CinemaScope

Robert_Niemann said:
Will there be an anamorphotic adapter for the HVX200 to shoot in 1:2,35?
Click to expand...

Though possible, its unlikely. For a 2.35:1 ratio with this camera you'd generally shoot in 1080P and crop in post (That's also how Episode II and III were shot).

If the lens is decent, it should still make a great picture, and you can always do a 1.77 "pan and scan" on it to 720P if someone wants to distribute your project for HD without "those black bars".

Philip Williams
www.philipwilliams.com
 
I hope the HVX includes a setting for 2.35:1 cinemascope framing guides in the LCD. That would make framing shots a heck of a lot easier! I know when I shoot something in 1080/24p, it's going to be cropped to cinemascope. I can't wait!
 
jrv3034 said:
I hope the HVX includes a setting for 2.35:1 cinemascope framing guides in the LCD. That would make framing shots a heck of a lot easier! I know when I shoot something in 1080/24p, it's going to be cropped to cinemascope. I can't wait!
Click to expand...

Considering the audience for this camera you'd almost consider that a given. The XLH1 has 2.35 guides despite it being marketed to studios for TV work. Guess we'll know soon enough.
 
Even if the HVX doesn't include 2.35 guidlines, I'm sure that someone will release an lcd protector film with guidlines printed on.
 
An anamorphic adapter wouldn't be appropriate to obtain a 2.35 aspect ratio as 1.778 is the widest native aspect ratio supported by DV. Shooting 1.778 and then masking to 2.35 is the correct approach.

Regarding the in camera "guidelines" I asked this question of Jan at Resfest in LA and she stated that the answer was 'no, not even the Varicam has that feature'.
 
khmuse said:
Regarding the in camera "guidelines" I asked this question of Jan at Resfest in LA and she stated that the answer was 'no, not even the Varicam has that feature'.
Click to expand...
Bummer. It seems like such an easy thing to implement... Obviously they can't add it now, since I'm sure all software and programming is set in stone for a December release. Hmmm, maybe for the HVX200a.
 
Simon Wyndham said:
Actually optically stretching the image vertically and then projecting anamorphically at 2.35:1 is a good way of doing things to make maximum use of the resolution.

Canon sells a device for doing just this very thing for use on cameras like the Varicam although it is quite a bit of extra length to the camera.

http://opd.usa.canon.com/html/industrial_bctv/p_hdec_ACV-235_intro.shtml
Click to expand...

NOW we're talking! This is what we need for the HVX. Forget the Mini/Micro/G/Agus 35mm adapters... I want Cinemascope in full resolution! :thumbsup:

Ok, so I'd need a 2/3" HD camera like the Cinealta or Varicam. Details... How much does a used varicam go for on eBay? :cry:
 
This type of anamorphic adapter (ACV-235) is not one that can be used with something like the HVX. Unlikely the LA7200, this adapter is intended to go between a 2/3" camera and an external lens, not in front of the HVX's lens.

What you would need (and isn't currently available) is a zoom through adapter like the LA7200 sized for the HVX. Then you would get the full resolution benefit of the HVX, but you would have a non standard PAR to deal with and you would still have to contend with the minimum aperture issues to ensure acceptable horizontal and vertical focus.

Sorry, and it really is too bad, but this isn't a solution for a camera like the HVX.

PS This adapter has a list price of $29,500 so I doubt too many HVX users would be interested.
 
They're joking, that's why khmuse! But it's true that we have here an interesting point to develop from now. We need a 2.35:1 way to go without resolution losses as it's possible to see not in Star Wars episodes, maybe, but, for instance, in the Lars von Trier master piece's, Dogville.
 
Yeah, I was aware that no one was really considering a nearly $30k solution!

I too am a fan of 2.35 and use this all the time with a DVX/LA7200 combination and a letter box mask (works perfect for a DVD project). A little over a year ago, we started work on a feature film project that was intended to be film out and shot with a DVX/LA7200 combination. We shot 8 days (a little over 20 minutes of the film) as a feature development project, then spent the money to blow it up to film for an investors screening. The outcome was reasonably acceptable, but in the end, not good enough to go forward with the project so we abandoned the concept of this camera/adapter combination for a theatrical project.

A 2.35 solution from the HVX would be wonderful, but with it's fixed lens design, it will require a zoom through solution like the LA7200 if you want to solve the problem optically (and will inherit all the issues that this approach brings). Personally I am hoping that the HVX shooting 720 (perhaps 1080 but I like the idea of being able to overcrank) will yield enough resolution advantage that it will hold up for a film out project.

I would be very interested to learn how anyone else intends to approach a scope aspect ratio project with the HVX.
 
khmuse said:
A little over a year ago, we started work on a feature film project that was intended to be film out and shot with a DVX/LA7200 combination. We shot 8 days (a little over 20 minutes of the film) as a feature development project, then spent the money to blow it up to film for an investors screening. The outcome was reasonably acceptable, but in the end, not good enough to go forward with the project so we abandoned the concept of this camera/adapter combination for a theatrical project.
Click to expand...
Why? Can you be more specific? 'cause, as I can see, we have in the some wave...and both experiences can be useful.
 
khmuse said:
I would be very interested to learn how anyone else intends to approach a scope aspect ratio project with the HVX.
Click to expand...

