Thread: Monstro vs Helium, 2.39:1 vs 16:9, some questions

Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1 Monstro vs Helium, 2.39:1 vs 16:9, some questions 
    Hi! Some questions regarding a upcoming camera choice I am to make for a series which needs to be shot in 4k. I am considering anamorphic, either Cooke or Atlas lenses. I dont know if I will be able to deliver 2.39:1 or 16:9, but I am exploring the possibility of shooting anamorphic anyway, and cropping for 16:9 if we cant do 2.39:1. So:

    Monstro will most likely only work in 7k if my research is correct, and then the 16:9 crop will be extracted from this. I guess Helium will be covered 8k, and 16:9 crop extracted from this. Any thoughts on other practical/visual differences between the two setups? A very practical point; filesizes will be somewhat smaller on the Monstro, right?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Monstro works fine 8K ana on most longer lenses for 2.39. like 65mm and up normally. If looking at more modern anas like master anas, cooke anas and such and some covers even on wider focal lengths. I think all atlas covers VV.

    But yes you could go 7k ana and pretty much all anas will cover and then you really utilize the full projection from those lenses so lot of character out in the corners but also you gain some resolution compared to helium as helium is actually a bit small for ana.

    So as you possibly aim for 16:9 mastering I would very much recommend monstro. As that option lets you use more of the lenses. If doing that with helium you simply only use a small little square in the middle and loose lot of the character and also lens resolution sharpens.


    Then also as I see it monstro is of a completely different caliber when it comes to color rendition. Helium is a great s35 camera with big focus on resolution, but color rendition in high exposure signal colors is not heliums strongest part. So that to me is also a godo reason to pick VV before helium.

    here is a 50mm master ana on 8K ana Monstro, just to show how close it is to cover. It very much covers 16:9 and if going 7.5k Ana then those dark corners are gone.

    Master Anamoprhic 50mm Monstro 8k 5_6 Ana by Björn Benckert, on Flickr


    So my advice get the monstro and dial in what ever is the highest resolution the lens can cover. But also no worry to go down to 6k or such to get a bit more narrow. If exposure is somewhat right you can bump between 6k and 8k without any notable change of sharpens and noise if you master in 4k. So its a quick way of getting some in betweens on each lens. Which is a huge benefit not having to swing lenses as often.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se
    Flame / VFX / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    And also just so you know, there is other options. You dont have to go for cheap copy cat lenses like the cooke, masters atlas or what ever. The real deal, mothers of all ana, those used by ledgends are actually very much available.

    100MM Original Cinemascope by Björn Benckert, on Flickr

    http://www.syndicate.se/bauch-lomb-cinemascopes/


    But yes, those are only for the brave. :)
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se
    Flame / VFX / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Thank you for your very detailed and informative post. Lots of great info!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Hollywood, USA
    Posts
    6,239
    Don't forget, you can always crop for final release and use the extra area for reframing if you need it in post.



    I wish more clients would take advantage of the greater image area of 5K/6K and crop to 4K for final release, giving them a lot of flexibility in composition.
    marc wielage, csi • colorist/post consultant • daVinci Resolve Certified Trainer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Jens Jakob Thorsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    758
    If you end up using the 16/9 of the 2.39 all anas I know of will cover 8K MONSTRO at least down to 35mm, witch becomes quite wide. I know for sure that my LOMO RF 35mm covers 1:2.00 at 8K
    Jens Jakob Thorsen DFF
    Director of photography
    Denmark
    www.jensjakob.com
    mail@jensjakob.com
    Monstro VV
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens Jakob Thorsen View Post
    If you end up using the 16/9 of the 2.39 all anas I know of will cover 8K MONSTRO at least down to 35mm, witch becomes quite wide. I know for sure that my LOMO RF 35mm covers 1:2.00 at 8K
    Yes very likely so.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se
    Flame / VFX / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,991
    You could shoot 8K on the monstro with Atlas and easily have the 16:9 extraction, there is only a tiny bit of vignetting in 8K 6:5 (2.40:1 native desqueeze aspect, so you could deliver 2.40:1 for your reel and frame for 16:9 with guides. I’m pretty sure there is an 8K 8:9 Ana aspect too which would deliver you 8K 16:9 when desqueezed.

    Hope that’s helpful!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Hi everyone. I just wanted to update this thread with my findings. I just came back from a DCP 4K screening of my cameratest, where I tested Helium 8k vs Monstro 8k 6:5 (with 8k 2:1 extraction) to see how the Hawk v-lite series behaved. After reading all your input, I was quite sure I wanted to push to do it on Monstro, but after the test I have fallen back to Helium. Here’s why

    - The great part of shooting 2:1 on Monstro (with ana lenses) is as most of you said, you are cropping of the parts that doesn’t work for the sensor horizontally. But issue vertically remain. On the 35mm, a lot of the top and bottom of the frame was out of focus and distorted, both the parts in focus and the parts not in focus. The problem was not completely gone before I went to up to the 80mm. The lenses were tested at 2.2-2.8, but from what I saw when I played around with the aperture, it wasn’t gone at f4 either. When you have a face as foreground, and some depth between the infocus object and background, the problem wasn’t as noticeable. But I dont feel comfortable bringing the lenses/camera combo into scripted, on-location work, when theres a lot of “art-by-accidents” going on.

    I know that in theory the Helium sensor is a tiny bit to small for the anamorphic standard, but in my testing, the Monstro is way to big, at least for Hawk v-lite. You could shoot in 6k and have the problem be gone, but then the benefits over Helium from the sensor size/fov are more or less gone (plan on shooting between 400-800 iso at all times)
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts