Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Anyone shot with 2x Anamorphic in 8K 8:9 for a 1.78 finish and have examples?

M

Mike Maliwanag

New member
Joined
Aug 14, 2014
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Los Angeles
Hey everyone,

Has anyone shot with 2x Anamorphic in 8K 8:9 for a 1.78 finish? If so does anyone have examples? What was your experience like?

I'm interested in shooting with 2x anamorphic lenses and finishing in a final 1.78 aspect ratio. After doing some research, I feel that shooting 8K 8:9 would give me the best option after cropping the sides to get a 4096 x 2160 resolution with a 1.78.1 aspect ratio. I'd go in and test but due to our current situation, I can only speculate.

I know I could potentially shoot 1.33x anamorphic at 6:5 or 3:2 but I feel you start to lose some of the anamorphic feel with 1.33 squeeze lenses that you would get with 2x squeeze lenses.

So I assume the FOV changes with the crop. In my above setup/settings, does a 40mm 2x anamorphic lens lose that 20mm FOV and just revert back to a FOV of a 40mm? If so,I feel like a negative set back is a lack of wide angle lenses when shooting with 2x anamorphic at this set up.

Thanks,
Mike
 
I think Homecoming on Amazon Prime did this with Monstro for a 2:1 finish. And The Dark Crystal on Netflix also did the same thing with Dragon VV (4096x4096 desqueezed to 2:1).

And yes, the FOV changes when you crop away the additional wideness. So, if you went with 3840x2048, it'd be 40mm 2x ana = ~20mm FOV @ 2.4:1 = ~24mm equivalent FOV when cropped to 2:1... Unless my maths are wrong. e.g. 2/2.4 = .833 x (Focal Length/2)... That's a rough estimate, as Ana modes are usually 4:3 and desqueeze 2.66:1 (and I'm not sure if the "2x" FOV is when it's at 2.66 or 2.4.)
 
Last edited:
3840x4320 is your 8:9 aspect, then down to 3840x2160 desqueezed. Are you looking for a UHD finish? Or is 4096 you goal here?
 
Thanks for the replies Mike, Rion, and Simon!

Mike, Homecoming is on my list and I just watched the trailer. The look of 2x anamorphic lenses is definitely there in some of the shots in the trailer. Thanks for the heads up. Also thanks for the formula! It'll prove to be very useful.

Rion, I checked out Wayne and it looks like a really great watch and I love the look of Cooke Anamorphics! I'm looking specifically for films that have shot 2x anamorphic and cropped the sides to finish with an aspect ratio around 2:1/1.85:1/1.78:1.

Simon, I want to have the option of going 4096 in the event the producer wants a 4K finish.

Thanks again everyone,
-Mike
 
Both Homecoming (DXL) and The Dark Crystal (Dragon VV) are as amazing looking as they are different looking. And they're rad shows too (definitely worth a watch). I think Dark Crystal used Cooke Anas, but Homecoming definitely used tweaked/adjusted Panavision lenses (emphasized defocus on the top & bottom of the frame).
 
I was bidding on the post for Dark Crystal way back. Netflix and the Post Sup came in for a meeting. We spent a couple of days reworking their numbers to come up with an alternate, and that's how they ended up going with the 1x1 square. Can't remember the lens package though.

Cropping the sides is not really a good way to go IMO. If you want a 4096 finish and have 10% at the sides to crop, you're going to end up with fractions which is not good for the image/pulls.

8:9 at full width is 4096x4608, so 4096x2304. 4320 is your max height though, so 1.78:1 will need a height of 2304. That's 4608 with the 2x lens on it, so you're going to lose 512 pixels, or 256 when squeezed.....(it's all binary :D )

1.78:1 is 16:9, so i'd go the UHD route, or the 1:1 4096x4096 2:1 route.
 
It's worth mentioning that the shortest full height aspect ratio in-camera is 6:5 (1.2:1), which then gets desqueezed to 2.4:1 with 2x Anas. The 1:1 that Dark Crystal used was done custom by RED, and not in any release build firmwares.
 