I was originally considering a cropped 'scope' solution using the HVX for a feature I'm working on. I decided to abandon that idea, beacuse I wanted to use the overcrank capabilities in 720P while maintaining as much resolution as possible for a possible film blow-up.

I just can't see this camera carrying enough resolution (cropped and blown up) to make a satisfactory cinemascope print. But, then again, I may be wrong.
 
I don't know the LA7200 device but I think, apparentely, there isn't resolution losses or am I wrong? And there is another from Century Optics - a respectable company - isn't it? In this case, there will be for the native 16:9 HVX, for sure. And the next step after the previous anamorphic concern to 16:9 will be, of course, the 2.35:1.

Although the Fritz Lang's opinion [I love this one but I not agree with his thought :) other time(s) other needs] about the format: only for snakes or funerals...quoting KCFILMS: «It's not the plane, it's the pilot...» nevertheless the 2.35:1 is the format, indeed! Any director knows the more difficult that there is in to handle with it, so...

KCFilms said:
I was originally considering a cropped 'scope' solution using the HVX for a feature I'm working on. I decided to abandon that idea, beacuse I wanted to use the overcrank capabilities in 720P while maintaining as much resolution as possible for a possible film blow-up.

I just can't see this camera carrying enough resolution (cropped and blown up) to make a satisfactory cinemascope print. But, then again, I may be wrong.
Click to expand...
Who knows? (DVX did it for a non-cinemascope print). And that's why we are looking for a solution without resolution losses. I'm convinced after HVX release, there will be a similar solution that ones for 16:9 DVX but now to 2.35:1 without crop (like ACV-235 but there's other business - it's only a question of numbers/market/profits/money), or will I be (only) a believer?
 
<PS> Some years ago, I saw a Veit Helmer's short film [the director of "Tuvalu" - for who doesn't know: a bulgarian shooting for a german co-production (I suppose) very interesting - and former Wim Wenders student]:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106900/technical

A Super8 shooting for a 35mm blow-up @ 2.35:1. Simply, marvelous and very well aesthetics explored (no! :huh: it's not the name of a software...)
 
I remember talking with a fellow from Century Optics about a 16x9 adapter for a lens I have with an 82mm filter front (same as HVX.) The guy said producing an anamorphic adapter that size would be very difficult (read, expensive.)

Add to that diffuculty, the need to maintain high resolution for the HVX and I think we're going to at least match the cost of the camera. And let's not forget that any anamorphic lens, no matter how well built, is going to degrade resolution by its very nature.

If you're in love with 2:35, by all means go for it. I'm sure there'll be a way to get it with this camera even if you have to crop.
 
Emanuel said:
Why? You can be more specific? 'cause, as I can see, we have in the some wave...and both experiences can be useful.
Click to expand...

While the DVX/LA7200 combination was about the best solution that we could find for a low budget feature (at that time), it really wasn't good enough for our proposes (1.778 anamorphic matted to 1.85). From about the middle to the back of the screening room (about a 300 seater) it looked pretty good, but any closer, and the resolution limits of the SD format became too obvious. We considered restarting the project on the SDX900, but again came to the conclusion that SD wouldn't hold up well enough for our purposes.

Now that the HVX is forthcoming, we are hoping that its 720p performance will be good enough to go forward. If it holds up to film out blowup at 1.778 (and looks good from any seat in a theater), then I don't see any reason to assume that matting it down to 2.35 would be appreciably worse. I have high aspirations for this camera, with its 4:2:2 color sampling and apparently very high resolution (from what I saw at Resfest in LA) it may be just what we need. The only down side is that I do expect that it will be 1 or more stops slower than the DVX so we will have to add a little to our lighting budget, but I don't expect this to be a serious issue for our application.

December is only a matter of days off, so all this speculation will soon be over.

Waiting with fingers crossed!
 
KCFilms said:
I remember talking with a fellow from Century Optics about a 16x9 adapter for a lens I have with an 82mm filter front (same as HVX.) The guy said producing an anamorphic adapter that size would be very difficult (read, expensive.)

Add to that diffuculty, the need to maintain high resolution for the HVX and I think we're going to at least match the cost of the camera.
Click to expand...
So much?... And a step ring possibility to 72mm for the DVX adapters. How will it be the result? Isn't it possible without losses or vignetting or other freak issues?

khmuse said:
I have high aspirations for this camera, with its 4:2:2 color sampling and apparently very high resolution (from what I saw at Resfest in LA) it may be just what we need.
Click to expand...
What's exactly your opinion about that you saw?...(I'm in Europe!) Did you like as your expectative or not? I know that there isn't progressive, blá blá blá blá blá blá...60i but maybe it's not possible yet to know its cinematic/film look properties or think in a possible comparative with F900 footage, or I'm wrong?

khmuse said:
Waiting with fingers crossed!
Click to expand...
Indeed...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top