Anamorphic a must for film blow?

[Ldogg]

I am filming a Doc this summer. If I don't blow it, I think the content should be good enough to blow up to film and entered into festivals. My question is....

If I am certain on blowing up to film from 24p(a) recordings, do I certainly need to have an anamorphic adaptor. Thanks

[Barry_Green]

No, you don't NEED it. It can make the blowup look sharper, but it's not absolutely mandatory. Shooting 24PA will give you a sharper look than any VX2000 or PD150 blowup, and certainly plenty of those have been done.

[Sean Michael]

Yesterday, I did several side-by-side tests of the native 4:3 versus 16:9 "squeeze" mode.

I viewed the results on both a 60-inch HDTV and a 27-inch SDTV. My reluctant conclusion is that 4:3 looks significantly better than 16:9 squeeze, especially on the HDTV.

Of course I knew that squeeze mode compromises resolution...but wasn't sure the difference would be enough to warrant shooting in 4:3. Now I believe it is.

If I were definitely, positively planning on film-out, I think I'd opt for the anamorphic lens, or just stick with 4:3.

I've recently watched some great documentaries (ie. 2003's Spellbound) that were all shot in 4:3. So now I think I'm back to shooting my doc in 4:3. Might as well use the native strengths of the DVX, and focus our efforts on content.

[Ldogg]

Thanks very much Barry and Sean. Sorry for the late reply, had to leave town. I think I will stick with the 4:3 and put the extra cash into audio. Thanks again

[xander76]

Thanks very much Barry and Sean. Sorry for the late reply, had to leave town. I think I will stick with the 4:3 and put the extra cash into audio. Thanks again

I think this is absolutely the right call. Only about 10% of your audience will even notice the aspect ratio of your piece, and even those 10% probably won't care. However, 100% of them will notice (and be very annoyed by) muffled, bad audio.