  • Student
  • San Fernando Valley, CA

Posted 02 September 2005 - 12:07 AM

I've been reading a lot about aspect ratio lately, trying to understand the ins and outs, and here is a question that I don't understand (the information I have may be incorrect, so bear with me): According to my info, the frame size for standard Academy aspect ratio is .864" x .630", an aspect ratio of 1.37:1 (actually about 1.371). Likewise, standard 16mm (not super 16) has a frame size of .404" x .295", which is also 1.37:1 (actually 1.369). My question: if these two formats are so close in aspect ratio, pretty much the same actually, why are people forced to shoot super 16 if they want to blow up to 35, when regular 16 has the same aspect ratio as the format that they want to blow up to? Is the extra negative space on super 16 really worth the extra cropping that needs to be done, or is there something I'm missing? I'm guessing there's something I'm missing.

Any help would be appreciated.
  • 0

#2 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 02 September 2005 - 12:40 AM

What you are missing is that nobody uses standard 35mm academy any more (for film finishing).

Normal 35mm theatrical projection is 1:1.85 ratio (widescreen).

So when you blow up from standard 16, although it fills the 35mm academy frame, you end up cropping a whole lot from top and bottom. Just as you do when you shoot 35mm in the first place of course, but it's more critical when you have come from such a small negative area to start with.

Super 16 is 1:1.66, so it's a much better fit for 35mm widescreen, with only a little bit of cropping top and bottom.
  • 0

#3 Louis

Louis
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 103 posts
  • Student
  • San Fernando Valley, CA

Posted 02 September 2005 - 12:53 AM

What you are missing is that nobody uses standard 35mm academy any more (for film finishing).

Normal 35mm theatrical projection is 1:1.85 ratio (widescreen).

So when you blow up from standard 16, although it fills the 35mm academy frame, you end up cropping a whole lot from top and bottom.  Just as you do when you shoot 35mm in the first place of course, but it's more critical when you have come from such a small negative area to start with.

Super 16 is 1:1.66, so it's a much better fit for 35mm widescreen, with only a little bit of cropping top and bottom.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



That was a lot more simple than I thought it would be. Thank you. And since people are humoring me and my silly thirst for knowledge, here's another question:

Is there such a thing as super 16 print stock? Because when I shot my last short on super 16, the lab printed it on 2-perf 16mm negative, which I can only assume is not super 16. I just assumed there was no such thing as s16 print stock, until I recently read that some s16 features employ special s16 projectors to view dailies on sometimes. Is this true, or is there in fact no such thing as s16 print stock?

Edited by Louis, 02 September 2005 - 12:59 AM.

  • 0

#4 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 02 September 2005 - 03:26 AM

The other point you are missing is that Super 16, though printed on a 16mm film stock, is, not only different by its aspect ratio, but also by the way the image is printed on the neg. The loss of surface in the height is done as its width is actually large than regular 16mm.

In 16 the image is beetwenn the two rows of perforation. (2R, "2-perf", as you said). When projected, th positive woud be only one ridge, with optical or magnetic sound on the left (in projection), raw of perforations.

The idea for super 16 is to use the image surface that would be dedicated to the sound track, in the camera, and therefore use a 1 ridge perforation, and print the neg on the surface were would the second ridge be.

Since the sound track won't have any room if printed onto a reg 16 mm positive, it is only possible to have silent super 16 prints on 1R positive,

For viewing dailies, you need double roll : the super 16 print for the image as decribed, and a dubbed tape of the recorded sound on a perforated magnetic tape, for projection. Otherwise you have video dailies.

The purpose of super 16 is to blow-up to 35 mm. you are not supposed to release a 16 print of it. Otherwise dailies and specific situations in post.
  • 0

#5 Louis

Louis
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 103 posts
  • Student
  • San Fernando Valley, CA

Posted 02 September 2005 - 01:02 PM

But if you print 1-perf super 16 dailies on regular 2-perf 16mm print stock, wouldn't you experience some image loss? I thought I heard somewhere that they have s16 print stock specifically for viewing dailies on s16 projectors, which are built for the sole purpose of screening s16 dailies without sound. Is that true?
  • 0

#6 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 02 September 2005 - 01:16 PM

That was a lot more simple than I thought it would be.  Thank you.  And since people are humoring me and my silly thirst for knowledge, here's another question:

Is there such a thing as super 16 print stock?  Because when I shot my last short on super 16, the lab printed it on 2-perf 16mm negative, which I can only assume is not super 16.  I just assumed there was no such thing as s16 print stock, until I recently read that some s16 features employ special s16 projectors to view dailies on sometimes.  Is this true, or is there in fact no such thing as s16 print stock?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Kodak VISION Color Print Film is available with both 2R-3000 and 1R-3000 perforations. The 1R-3000 perf would be used for both 16mm prints with optical soundtracks, and Super-16 prints. Of course, Super-16 is not a recognized projection format, and requires a specially modified projector and a "double system" sound like DTS.

http://www.kodak.com...esP.shtml#perfs
  • 0

#7 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 02 September 2005 - 01:21 PM

But if you print 1-perf super 16 dailies on regular 2-perf 16mm print stock, wouldn't you experience some image loss?  I thought I heard somewhere that they have s16 print stock specifically for viewing dailies on s16 projectors, which are built for the sole purpose of screening s16 dailies without sound.  Is that true?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Most 16mm prints are made by contact printing. So the image on the printing negative is printed directly to the same area on the prints, without change in magnification or position. It's all in the SMPTE Standards:

http://www.smpte.org...tore/standards/

Note that the projected image area is slightly smaller than the camera aperture area, as you don't normally want to project the image of the edges of the camera aperture (to avoid showing dust/hair buildup on the camera gate).
  • 0

#8 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 02 September 2005 - 01:44 PM

But if you print 1-perf super 16 dailies on regular 2-perf 16mm print stock, wouldn't you experience some image loss?  I thought I heard somewhere that they have s16 print stock specifically for viewing dailies on s16 projectors, which are built for the sole purpose of screening s16 dailies without sound.  Is that true?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


If you want super 16 print on 16 mm you need a 1 R positive.

One has to know that for wht's about projection, 1 raw of perforation is enough. The problem of 1R/2R is a problem of fixity. The thing is that camera shooting needs more precision than screening. If you shoot for compositing, you don't accept a default of fixity (registration pins regularuty). Many projectors have a default of fixity, it doesn't matter that much...

TV screening is supposed to have no fixity problem, since video has no such problem.

If you print a super 16 on a 16 positive (2R), you either reduce the image to fit in the 16 mm frame, meaning you need an optical printing (reduction), meaning it should cost much more, either you crop (I mean cut and lose) a part of the image on its side... that would have no meaning to view such dailies...

If you do a telecinema of your rushes you can have video dailies as well...

As always, John's post are very valuable, follow them..

EDIT Forgot to mention that on a double projector, the projection aperture plate has to be modified from 16mm so that the surface that was covered for the optical sound has to be projected so that the plate has to be widened (???) enlarged, to project the whole frame, apart from the magnetic sound
  • 0


Opal

Abel Cine

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

Technodolly

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

The Slider