Keep in mind that when you're talking about the field of view of a traditional 2X 40mm anamorphic, that's usually in terms of the 4-perf 35mm frame of 21mm x 17.5mm. So on a larger format, assuming it fills it enough, the view will be larger so if you have to cut it down on the sides, you may end up back to the traditional view. But trimming a 2.40 image to 1.78 is quite a crop so I'd expect a loss of horizontal view no matter what. It helps to be using a sensor that is more like 20mm to 24mm tall, which a traditional anamorphic lens might just fill, gaining some vertical view and thus keeping a little more of the horizontal view.
 
Simon Dunne said:
https://www.red.com/DSMC2-BRAIN?quantity=1?sensor=4

Monstro and Helium showing 1:1 under the "4K Full Format (4096 x 2160)" area, though it was deffo a custom at the time.
Click to expand...

I wondering if that means 2160x2160 desqueezed horizontally or 4096x4096 squeezed vertically.

David Mullen ASC said:
Keep in mind that when you're talking about the field of view of a traditional 2X 40mm anamorphic, that's usually in terms of the 4-perf 35mm frame of 21mm x 17.5mm. So on a larger format, assuming it fills it enough, the view will be larger so if you have to cut it down on the sides, you may end up back to the traditional view. But trimming a 2.40 image to 1.78 is quite a crop so I'd expect a loss of horizontal view no matter what. It helps to be using a sensor that is more like 20mm to 24mm tall, which a traditional anamorphic lens might just fill, gaining some vertical view and thus keeping a little more of the horizontal view.
Click to expand...

The thick, plottens.

Pretty sure Helium is ~16.5mm high, so not quite 4-perf, which means you won't be maximizing out the 2x Anas height/image circle. So the FOV will likely be a smidgeon smaller than previously calculated. That said, with a 32mm or 40mm 2x, you're still gonna be quite wide even when cropped to 1.78:1~2:1...
 
Mike Maliwanag said:
Hey everyone,

Has anyone shot with 2x Anamorphic in 8K 8:9 for a 1.78 finish? If so does anyone have examples? What was your experience like?

I'm interested in shooting with 2x anamorphic lenses and finishing in a final 1.78 aspect ratio. After doing some research, I feel that shooting 8K 8:9 would give me the best option after cropping the sides to get a 4096 x 2160 resolution with a 1.78.1 aspect ratio. I'd go in and test but due to our current situation, I can only speculate.

I know I could potentially shoot 1.33x anamorphic at 6:5 or 3:2 but I feel you start to lose some of the anamorphic feel with 1.33 squeeze lenses that you would get with 2x squeeze lenses.

So I assume the FOV changes with the crop. In my above setup/settings, does a 40mm 2x anamorphic lens lose that 20mm FOV and just revert back to a FOV of a 40mm? If so,I feel like a negative set back is a lack of wide angle lenses when shooting with 2x anamorphic at this set up.

Thanks,
Mike
Click to expand...


I shot a TV pilot a couple of years ago on Helium in 8:9 with 2x Hawk V-Lite anamorphics for 1.78:1 delivery.
Worked great, saves you a lot of storage space and no hazzle with post cropping. We recorded straight to ProRes, so the files were already desqueezed in the delivery aspect ratio.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw2TKgfuL8A
 
David, Markus, Simon, and Mike thanks for the replies! Again I appreciate this great information.

David thanks for the response. I figured it would be quite a crop since we'd lose about 25% on the sides. I'll keep in mind the taller sensor size but it boils down to budget. It's good to know I'll gain wider FOV with a full frame/larger sensor on a 40mm 2x ana lens than with a super 35 sensor.

Markus, the pilot looks great! Thanks for sharing and it reaffirms my thought process on shooting 2x ana for 1.78 aspect ratio. I'll go in and test once we're allowed to!

Thanks everyone!
-Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top