The full-frame/vistavision look.

[ICD Films]

edit: Oh here i thought vista/imax was basicly the same thing... *moves over to the corner*

Myself I can't really tell any difference on a 35mm projection in the theatre... not seen that much, but still. The look out of the 5dmk2 on the other hand still blows my mind. There's just a killer depth too it... maybe just some (photo...) lenses that makes it that way, and not so much the size of the frame... hmmmm? (Ie, the lenses "shine" on their appropriate form factor.)

Anyway just venting. Do you guys agree that there is "another" depth to the larger frame than just the actual depth of field? (well maybe same thing, but the actual perceived characteristics of it.)

Also what lenses does Hollywood use on their vistavision cameras?

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

Bit old hat, bit not. Vistavision seems to be on the rise quite a bit (?)

Myself I can't really tell any difference on a 35mm projection in the theatre... not seen that much, but still. The look out of the 5dmk2 on the other hand still blows my mind. There's just a killer depth too it... maybe just some (photo...) lenses that makes it that way, and not so much the size of the frame... hmmmm? (Ie, the lenses "shine" on their appropriate form factor.)

Anyway just venting. Do you guys agree that there is "another" depth to the larger frame than just the actual depth of field? (well maybe same thing, but the actual perceived characteristics of it.)

Also what lenses does Hollywood use on their vistavision cameras?

Vistavision? on the rise... Vista Vision has not been used since the late 50's early 60's in the US...

The current standard for HD is 16:9, or 1.77:1, which sort of stands between 1.66:1, and 1.85, two 'standard' aspect ratios of Hollywood/Europe.

Anyway... the human perception of 'depth' of an image, can come from a number of visual cues. Depth of Field is one. Positioning objects, in perspective, yields a perception of depth. Shadow creation via lighting also gives depth. So, some set of those in combination added up to 'Depth' of a image.

 

[Noel Evans]

Martin - are you referring to 65mm as in imax?

 

[TheDingo]

According to Wikipedia the last VistaVision film was released in 1989, though it's still used for SFX work.

Wikipedia : List of VistaVision films

...I don't see any evidence that VistaVision is coming back any time soon.

As far as the 5D MK2 look, it's a nice look but the 5D MK2 has lots of imaging problems ( i.e. rolling shutter, aliasing, moire, etc... ) so I have big doubts about the future of this format, especially when you consider that you need 1.5 - 2.0 stops of more light to properly expose for the 5D MK2 format when compared to the APS-C or M4/3 formats.

This F-Stop difference can become a big deal when you have to light large interior sets. For example you might need 4,000 watts of light to light a large set for the M4/3 format, but it would take 16,000 watts of light to light the SAME set with the SAME DOF at the SAME ISO when shooting with the 5D MK2.

Let`s say you are shooting in a low-light situation ( one-man-band documentary work ) and you have to shoot at f/2.0 with your GH-2 at ISO 1600 in order to get a clean shot with sufficient depth of field. Now you decide to switch to a 5D MK2 and have to set your lens to f/4.0 in order to achieve the SAME DOF as the GH-2 and the ISO to 6400 in order to get the correct exposure.

Which camera would you rather shoot with? The GH-2 at f/2.0 and ISO 1600, or the 5D MK2 at f/4.0 and ISO 6400 ?

...I am far more interested in high performance Super35 and M4/3 formats than reviving the ancient VistaVision format.

 

[Michael Carter]

As far as things like "depth" go - this book is amazing. You'll re-think how you approach just about everything in shot design and action.

 

[Cory Braun]

Vistavision? on the rise... Vista Vision has not been used since the late 50's early 60's in the US...

I believe Paul Thomas Anderson's new film "The Master" was at least partially shot in Vista Vision (not IMAX).

 

[TheDingo]

I believe Paul Thomas Anderson's new film "The Master" was at least partially shot in Vista Vision (not IMAX).

IndieWire says it was shot in 65mm. So, Paul Thomas Anderson's 'The Master' Has Been Shot In 65mm (Not IMAX)

 

[Matty_g]

IndieWire says it was shot in 65mm.

It was indeed shot mostly on 65mm.

 

[ICD Films]

Okay? Thought Inception was vistavision... have to check my sources tad better then

 

[TheDingo]

...You are assuming that the entire film was shot in VistaVision, when the reality is that ONLY the heavily SFX dependent scenes are produced in VistaVision or 65mm.

he shot Inception in mostly anamorphic 35 mm, with certain scenes in 65 mm or VistaVision. This gives him the best possible quality without using IMAX.

Christopher Nolan Talks 3D, IMAX & ‘Inception’

 

[TheDingo]

VistaVision was used for aerial cinematography, shot by Hans Bjerno

Wally Pfister, ASC and Christopher Nolan offer AC an inside view of the sci-fi thriller Inception

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

Okay? Thought Inception was vistavision... have to check my sources tad better then

In terms of IMAX... well that's way out of my league. The only 70mm film I've shot, is in the Wife's Hasselblad... or a 6x9cm film back form my 4x5...

But in terms of my being an viewer of IMax presentations... for me it is not worth the premium. And neither is 3-D.

From the reading of IMAX, it does follow the 'vistavision' transport, that is the 'longer dimension' being in the direction travel of the 70mm film. But the frame is 4:3
and then cropped to the eventual theater projection format.

The local space museum, the Ruben H. Fleet, has been doing IMAX presentations for years, and has a "dome" IMAX projection screen... I get motion sick watching these sorts of presentations... so I've not been all that enthused about them...

The biggest impediment to 'big format' in the film film days was... the cost of film. With digital capture that may no longer be as much a problem... but still the other aspect of IMAX, or any 'big screen' presentation, is that most theaters will not upgrade, build new, whatever, to present such. This is what happened to 'Cinerama' in the 50's and 60's. They were fadish, and died out, when ordinary theaters upgraded enough to show a reasonable 2.35/2.40:1 'wider than wide screen'.