Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

DC

DC

Cinematographiliac
I own the DVX100A NTSC model.

If I shoot in "Squeeze" mode, will it look squeezed while editing in Avid Xpress Pro? Or will it appear as 16x9 (with or without the bars)? After editing, do I have output options? Say I want to output it back to tape "squeezed" or "letterboxed" - is this possible?

I was told by a camera shop clerk that since the DVX100A has incorporated the "Squeeze" mode, an anamorphic lens would be redundant because the effect is now in-camera. And I realize that the "letterbox" mode doesn't use the full scope of the CCD's which results in image resolution loss.

My goal, coming up, is to shoot 24p Advance with the full scope of the CCD's but to also maintain a 16x9 aspect ratio. This may go to theaters and/or DVD. I want to preserve every option advantage and keep the quality very high. Is "Squeeze" mode my best bet? And if so, how exactly should I proceed and what should I expect throughout the process (shooting, editing, distribution formats)? ???

Any ideas would be most helpful.

Thanks,

-DC-
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

As far as I have seen, the only reason for the anamorphic adapter is if you are absolutely going to 35mm film, or uprez to HD possibly. All the avenues seem to have been explored and unless Century on another higher quality anamorphic arrives, squeeze or letterbox/cropped is as good as you will get up to 24p DVD quality for 16:9.

If the pana anamorphic could pull a perfect focus, maybe different, but seems this is all but impossible in most normal shots, and for sure in any run & gun type of shooting.

I just can't see the advantage otherwise.

-Rodger
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

if you want to project, the ana is the way to go, its not that hard to get great focus at all, it only becomes more difficult when your pretty tele. but even there you can get things pretty sharp by either backing away, and lengthening your focal distance, or just irising down a little. overall, it justmakes you work a little harder.
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

[quote author=DC link=board=Events;num=1078090137;start=0#0 date=02/29/04 at 13:28:57]If I shoot in "Squeeze" mode, will it look squeezed while editing in Avid Xpress Pro?  Or will it appear as 16x9 (with or without the bars)?  After editing, do I have output options?  Say I want to output it back to tape "squeezed" or "letterboxed" - is this possible?
[/quote]
You should ask those questions over in the Avid forum, they will probably be better equipped to answer.  Speaking as a user of Vegas (and Premiere), those programs allow you to view the footage "unsqueezed", so I'm sure Avid does as well.

And, you should certainly have the option of outputting it as either letterboxed or full "squeeze" -- both Vegas and Premiere can do that, I can't imagine why Avid wouldn't.

I was told by a camera shop clerk that since the DVX100A has incorporated the "Squeeze" mode, an anamorphic lens would be redundant because the effect is now in-camera.
Click to expand...
Well, "redundant" is certainly all-encompassing, I don't think I'd say it's redundant.  I will say that I think a lot of people will be happy with squeeze mode and won't bother with the anamorphic adapter, but that doesn't mean it's not still a good and valuable tool, just that maybe users will be plenty happy with the squeeze mode results.

 And I realize that the "letterbox" mode doesn't use the full scope of the CCD's which results in image resolution loss.
Click to expand...
And squeeze mode will suffer that same resolution loss. Squeeze mode uses the same surface of the CCD's as letterbox mode does.

My goal, coming up, is to shoot 24p Advance with the full scope of the CCD's but to also maintain a 16x9 aspect ratio.
Click to expand...
Then you would have to use the anamorphic.  That is the only way to get 16:9 using the full area of the CCD's.

This may go to theaters and/or DVD.  I want to preserve every option advantage and keep the quality very high.  Is "Squeeze" mode my best bet?
Click to expand...
No.  Anamorphic will provide higher quality, higher resolution, use the full space of the CCD's, and provide for a better film blowup.  You will retain more options if you use the anamorphic.

Squeeze is free, try it and see if you're happy with it.  But if not, or if you need that extra boost that only the anamorphic can provide, there's no substitute.
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

Thank you all for the input!  :)

One more silly question. If using the anamorphic lens, what ratio mode do I shoot in? Leave it 4x3 and the lens does the rest?

-DC-
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

Alright, now I've GOTTA follow up.   :)

Based on the responses, gonna shoot with the anamorphic adapter in 4x3.  This is a documentary with the DVX100A in 24P Adv.

What are the do's and don't's of shooting like this?  I want to maximize my shots and avoid goofy looking mistakes.  I need a quick 101 course as I've never shot extensively with this camera.  And I've never shot at all with an anamorphic lens.  I want the best possible 16x9 image.

Thanks,

-DC-

LET ME START A NEW TOPIC. SEE "Brief 101 with anamorphic shooting." PLEASE RESPOND THERE.
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

..it shouldnt really change the way you shoot at all. you just have a more pleasing frame to compose with is all. otherwise you light, shoot, move, and storyboard and whatnot evrything the same. just dont use it with ois on.. and be sure to get good focus. iris down and add more light if you have to or move further back and push the focus out more thats about all.. otherwise all it does is change your composition from 4:3 to 16:9.
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

See, now the question I would like answered is:

When shooting with an anamorphic adapter, the image coming into your camera will be distorted... now unless you have a monitor with a feed coming from your camera that can adjust itself to show the proper image from the anamorphic lens... then it's impossible to see what your finished footage will look like until you take it to post...

how do you guys handle the distortion? Just try to compose with the stretched out looking image?
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

If it's vital to you to see the unsqueezed composition, then you have to use an external 16:9-capable monitor. It's also highly advisable to use an external CRT when using the anamorphic anyway, since it's much easier to judge critical focus on a CRT, and it's more important to nail the focus accurately when using the anamorphic.

Most professional monitors include a switchable 4:3/16:9 setting. Other options may include a 16:9-shaped LCD, or using a portable widescreen DVD player as a monitor, or feeding the signal into a laptop computer, etc.

Another option is the viewfinder de-squeezer being introduced by Century Precision Optics. It's an optical de-anamorphosizer that fits onto your viewfinder, but it's a little pricey at $395 MSRP.
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

Holy crap! They invented something that un-anamorphic's your image coming out of the lcd screen! That's sooooo cool yet somehow seems so excessive!

Yeah, i suppose the monitor is the best way to go regardless... hmmm... do you know if they have any kinds of adapters that will change the image before going into a monitor? You know, so you can watch the true composition on just any ordinary CRT monitor even if it doesn't have a 16x9 mode? Kinda like an antennae box or something for older televisions that when you pass through it fixes it up?
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

They have an LCD un-anamorphosizer, but that doesn't work for the DVX, it only works on the smaller 2.5" LCD panel cameras like the PD150 and GL2.

For the DVX, it's a barrel-shaped device that bolts onto your viewfinder. Basically it looks like another anamorphic lens, just turned sideways.

As for the in-line adapter box, yes there is something like that, I found it once. Costs about $600 if I remember properly. Called something like "aspect ratio converter"...
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

What an original name with such a terrible price... would only be worth it if the 16x9 monitor costs more than $600...
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

Guys,,

Can one use those Russian anamorphic lenses we see on ebay? Saw one the other day called Loma. Seemed like a resolute piece of optics (over a kilogram). Would it be compatible to any zooming on the DVX?

Dunn
 
optical de-anamorphizer

optical de-anamorphizer

Century Precision Optics has an optical de-anamorphosizer that fits onto your viewfinder?

Where can I get that??

Thanks,

-DC-
 
Re: Squeezed vs. Anamorphic Lens vs. Letterbox

They showed it at DVExpo a couple of months ago. I don't know if it's made it into their catalog yet. They said the MSRP would be $395.

Ask Ken Robings here on this board, or just try calling or writing to them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top