how to unsqueeze anamorphic?

M

matt9b

Well-known member
Hi guys,

Does anyone know what is the right way to go about unsqueezing anamorphic image in vegas for an anamorphic 1.5x adapter?

Its recorded in PAL 720x1280, with a 1.5x anamorphic adapter so the image is squashed

What does the 1.5 stand for? Does it mean the image needs to be insqueezed to 1.5 times its size on width only?

Thanks :)
 
Last edited:
Which anamorphic adapter is this?

In any case, you might try a PAR of 1.21 (DV widescreen) or 1.364. Right-click, Properties.
 
David Jimerson said:
Which anamorphic adapter is this?

In any case, you might try a PAR of 1.21 (DV widescreen) or 1.364. Right-click, Properties.
Click to expand...

Thanks David :) Is it definitely a 1.5 squeeze horizontally only and nothing vertically? It's an iscorama 36. Would be nice to know the real settings for this, if anyone knows it..

Thanks for the PAR suggestion.. Is there is a way to globally set this? Global PAR doesn't seem to affect the events at all.

What about using the 'sony deform' effect to expand the image horizontally on the whole video track - would this work or am I losing image quality?

If anyone knows if the 1.5x means it stretches it by 1.5x horizontally that would be a great help

Thanks :)
 
Last edited:
OK, the info you added to the original post changes the game significantly. :)

1280x720 is already 1.000, so change the pixel aspect ratio to 1.5.

You have to do this for the clips, not the project settings.

(BTW -- HD isn't "PAL" -- PAL is an SD standard only. You shot 720p. Best to say that and then give the frame rate.)
 
Thanks David! :) 1.5x, that's what I thought. So how come changing the pixel aspect ratio to 1.5 makes everyone look slightly fat? I'm wondering if this lens is really 1.25x or similar.. unless that's just an artifact of the anamorphic format somehow.. stretching it by only 1.25x seems to work better

There are usually hundreds if not thousands of small clips to deal with when working on a project.. is there no way to stretch it globally at all?

If I use the track FX and select 'deform' and stretch it horizontally, this works on all the clips at once. Is the 'deform' stetch effect a bad idea, or is there a reason for using the PAR in media properties instead?
 
When you shoot close with the anamorphics, you usually get more barrel distortion, so your close ups make people appear fat. This was called "the anamorphic mumps" - google it. Better lenses that don't distort close ups are what put panavison on the map. They dont really make them for still cameras...

The vDSLR indie work-around seem to involve experimenting with stretching the image to non-standard widths in post and hoping the framing and composition doesn't suffer too much. You are basically cropping the sides anyway if you plan to finish a 16:9 sensor that is recording a 1.5x or 2x image to a standard aspect ratio like 1:2.35, so you need to shoot some tests and determine to what degree you plan to distort your closeups so you know how to make a mask for your viewfinder.

Good luck, you are not alone in dealing with it.
 
Jean Dodge said:
When you shoot close with the anamorphics, you usually get more barrel distortion, so your close ups make people appear fat. This was called "the anamorphic mumps" - google it. Better lenses that don't distort close ups are what put panavison on the map. They dont really make them for still cameras...

The vDSLR indie work-around seem to involve experimenting with stretching the image to non-standard widths in post and hoping the framing and composition doesn't suffer too much. You are basically cropping the sides anyway if you plan to finish a 16:9 sensor that is recording a 1.5x or 2x image to a standard aspect ratio like 1:2.35, so you need to shoot some tests and determine to what degree you plan to distort your closeups so you know how to make a mask for your viewfinder.

Good luck, you are not alone in dealing with it.
Click to expand...

Thanks Jean- but it's like this with all distances, not just close-ups. It turns out I might have an Iscorama 1.33x as opposed to 1.5x. I'm going to test it up against some charts tomorrow.. I'll post back with the results if anyone's interested.

Thanks
 
I'm interested... in fact I just shot some tests of my own today with an Isco 42, a 1.5x anamorphic.

I used a perfect circle on a chart, took a frame enlargement and then reproduced the round circle in photoshop when unsqueezing. At a close range, it is not the same ratio as the math tells you it would be.
 
Jean Dodge said:
I'm interested... in fact I just shot some tests of my own today with an Isco 42, a 1.5x anamorphic.

I used a perfect circle on a chart, took a frame enlargement and then reproduced the round circle in photoshop when unsqueezing. At a close range, it is not the same ratio as the math tells you it would be.
Click to expand...

what do u mean by close range? my lens doesn't go closer than 2metres anyway. I didn't shoot anything closer than that in my test.. would be interested 2 know at what distance urs starts to change ratio.. thanks :)

edit:

I have a 1.33x ISCORAMA!!!

Just ran a few tests. I'm uploading one to vimeo now.

http://www.vimeo.com/7345538
 
Last edited:
I haven't completed the tests but my initial shooting with the Iscorama 42 was telling me that something wasn't right when I resized using the simple math of a 1.5x horizontal squeeze factor when shooting with close up diopters.

Close up diopters are lenses (not filters) one employs to make a taking lens perform at a range closer than the one it is designed for. They are like reading glasses - you lose the ability to focus at infinity but it brings close subjects into focus. People who shoot with the Iscorama lenses have found that a 0.5x close up diopter is desirable for shooting medium close up shots of people with a 50mm "A" lens in front of the "B" lens ( the isco anamorphic.) I found the one I use in series IX (series 9) size on the used market - you may want to start looking for one in any round size larger than 72mm, as well. They are very useful, and a 1x is too strong - gets used for macro mostly.

I'll make a fuller post when I complete my tests but for now check this out:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeandodge/4057842224/in/set-72157622364088668/

BTW, your vimeo is locked/ password protected at the time of this posting.
 
Jean Dodge said:
People who shoot with the Iscorama lenses have found that a 0.5x close up diopter is desirable for shooting medium close up shots of people with a 50mm "A" lens in front of the "B" lens ( the isco anamorphic.)

BTW, your vimeo is locked/ password protected at the time of this posting.
Click to expand...


I have already have a 0.5 achromat diopter on the way :)

I have unlocked the vimeo! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top