Personalized Filming Formats?

[BrendanLeahy]

Hey all - I can't seem to figure out if it's actually possible or not... Can I create my own recording format, or am I simply bound to FF, HD, 2.4, 1.22? I know how to create the actual guides for what I want, but would love to see if I can "black out" the dead areas in-camera!

If not... RED team - GO!

 

[Mike P.]

I think this is Dragon only. Or at least RED claimed it was (otherwise, even Scarlet-X would have ANA modes, as we'd just window/crop it manually).

 

[Phil Holland]

Hey all - I can't seem to figure out if it's actually possible or not... Can I create my own recording format, or am I simply bound to FF, HD, 2.4, 1.22? I know how to create the actual guides for what I want, but would love to see if I can "black out" the dead areas in-camera!

If not... RED team - GO!

Currently you are bound to the standard formats in camera: FF, 2:1, WS, HD, 6:5, 4:3, 3:2, 4:1, and 8:1.

However, it's been mentioned in the past that Red might experiment with custom "user defined" formats. We just haven't seen it yet or if it's worth pursuing.

Personally I'd love to have it, specifically for 2.20:1 which i've been working a bit in lately. However, I can see this creating chaos outside of "standards". Double edged sword here really.

 

[Marc Wielage]

Personally I'd love to have it, specifically for 2.20:1 which i've been working a bit in lately. However, I can see this creating chaos outside of "standards". Double edged sword here really.

That's the beauty of "standards": there's so many to choose from. :embarassed:

 

[Björn Benckert]

Personally I would prefer to have some sort of option for frame size where i could choose to slide two parameters out of the H,W and ratio.

So for example set full height and then select ratio. And if I want to shoot more overcranked than the resolution allow or such, I would just lower my hieght until I got more fps to play with... as of now the none existing ana 2,40 full sensor height drives me nuts.

 

[Marc Wielage]

I personally think it's a much smarter idea to just shoot in 1.9:1 full-frame and mask off to whatever aspect ratio you want. That way, you'll always have the room to reposition the framing as required in post. I have yet to work on a film in the last 10 years when we haven't repositioned at least 100 shots. I can think of a few were half the movie was repositioned in some small or large way. You can't do that if you're using every pixel of the captured frame.

Note also for those inventing new aspect ratios: distributors and theaters are only really set up to handle certain set aspect ratios like 1.85, 1.78, and 2.40. Before you commit to a weird, new aspect ratio, talk to your distributor and make sure this is something they're willing to a) show in public, and b) pay for. I personally think the existing aspect ratios we already have are perfectly sufficient for the kinds of stories most people need to tell, but I accept that there are filmmakers that have unusual ideas -- like Christopher Nolan with Interstellar -- who are willing to buck the trend and go with shifting aspect ratios within the picture. But I also think you have to wait to a point where you've earned the right to break the rules.

 

[Phil Holland]

I tend to agree Marc as they are standards.

Heh. 2.20:1 isn't breaking the rules though. It's looking back through an older "playbook". I often feel the same about 2:1.

These days most of my content is finished for DCI 4K with various aspect ratios and then there's the UHD 4K which tends to be always 16x9 content.

My bigger problem from a creative aesthetic is while for general "programming" 1.78:1, 16x9, is just fine. But when I shoot narrative work I and many others are looking for those wider frames.

1.9:1 though, that's actually a pretty happy spot in reality. Especially if maximizing projection potential.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I would love to see the arbitrary or custom frame size option that rears its head every now and then. It would be super useful for VFX work, game development, digital signage and other tasks not specifically destined to common cinema and broadcast aspects.

 

[Brian Merlen]

i was very interested in this functionality when red discussed its potential in the dragon...specifically if you can pull faster frame rates as you crop the sensor (like phantoms do)...


as a phantom owner i dial in weird shit all the time, and then i get to see cool stuff at scientific like speeds...that is a huge reason why i bought an SD phantom (that can do 5,000fps at half SD resolution).... super cool stuff (though i understand with the red refresh rate my specific interest might not work out nearly as fast, but maybe a few fps here or there?)


ps bonus points for in camera shapes...i wanna shoot triangular brah

 

[Luke Kokinos]

ps bonus points for in camera shapes...i wanna shoot triangular brah

Triangles and other various shapes would be awesome for shooting split screen footage. Though I'm very doubtful the R1 would ever get more ratio presets.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Speaking of shapes. I wish we could customize sensor scanning and resets. Instead of horizontal scan-line readouts, it would be awesome to be able to do staggered sweeps to mimic a film shutter or or even star burst or radial patterns for some trippy motion blur and skew effects. Heck, I'd even take the option to mirror or flip the scanning for inverted camera mountings and 3D rigs and whatnot.