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 :)

Sensor chart

Omg Scarlet 2/3 is soooo small, omg!! :waaa: :clown2:
 
Petr Dvorak said:
Omg Scarlet 2/3 is soooo small, omg!! :waaa: :clown2:
Click to expand...

Yeah but it's also small enough to mount on a remote controlled helicopter, motorcycle handlebars, or toss in a small backpack. And keep in mind that major films like Revenge of the Sith were shot on that size sensor.
 
Jarred Land said:
Hey Jeff, 120 and 220 are the same size, a 220 ROLL is just longer in the roll for more exposures.

And I dont understand your comment about 120 not being used compared to 645... They are the same thing... you use a 120 or 220 roll to capture 645 frames with ( unless your shooting polaroids ) . And I use both of them all the time.. they actually are still quite popular, albeit a total pain in the ass.
Click to expand...

I concur, 645 is a pain, but very rewarding!! There is something very special about MF.
 
USlatin said:
Something seems to be a bit off, 4 perforation S35 looks taller than Misterium-X.
Click to expand...

That's because it is taller. The S35 sensors are not large enough to do 4-perforation super 35mm or proper anamorphic. I'm sure there will be modes that are closer than the RED ONE is... but it is still a three-perf sensor. That's one of the enormous benefits of the FF35 and 645 models.
 
Tom said:
And keep in mind that major films like Revenge of the Sith were shot on that size sensor.
Click to expand...

Yup, Scarlet 2/3" is the Yoda of sensors.
Small, but still kicks ass.
 
Brook Willard said:
That's because it is taller. The S35 sensors are not large enough to do 4-perforation super 35mm or proper anamorphic. I'm sure there will be modes that are closer than the RED ONE is... but it is still a three-perf sensor. That's one of the enormous benefits of the FF35 and 645 models.
Click to expand...

4-perf 35mm Full Aperture (Super) is 24.84mm x 18.67mm, but most frames you compose for within that are 24mm wide.

3-perf 35mm Full Aperture is 24.89mm x 13.87mm.

The 4-perf 35mm anamorphic camera aperture is 22mm x 18.59mm.

Other cameras with sensors in the S35 range:

The Arri-D21 sensor (2.8K RAW) is around 4x3, so is very close to 4-perf Super-35 -- it is 23.76mm x 17.8mm.

The Dalsa Origin sensor (4K RAW) is larger than S35 and around 2x1, but that makes the height closer to 4-perf S35 -- it's 34mm x 17.2mm.

The Phantom HD sensor (2K RAW) is square and 25.6mm x 25.6mm.

The RED ONE Mysterium sensor (4.5K RAW) is 24.4mm x 13.7mm, extremely close to 3-perf 35mm Full Aperture.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
The RED ONE Mysterium sensor (4.5K RAW) is 24.4mm x 13.7mm, extremely close to 3-perf 35mm Full Aperture.
Click to expand...

Ah, yes... But will we ever get to record an image that size with the RED One? 4.5K is coming, but as of the last report, it was to be 2:1. Actually 4480x2240 sticks in the mind for this one. Or 24.18mm x 12.09mm. I guess it's all speculation until we see what RED gives us. Either way, it's all good.
 
The 645 is 3:4 aspect ratio sensor. Seems great for stills (which I am sure is the intent) but it has a lot of extra real estate for cinema work. I assume there will be numerous windowed formats, such as one similar to standard 65mm.
 
rpshooter said:
The 645 is 3:4 aspect ratio sensor. Seems great for stills (which I am sure is the intent) but it has a lot of extra real estate for cinema work. I assume there will be numerous windowed formats, such as one similar to standard 65mm.
Click to expand...

Think Anamorphic here... :)
 
Don't know a lot about anamorphic. I guess you need Imax/medium format type anamorphic lenses to cover the 645. Do these lenses exist? I would think panavision 70 ana lenses might not have a large enough image circle, but I guess you could window down. any thoughts here?
 
I doubt Panavision has complete sets of the old Ultra Panavision 65 anamorphic lenses -- those only had a 1.25X squeeze anyway to squeeze 2.7 : 1 onto a 2.2 : 1 neg.

Plus the 5-perf 65mm neg is only 23mm tall, and the 645 neg is 42mm tall.

There was an old format called CinemaScope 55, which used a 55mm negative and big anamorphic lenses with 2X squeeze, only used on two features: "The King and I" and "Carousel". But even that format was probably not 42mm tall.

With a sensor that big, with that much resolution, you can easily just crop of you want a 2.40 image.
 
It's easy to forget how incredible sensor (or indeed film) technology is: an image recorded onto something the size of a postage stamp looks fantastic when projected onto a cinema screen. We take a lot for granted!
 
Thanks Brook.

Great.

Just for the reference to compare with Panavision and Arri original papers about the formats see the pictures below:

Cine_formats2.jpg

Panavision film formats.

cine_formats1.jpg

Arri film formats.
 
Ah this chart is great thanks so much! And I never knew that revenge of the sith was shot on a 2/3" sensor? What camera/brand? I always assumed they were done on film. But I guess I should have assumed otherwise given Lucas' bent toward technology.

-Josh
 
David Mullen ASC said:
"Phantom Menace" was shot in 35mm anamorphic (Hawk). One scene was shot on a Sony HDW-750 HDCAM in interlace.

"Attack of the Clones" was shot on the Sony F900 HDCAM

"Revenge of the Sith" was shot on the Sony F950 to HDCAM-SR
Click to expand...


Lets hope the next few will be shot on red eh? I would LOVE to see that!

-Josh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top