Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Anamorphic Question

Ryan Patch

Ryan Patch

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
263
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
40
Location
NY, NY
Website
www.bitterriver.com
Hey all-

I'm considering shooting my final-year NYU film (this spring) in anamorphic, and I have some questions. My DP is having trouble answering them, I think because anamorphic doesn't usually happen here in film school due to the increased cost. I'm considering it because I'm filming in a very small area (passenger sleeper car).

Anyway, I know the basic concept- squishing a 2.40:1 image down to the 1.85:1 image size of a S35mm frame so you don’t loose resolution by matting out the tops of a 1.85:1 image and loosing that information.

But does this mean that, on say an anamorphic 50mm lens, you get the same field of vertical view as you would on a normal 50mm with wider horizontal view, or do you get the same horizontal view as a normal 50mm with a smaller vertical field of view on the anamorphic 50mm?

I realize this may be confusing, and I may have to draw pictures, but does anyone understand?
 
If you shoot anamorphic on red one and are aiming for 2:40:1 aspect ratio you will lose both horizontal and vertical FOV.
So if your only reason for shooting anamorphic is FOV then you are better off just shooting with wide spherical lenses.
 
If all you want is the 2.40 aspect ratio, then just frame for cropping to 2.40 and use spherical lenses -- anyway, in a small space and in low light, anamorphics are harder to deal with, they often are bigger and don't focus as closely, and the really wide-angle ones have a lot of barrel distortion.

Most anamorphic lenses available have a 2X squeeze because they are used on a 4-perf 35mm camera. On a 16x9 camera, which is 1.78 in spherical, a 2X squeeze would yield a 3.56 : 1 aspect ratio when unsqueezed, so you end up cropping the sides to get back to 2.40, so it's a wash compared to shooting spherical and cropping top & bottom to get 2.40.

Use anamorphic lenses if their unique optical properties and distortions work for your project; otherwise, if you just want a 2.40 ratio, shoot spherical and compose for cropping to 2.40.

To answer your other question, a 50mm anamorphic with a standard 2X squeeze sees twice as much horizontally as a 50mm spherical -- on other words, the horizontal view is as if you used a 25mm lens, but the vertical view is still the same as a 50mm spherical.
 
Spherical? Can someone explain that to me? I like anamorphic, but I think it's more because of the 2.40 format. If I shot 25mm lens, crop for 2.40, that's the same as 50mm anamorphic (other then the distortion qualities)?
 
Jason Ing said:
Spherical? Can someone explain that to me? I like anamorphic, but I think it's more because of the 2.40 format. If I shot 25mm lens, crop for 2.40, that's the same as 50mm anamorphic (other then the distortion qualities)?
Click to expand...

Yes but the depth of field on the anamorphic will be as if it is a 50mm spherical - that's why you use them (they are longer lenses at the same width as wider).
 
I suspect you'll have focus problems as Anamorphic lenses generally don't focus very close (Usually min 3-4 feet) - as you're in a tight space, getting actors in focus will be potentially difficult - if not impossible.

If you do opt for them you might want to look at the Hawk V series which focus a little closer generally. (min is around 2 feet or so).

Best of luck with it.
 
"New Lens flare tests.
Shot on The Red Camera.
Anamorphic footage was cropped to 4:3 and unsqueezed to 2:40"

by Claudio Miranda

LINK>>>
 
Jason Ing said:
Spherical? Can someone explain that to me? I like anamorphic, but I think it's more because of the 2.40 format. If I shot 25mm lens, crop for 2.40, that's the same as 50mm anamorphic (other then the distortion qualities)?
Click to expand...

no, it's not. it's similar, and Weirdcrew probably correct in providing you the "short answer" of yes, but like David said, it'd be like a 25mm horizontally and a 50 vertically. And yes, the DOF is that of a 50mm. It's a very distinctive look IMO.

David's also right in saying if want you're looking for 2.40:1 then just crop in post. If it's good enough for David Fincher's last 5 movies... :)
 
Hi all, I'm new, just joined as I've been hired to shoot my first project on the RED Camera. It's an action piece and the Director and I are set on shooting with Anamorphic Lenses to make use of the Anamorphic distortion properties and Flares. I've lit with the RED before, but the use of Anamorphic lenses is new to me with the RED. Is there anyone that would be willing to converse with me on the 'Do's and Don'ts' of Red Anamorphic production? Please PM me or reply here.

Thanks.

-C. S. Schneider
 
Close ups...

Close ups...

You can use +1/2, +1, +2, +3 Diopters in front on Anamorphic lenses, we have a set of 4.5 inch Diopters for doing that, you can stack them to get very close.

You should stop down to f/8 when using the Diopters if you want anything sharp though since they make the images a little soft.

The 50mm square Lomo is marked for its own set of Diopters, on other lenses you need to put tape on and mark your own distances.
 
Ryan,

Hand Held Films has a full set of Elite Anamorphics as well as RED's if you would like to come someday and shoot a test. Feel free to shoot me an email to set up a time. A few NYU students have shot 35mm with the Elites I can give you their names if you like, just send me an email. dave@handheldfilms.com

Dave
Camera Dept.
Hand Held Films, INC
 
David Mullen ASC said:
If all you want is the 2.40 aspect ratio, then just frame for cropping to 2.40 and use spherical lenses -- anyway, in a small space and in low light, anamorphics are harder to deal with, they often are bigger and don't focus as closely, and the really wide-angle ones have a lot of barrel distortion.

Most anamorphic lenses available have a 2X squeeze because they are used on a 4-perf 35mm camera. On a 16x9 camera, which is 1.78 in spherical, a 2X squeeze would yield a 3.56 : 1 aspect ratio when unsqueezed, so you end up cropping the sides to get back to 2.40, so it's a wash compared to shooting spherical and cropping top & bottom to get 2.40.

Use anamorphic lenses if their unique optical properties and distortions work for your project; otherwise, if you just want a 2.40 ratio, shoot spherical and compose for cropping to 2.40.

To answer your other question, a 50mm anamorphic with a standard 2X squeeze sees twice as much horizontally as a 50mm spherical -- on other words, the horizontal view is as if you used a 25mm lens, but the vertical view is still the same as a 50mm spherical.
Click to expand...


wow.....

Thank you. That answers a lot of questions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top