different anamorphic settings on Dragon

[Lee Kelly]

I kind of understand the purpose of anamorphic lenses on film and have also read the Red guide to anamorphic but there are still some confusing things floating around my head.

16x9 is the standard aspect ratio for normal HD content.

2.39:1 is the standard widescreen ratio for cinema.

Red make it fairly easy to choose a ratio for anamorphic by offering 1.33x and 2x settings but how does this affect everything else?
Anamorphic from what I understand was introduced to offer the whole area of the film 'frame' to be recorded in a squeezed way and then when projected as 2.40:1 widescreen, the squashed image was stretched out to look natural in the wide screen format while maintaining the full 'resolution' of each film frame right?

So my questions and I appreciate anyone who can answer this for dummies like me, is with Red and digital in general, if I was to shoot with 1.33x lenses, would my aspect ration best to be 16x9? So lets say 6kHD?
If I was to shoot with 2x lenses would my ratio want to be something else?
What about less common 1.5x lenses?
There are so many options on the camera too!

Then with the post delivery end of things, how do these ratio decisions affect the options for either cinema DCP files, 16x9 tv or the widescreen 'letterboxed' view on vimeo or youtube without actually cropping or losing your original composition?

Plenty of people want to shoot on anamorphic for the style of image it creates, like flare etc but I really want a clear explanation (for a dummy) on how to set my aspect to get the most information out of my sensor kind of like those lenses were intended to do back in the day.

Do cinema DCP files have to be 2.40:1 or can they be 'wider' and with more 'letterboxing' required and still play out of the projector without any issues, just a shorter in height image?

So many questions and I am sure they are quite a mess but plenty of others may benefit from those with experience in both shooting various aspects and also people with experience with what that means for post too.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Haris Mlivic]

Well, in case of RED cameras, you actually loose information by going anamorphic. You win a bunch of other cool stuff like the look, distortion and flares. But you loose pixels. This is because the sensor is so wide that i requires you to crop a lot the sides in order to get a 1.20:1 (of 6:5 as red calls it) box in the center of the sensor required to for a 2x stretch. 2x lenses were made for 4:3 formats, and instead of cropping top/bottom for a 2.39:1 ratio, you expose the whole 4:3 frame and stretch it.

In case of 1.3x anamorphic, its a bit similar, but you crop less on the sides. Since the Dragon sensor is wider than 16:9, you still loose pixels on the sides since you need to crop to 16:9 first, in order to stretch it back out to 2.39:1 once exposed. But I haven't done the math on this one, don't actually know if you would gain or loose pixels going anamorphic from 1.3x. The cropping required from 2:1 sensor to 2.39:1 frame, must in that case be higher than the crop going from 2:1 sensor to 16:9. It is indeed an interesting question!

 

[Lee Kelly]

I mean, i know it works and thousands of people are shooting 2x everyday on Dragon but the info is a little thin as to what resolution and ratio settings get the most out of the sensor.
2:1
6:5
WS
Blah blah blah

Then with a strange lens that is 1.5 and not readily supported in the menu on Dragon??? I have seen samples online with similar lenses with that kind of 1.5x stretch all looking good on (what I assume is) a 2.39:1 delivery, or maybe its more closer to 1.85:1? I wonder if these delivery ratios are a post crop or straight out of camera for a 1.5x lens?

There are some very talented people on this forum who are very generous with their sharing of info and I appreciate the simple explanation of these questions.

 

[Ryan Glover]

With 2x lenses, you want to use 6K 6:5 (3792x3160 - sides cropped a lot) with the 2x anamorphic setting turned on. This will give you a 2.40:1 image on your displays and in Redcine-X.

For 1.33x lenses, use 6KHD (16:9 - sides cropped a little) with the 1.3X anamorphic setting turned on. This will give you a 2.40:1-ish image on your displays and in Redcine-X.

