squeeze mode in post-prod.

R

rs0506

New member
The DP I worked with conviced me that squeeze mode was an anamorphic setting and would be the best option when blowing up to film. The short has already been shot using the squeeze mode.

From what I understand from this forum, squeeze mode does not use the entire chip and doesn't allow for a better image when blowing up. I've also read here, the squeeze mode creates too much noise, results in resolution loss, has minor defects when blown up, and loses the ability to reframe in post.

I would like to enter my short into festivals that allow only 35mm or HD entries. Does anyone have advice about how to get the best resolution for the best quality output when all the source material was shot with the squeeze mode?

Thanks.
 
I don't have an answer for you but I am waiting on pins and needles to know how "bad" squeeze mode really is or isn't. I am currently shooting with an XL2 and the 16x9 is obviously really tight. I need a second camera and I want a more portable one like the 100A or B. 16x9 being critical to me I am waiting to get some more firm answers or examples of what to expect. SO far my only reference is original dvx100 footage uprezzed to 16x9 in Vegas. I am hoping the digital squeeze is better than this!

Good LUck!
 
I can't offer exact specs and numbers and resolution charts (Barry would be the man for this) but I can tell you from what I see. Squeeze mode yields a gorgeous image. I am sure that the resolution is not as high as the Xl2 because the chip shape is entirely different. But, the squeeze mode is quite remarkable.
 
It's been a while since I checked out the DVX book/DVD so this is just from memory. If you're using squeeze mode, then yes, you do lose resolution b/c it isn't using the whole chip. However don't think you're any better off using letterbox if resolution is your aim. Letterbox basically uses the exact same part of the chip as squeeze mode.

The only way to use the entire chip when shooting widescreen is to use the Anamorphic Lens. However the Anamorphic Lens has it's own issues to deal with too (f-stops, harder to focus, etc). I personally have seen the DVX with the Anamorphic and just by using squeeze, and the difference is noticeable to a person who's paying attention but I just use squeeze b/c A) it's not a HUGE difference if you're gonna stay on DVD or tape 2) the issues like f-stops and critical focusing don't gel with my run and gun style of shooting and 3) I save 600 bucks.

Now if since you said you plan on going to film, then it becomes a much tricker issue. The best bet for you is to get the Anamorphic Lens. Just realize that set up will be a little harder. Not THAT much harder, but harder enough to become a bit irking after a while.

If you rather not get the Anamorphic Lens, then your options are Squeeze or Letterbox. Actually there's a third option which is to shoot in 4x3 and letterbox in post, although this is technically the same as just shooting in letterbox, so I'll just keep it two options for now. As you said your intended output is film, then it's best you shoot in letterbox. According to the DVX book, I remember it saying something that if you were to output to film, then the telecine process would include an extra electronic step of de-anamorphisizing (yeah, I just made up that word) the image before it can print it to film so you lose a small generation of quality there as opposed to letterbox which is natrually shaped to fit a film frame.

On the otherhand, if you're intended output is to DVD, then go for Squeeze. Why? Because with Squeeze (and DVD Studio Pro or any other respectable authoring system) you can make DVDs just like Hollywood which will play in Anamorphic widescreen on a 16x9 tv yet also play letterboxed 4x3 on a regular TV. If you shoot letterbox or letterbox in post and burn to DVD, it'll play fine on a regular TV but on a widescreen TV, it'll be a 4x3 letterboxed image inside a widescreen display so the user will have to zoom to fill the screen up with the image and that leads to ugly picture degredation.

Honestly though, no matter which format you shoot in, you can always redo your timeline in Final Cut or Premeire to fix the issue. For instance, I shot in Squeeze mode for my latest project. However I needed to make a BetaSP copy of the film to show at the festival and the BetaSP machine offered to use doesn't handle Anamorphic/Squeeze footage correctly as it would looked stretched. So I just made another sequence in Final Cut and unchecked the 16x9 box. When I imported my EDL into the 4x3 sequence, it automatically resizes it so it'll fit the 4x3 frame and be displayed letterboxed. Yeah, I do lose some quality and it is a pain b/c I had to rerender my entire movie but hey, at least it's possible. It can also work the other way. You could shoot in letterbox and then stretch your footage in post, put it in a 16x9 timeline and viola! I think there's a sticky about doing just that somewhere on these forums.

However, I think the bigger question for you rather than which mode to shoot in is what REALLY is your intended output. I really respect you wanting to output this on film and show it around festivals ("wow, a real film man!) but honestly how is 90% of peeps you show the film be watching it? I think chances are: DVD. I mean you can't really send your aunty and uncle a film print to watch your film that you spent months working on. Also not to mention that it has been my experience in that past that a lot of festivals nowadays seem to prefer other formats than film for shorts. Why? Because so few shorts have a film print that they'll often group together a bunch of shorts in a program and project it digitally. Now with your film print, you're the odd man out and they'll probabaly just ask you to burn a DVD for them anyway. Of course that's not always the case but that is a growing trend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top