MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
- Thread starter PC
- Start date
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Re: MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
I like the third one. Very cool.
I like the third one. Very cool.
Mike_Donis
Veteran
Re: MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
Second one DEFINITELY looks like something of Leone's!
Good stuff man
Second one DEFINITELY looks like something of Leone's!
Good stuff man
Beat Takeshi
Two-Hip Shakur
Re: MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
you should post these on the post screen shots thread to add to the collection.
you should post these on the post screen shots thread to add to the collection.
PC
Active member
Re: MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
Thank U all for the comments. these images are from a test shot we did to find out how good DVX100 for blowing up to film. I didnt have any experience shooting DV other than reading extensively about it.(I do visual effects for film) For this shoot I hired the camera for a day, followed the settings suggested by DV FILM GROUP and on the spot developed few situations for the actors (by the way these gyys in the frames are not professional actors. They are my friends from art department) So sorry to tell that these shots are not going to come out in film but we are working out a story to shoot with DVX and as it starts shaping up i will post more pictures and clippings. Thanks again for the support.
Thank U all for the comments. these images are from a test shot we did to find out how good DVX100 for blowing up to film. I didnt have any experience shooting DV other than reading extensively about it.(I do visual effects for film) For this shoot I hired the camera for a day, followed the settings suggested by DV FILM GROUP and on the spot developed few situations for the actors (by the way these gyys in the frames are not professional actors. They are my friends from art department) So sorry to tell that these shots are not going to come out in film but we are working out a story to shoot with DVX and as it starts shaping up i will post more pictures and clippings. Thanks again for the support.
dmitriandsnow
Well-known member
Re: MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
I enjoy the stills, nice warm colors fit the man good. Did you crop in post or on the shoot? Don't you get less than 2.35:1 when you crop via the camera (with anamorphic that is). My favorite is third!
Good going man.
I enjoy the stills, nice warm colors fit the man good. Did you crop in post or on the shoot? Don't you get less than 2.35:1 when you crop via the camera (with anamorphic that is). My favorite is third!
Good going man.
Mike_Donis
Veteran
Re: MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
You get about a 2.35 image.
It's all a ballpark, anyways. Theatres project (on paper) a 2.39:1 image, though they used to project a true 2.35:1 image (again, on paper). Slight variations in the projection make it not precise, though.
If the DVX were in a *true* 16:9 letterbox, with a *true* 16:9 squeeze, then you'd get about 2.37:1. The letterbox mode on the DVX, however, isn't quite the same ratio as the anamorphic adaptor, however. I believe I once calculated it at about 1.72:1, rather than 1.78:1, as *true* 16:9 should be. So then technically, it's not quite 2.35, no.
But, again, I'm babbling with a moot point: it's all a ballpark anyways, and shooting with letterbox in camera, AND the anamorphic adaptor at the same time gives you what you need for a basic '2.35:1' image.
It's close enough
You get about a 2.35 image.
It's all a ballpark, anyways. Theatres project (on paper) a 2.39:1 image, though they used to project a true 2.35:1 image (again, on paper). Slight variations in the projection make it not precise, though.
If the DVX were in a *true* 16:9 letterbox, with a *true* 16:9 squeeze, then you'd get about 2.37:1. The letterbox mode on the DVX, however, isn't quite the same ratio as the anamorphic adaptor, however. I believe I once calculated it at about 1.72:1, rather than 1.78:1, as *true* 16:9 should be. So then technically, it's not quite 2.35, no.
But, again, I'm babbling with a moot point: it's all a ballpark anyways, and shooting with letterbox in camera, AND the anamorphic adaptor at the same time gives you what you need for a basic '2.35:1' image.
It's close enough
PC
Active member
Re: MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
As I mentioned earlier I shot with anamorphic adapter and did the croping in post. In one thread Barry suggested to shoot in 16:9 squeeze with anamorphic adopter to get the best results. Which I will be following when I start the production. I cannot aford another test to find out which is superior. I prefer to believe Barry's words.
As I mentioned earlier I shot with anamorphic adapter and did the croping in post. In one thread Barry suggested to shoot in 16:9 squeeze with anamorphic adopter to get the best results. Which I will be following when I start the production. I cannot aford another test to find out which is superior. I prefer to believe Barry's words.
Avenger007
Well-known member
Re: MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
doesnt shooting in 16:9 squeeze from camera loose resolution
doesnt shooting in 16:9 squeeze from camera loose resolution
dmitriandsnow
Well-known member
Re: MY FIRST GRABS: CINEMA SCOPE TEST
[quote author=PC link=board=Clips;num=1093412630;start=0#11 date=08/31/04 at 02:46:59]In one thread Barry suggested to shoot in 16:9 squeeze with anamorphic adopter to get the best results.[/quote]
I am having doubts about that. Shooting 16:9 Anamorphic and then "resqeezing" a 1.78:1 image (which is actually stretching vetically) will do no good from what i heard. Where else are you going to stretch your full resolution image? (the frame is only 1.33:1)
[quote author=PC link=board=Clips;num=1093412630;start=0#11 date=08/31/04 at 02:46:59]In one thread Barry suggested to shoot in 16:9 squeeze with anamorphic adopter to get the best results.[/quote]
I am having doubts about that. Shooting 16:9 Anamorphic and then "resqeezing" a 1.78:1 image (which is actually stretching vetically) will do no good from what i heard. Where else are you going to stretch your full resolution image? (the frame is only 1.33:1)