Anamorphic Cinemascope in Native 1920x810 MJPEG Mode
- Thread starter Lpowell
- Start date
Yes, since no one has been able to make MJPEG 1920x1080 work reliably...
Congrats! Enjoy!
Just out of curiosity has anyone else tried this?:
4:3 settings selected in camera
ptools MJPEG 1920x720 (2.66)
Quality: 300,200,120,100
Table: 4,4,4,4
For fun I was messing around with 960x720 in MJPEG 16:9 and everything was working correctly...So I tried it with the 4:3 setting and it worked again. I think I did the math right but with a 2x lens and the above you should end up with a 2.66 frame. I dont have my anamorphic lens yet so I cannot test out whether this works or not. I did think it was odd that I was able to capture at all in 4:3 mode. lpowell or anyone else care to test it out and see what results they come back with?
Update:
I also tried just tried:
MJPEG 1280x480 (2.66)
MJPEG 1280x544 (2.35)
(with same settings)
Q: 400,300,250,188
T: 4,4,4,4
(modular settings)
422 checked
4:3 turned on in camera
Everything seemed stable and I was able to record around my apartment for 2 min with no crashes. I know the 4:3 is having an effect because the image is coming out squished like in the 1920x810 settings lpowell was awesome enough to give us. I hope someone with a 2x anamorphic is able to try these and they come back functional.
Update 2:
Realizing I was going about it wrong using 4:3 mode I tried this:
960x720 (4:3 checked in camera)
Q: 400,300,250,188
T: 4,4,4,4
(modular settings)
422 checked
I received a write error within the first 4 seconds but then I continued to film and I never saw it again. Taking 422 off might make this more stable however finding a setting where it will work will be the ultimate goal. Sorry lpowell if this is hijacking your thread as thats not what I am trying to do. All of this is based on your findings so I thought it was applicable.
4:3 settings selected in camera
ptools MJPEG 1920x720 (2.66)
Quality: 300,200,120,100
Table: 4,4,4,4
For fun I was messing around with 960x720 in MJPEG 16:9 and everything was working correctly...So I tried it with the 4:3 setting and it worked again. I think I did the math right but with a 2x lens and the above you should end up with a 2.66 frame. I dont have my anamorphic lens yet so I cannot test out whether this works or not. I did think it was odd that I was able to capture at all in 4:3 mode. lpowell or anyone else care to test it out and see what results they come back with?
Update:
I also tried just tried:
MJPEG 1280x480 (2.66)
MJPEG 1280x544 (2.35)
(with same settings)
Q: 400,300,250,188
T: 4,4,4,4
(modular settings)
422 checked
4:3 turned on in camera
Everything seemed stable and I was able to record around my apartment for 2 min with no crashes. I know the 4:3 is having an effect because the image is coming out squished like in the 1920x810 settings lpowell was awesome enough to give us. I hope someone with a 2x anamorphic is able to try these and they come back functional.
Update 2:
Realizing I was going about it wrong using 4:3 mode I tried this:
960x720 (4:3 checked in camera)
Q: 400,300,250,188
T: 4,4,4,4
(modular settings)
422 checked
I received a write error within the first 4 seconds but then I continued to film and I never saw it again. Taking 422 off might make this more stable however finding a setting where it will work will be the ultimate goal. Sorry lpowell if this is hijacking your thread as thats not what I am trying to do. All of this is based on your findings so I thought it was applicable.
Last edited:
If you set MJPEG width to 960 and leave height at 720, you'll get an HD video frame that is squeezed horizontally by 33%. If you then resampled the frame vertically, from 720 down to 540 pixels high, you'd get a correctly proportioned 16:9 aspect ratio at the SD resolution of 960x540.
I don't know what you mean by "the 4:3 setting" or "4:3 mode"?
Man, thats what I will get for trying to be revolutionary at 2 in the morning. I completely read my manual wrong lol...Yes I was using the TV aspect mode but there is a 4:3 setting in the stills option however we are unable to film with it...My thinking was we could just set up a 960x720 frame and then when filming with the 2x lens it would squish the image even further. But we could then stretch that image out to 1920x720 in post and that would work...But I cant test this since my lens isnt here.
However this did get me thinking...since vitality has already hacked 720p 16x9. I wonder if he (or others) could remove the squish I noticed and just have the camera interpret the image as a crop? Even a cropped 1280x960 would be very helpful. Just thinking out loud but 960x720 crop would probably be able to produce in camera 2.66 playback.
Vitaliy already said that he thought VGA mode (640x480) could be altered to record in higher resolutions. That would be very convenient, cause people could record normal 16:9 720p MJPEG with one lens, then switch to VGA mode for shooting with another.
Several cool combinations of anamorphics could be used to arrive at the same aspect ratio shooting both 16:9 and 4:3
1. 16:9 with 1.5x anamorphic and 4:3 with 2x anamorphic for 2.66 Cinemascope
2. 16:9 with 1.33x anamorphic and 4:3 with 1.75x anamorphic for 2.37 Cinemascope
3. 16:9 without and 4:3 with 1.33x anamorphic for Widescreen
Yeah I think I remember following a thread you posted where he mentioned that. I can only imagine how busy this guy must be lol...I came across an old thread where he gives instructions on how to get into the code and view it. So I started digging around the 1.34 firmware the other day and realized I have no idea what I am looking for haha.
nice one. Normally you would use 1920x540 (=1080/2) instead of 570. Does that mean your anamorphic isn't the full 2x?
Actually. I did try 1920x540. But, with the 1920x 540 , there will be a white color line appearing at the lower edge of the vid. Therefore I avoid such effect by using 1920x570 ratio, albeit some perspective distortion.
Man, cant get enough anamorphic :-D...I'm curious about this white line. I've never seen it before, does it show up on all of your videos?
Edit: lpowell, do you have any footage captured with your lomo? I've been digging around on those and am thinking about picking one up.
Edit: lpowell, do you have any footage captured with your lomo? I've been digging around on those and am thinking about picking one up.
Last edited:
Hi omnidecay,
This is the sample of my 1920*540 patch. No anamorphic attachment in this vid, though.
The day we can shoot 4:3 at higher resolutions with the GH13, i want to try something like this page from Arri. http://www.arridigital.com/creative/film-look/anamorphic
I know it's silly comparing to a 50k camera, but i'd love to see how far the GH13 can come, compared to the Alexa, in 4:2:2 with an anamorphic attachment. I imagine that when done right, GH13 footage will be ready for anamorphic cinema screening.
I know it's silly comparing to a 50k camera, but i'd love to see how far the GH13 can come, compared to the Alexa, in 4:2:2 with an anamorphic attachment. I imagine that when done right, GH13 footage will be ready for anamorphic cinema screening.