You're heading to the right direction Tom.
That sort of answers the question because at night, wide-open, you can get a lot of anamorphic artifacts which are interesting, especially on longer lenses with out-of-focus planes. So I can see why they want you to shoot anamorphic for that, just make sure you use primes with front anamorphic elements. There's no reason to use an anamorphic zoom because a rear-anamorphic lens hardly has any anamorphic artifacts.
Kenneth's bang on - the "extra" resolution you get from anamorphic is due to not cropping the sensor (or film gate, of course!) down to the 2.40:1 ratio and loosing a lot of information.
Now, if you are finishing for a non-anamorphic projection, then you're probably going to loose that resolution at some stage anyway (as you'll convert the image and squeeze it back down to fit in either a 2K or 4K 16:9 frame), but at least that will be later on, once CC and effects have been applied (or at least, one hopes so). But if you finish for an anamorphic projection, it all stays in the frame...
Sounds like a great project by the way Tom, congratulations on landing it - judging by your previous work it certainly seems like you deserve it...
Wow, RAW timelapses, I always just end up shooting small jpgs....
What kind of rigs are you going to be using, Tom??
Still with your own motor driven dolly, or getting into more advanced motion controlled crane moves and the like??
Lately I attached a wee motor to my Kessler pocket dolly, and then put the dolly on a severe tilt, do a timelapse, and the result is like a small crane-move in timelapse... good stuff!
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|