1.5x lenses (usually just vintage adapters I think?) would require a little more manual post work as that squeeze ratio isn't supported really. You can use them with the 6KHD mode to get 2.67:1 footage then crop the sides in post a little, or with the 6K 3:2 mode to get 2.25:1 and then crop a little off the height in post to get to 2.40:1. I would use the 1.3x anamorphic menu setting so that the image on the monitor looks almost correct while shooting. Then in post manually do the squeeze to 1.5x)

As far as DCP goes, I believe, but I'm not exactly sure, the container for widescreen movies has to be 1.2:1 so they can project them with an 2x projector lens. But I'm guessing you could have a final aspect ratio wider than 2.40:1 by also having some extra letterboxing?

FF, 2:1, WS are all for spherical lenses (unless you want a super widescreen aspect ratio).

Hope this helps.

 

[Lee Kelly]

I was just going through my cards from a recent shoot that I was underwater camera operator on. We were shooting a mix of spherical (super speeds) and anamorphic (Kowas)
I set frame guides in my monitor settings for 2.39:1 as this was the frame they were going to finish in. I think we were just set for 5kHD on the sensor.
When we swapped in the Kowas my monitor went to the aspect ratio we set for the Kowas which I thimk we 1.3x and was quite hard to monitor as it was the typical low/wide frame of 2.39:1.
Opening in Red Cine the first card is 'full screen' and the second card still maintains that low/wide 2.39:1. I guess this is a perfect example of having to post crop the first spherical footage to match the ratio of the Kowas.
Even though it was harder to monitor, and confidently assume sharp focus on the low/wide screen, to get that same 2.39:1 aspect in spherical, would I just do 5kWS and then in Red Cine the files would open natively in that aspect? Makes me wonder why we didnt do that in the first place and save the post cropping, although cropping later, gives you some room to move and frame you shots up or down a bit right? Is this 'zooming' in at all and eating into your image quality?
Ideally I want to shoot in a wide screen format with 1.5x, 1.33x or 2x and get the most out of the sensor as possible, like everyone else I guess.

 

[Ryan Glover]

Yeah, I Just did a music video on my Red One MX that mixed spherical with 2x anamorphic. Used the 4K 6:5 mode for my 2x anamorphic lenses and the 4.5K WS setting for the spherical lenses.
Made framing and post very simple. The two aspect ratios weren't exactly the same, but very close. We're finishing in 16x9 with letterbox, so it's super easy.

 

[Satsuki Murashige]

You need to decide what the final aspect ratio of your project is going to be before you can determine which camera format to use. Assuming that your intended final aspect ratio is 2.39:1, you work backwards from there. Therefore a 1.33x squeeze lens would require a camera format of 1.8:1 (or nearly 16:9) to achieve 2.39 (1.33 x 1.8 = 2.394). A 1.5x squeeze lens would require a 1.59:1 camera format. 2x squeeze requires 1.2:1, just like the 35mm anamorphic film format. If your final intended aspect ratio is something other than 2.39, then you'll have to calculate your own camera format and create custom frame lines or a custom ground glass.

 

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

With 2x lenses, you want to use 6K 6:5 (3792x3160 - sides cropped a lot) with the 2x anamorphic setting turned on. This will give you a 2.40:1 image on your displays and in Redcine-X.

...

FF, 2:1, WS are all for spherical lenses (unless you want a super widescreen aspect ratio).

Hope this helps.

Hi Ryan, this is very useful, thanks! I'm trying to figure out if you want to build in some safety around the frame for potential post-reframing, what would you do in that case? To maximize the sensor usage, and have some additional image outside the 2.40 area for potential reframing/stabilization?

My next planned shoot is with the EPIC Dragon and the Cooke Anamorphic 2x 40mm.

 

[Ryan Glover]

You could shoot in the 6K 3:2 mode (with the 2x squeeze turned on and then add 2.40:1 crop marks over the image. That would let you frame for things properly but your files would have an aspect ratio of 3:1 to reframe your shot left and right in post within the 2.40:1 frame. You won't be able to reframe the shot up and down without cropping the footage though.

 

[Nikhil Kamkolkar]

You could shoot in the 6K 3:2 mode (with the 2x squeeze turned on and then add 2.40:1 crop marks on top. That would let you frame for things properly but your files would have an aspect ration of 3:1 to reframe your shot left and right in post within the 2.40:1 frame. You won't be able to reframe the shot up and down without cropping the footage though.

Thanks Ryan! Looking forward to playing in this world.