16x9 - what solution is best ?

D

Draccan

Well-known member
Hi,

I know this is not a new topic, but I have read a lot about 16x9 in many places and I am wondering what is the best solution as the information is unclear.

I have a dvx100ae (Pal, 25p) and I want to create film in 16x9 so that it can be transferred to Cinema 35mm standard film.

Is it better to use the Panasonic Anamorphic adapter? Or the built in feature squeeze mode or should I just film in 4:3 and cut it in Avid afterwards. If I do the last I have read about people using cardboard to block the top and bottom of the monitor as to get an idea of how to order the film as to be cut later to 16x9.

Does anyone have experience with squeeze mode and transfer to cinema 35mm to the big screen? I know some claim the squeeze mode is actually not so diff from the anamorphic mode, but is that true when you do transfer to film / big screen?

Best regards,

Draccan
 
Anamorphic adapter. No question about it. You mention 35 mm film transfer than I guess you can take the time you need to adjust the focus which could be more difficult with the anamorphic adapter. You would like to work as on the film set we use to. Than use the time you need to make the settings good. First of all focus and exposure. Use a 16:9 TV or monitor at last on the set and you gonna be happy with your footage.
 
SergejIvanovits said:
Anamorphic adapter. No question about it. You mention 35 mm film transfer than I guess you can take the time you need to adjust the focus which could be more difficult with the anamorphic adapter. You would like to work as on the film set we use to. Than use the time you need to make the settings good. First of all focus and exposure. Use a 16:9 TV or monitor at last on the set and you gonna be happy with your footage.
Click to expand...
So anamorphic adapter is best?

Do you really need a 16:9 monitor?? Cant you just show it in 16:9 mode (letterbox) with black cut off at the bottom and top?

Do you have experience with squeeze mode?
 
Draccan said:
So anamorphic adapter is best?

Do you really need a 16:9 monitor?? Cant you just show it in 16:9 mode (letterbox) with black cut off at the bottom and top?

Do you have experience with squeeze mode?
Click to expand...
No, you can't because your camcorder is recording an 4:3 image with information for 16:9. Your lcd shows an oval and not a circle even your target is a circle. If you are using a 4:3 with a 16:9 switch than the preview picture will be softer than your original. You are not shooting HD than I guess a cheap 16:9 lcd-tv will do the job for you.

You need the adapter because with adapter your final image is 1024x576 and with cropping the letterbox to 16:9 you get only 720x405 or something.
 
Why is the film out so important to you? In Scandinavia the digital projection is in. All those shortfilms and spots before the main movie are projected digitally and now in HD. You can rent the cinema and show your movie without the filmtransfer.
 
SergejIvanovits said:
Why is the film out so important to you? In Scandinavia the digital projection is in. All those shortfilms and spots before the main movie are projected digitally and now in HD. You can rent the cinema and show your movie without the filmtransfer.
Click to expand...

Just want the option of being able to sell it for a distribution company if it is good. So better prepare all the details, so it is easily transferable to film. Still the cinemas generally project in standard Cinema 35mm.
Besides I like the 16:9 standard, but prefer to film in digital rather than 35 mm film.

But your answer is good. And I believe I will buy the anamorphic adapter - the resolution IS important. (Here goes another 1000$...)... and I still need sound recording equipment .... phew!

LLD
 
Your sound and the light is more important than your resolution. If the sound is perfect than the audience will buy your film-quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top