blow up from academic 35mm to 35mm scope

[L K Keerthi Basu]

Few days before when I visited a lab here in India I came to know about the blow up of academic 35mm to 35mm scope with the help of specialised lenses. But ARRI gave a demo on squeezing the 35mm academic to 35mm scope digitally. Which one will be having a good result. Please explain. Tell me also about the merits and demerits of both the technologies.

[John Pytlak RIP]

Few days before when I visited a lab here in India I came to know about the blow up of academic 35mm to 35mm scope with the help of specialised lenses.  But ARRI gave a demo on squeezing the 35mm academic to 35mm scope digitally. Which one will be having a good result.  Please explain.  Tell me also about the merits and demerits of both the technologies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think you mean "Academy" (Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences), which is the name given to the "classic" sound film image area developed around 1930. Today, the 1.37:1 aspect ratio specified by standard SMPTE 195 is equivalent (projectable image area of 0.825 x 0.602 inches).

 

"Extracting" a 2.39:1 aspect ratio from an negative shot with the "Academy" centerline and 0.825 inch image width is certainly possible, but not commonly done because of the relatively small image area that would be used (0.825 x 0.345 inches). Today, the 2.39:1 "scope" aspect ratio is normally achieved by using 2X anamorphic lenses on the camera (0.825 x 0.690 inches projectable image area), or by shooting "Super-35" with spherical lenses (0.945 x 0.394 inches extracted image area) and doing the "squeeze" in an optical printer or using Digital Intermediate.

 

Are you sure Arriflex didn't show the use of Digital Intermediate to extract a 35mm "scope" image from a Super-35 original?

 

Either optical printing or a Digital Intermediate can be used to extract the 2.39:1 Super-35 image and produce "squeezed" duplicate negatives of high quality. With digital intermediate, cost/resolution/through-put are factors that must be considered in choosing the system to use. Scanning and output at 4K are done today, but 2K is still most common.

[L K Keerthi Basu]

Yes Iam sure about the demo shown by ARRI in IFFI 2004 Goa.

[John Pytlak RIP]

Yes  Iam sure about the demo shown by ARRI in IFFI 2004 Goa.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Surprising, as Super-35 offers much more image area than extracting a 2.39:1 image from an Academy width image.

[Dominic Case]

Whether from Academy or Super 35 frame, both an optical squeeze and a digital squeeze can give excellent results.

 

I always point out whenever optical versus digital comparisons are being discussed, that you can usually get more difference between a good DI and a bad DI than you can between a good DI and a good optical dupe. Similarly, there are good optical dupes and bad ones.

 

I would say that other considerations are more important in your choice of an optical or a digital route for post production: such as cost, how much you want to take advantage of digital effects, dgital grading etc. And whether you use a lab that has expertise in what they set out to do, and uses the best possible equipment to do it.

[L K Keerthi Basu]

Whether from Academy or Super 35 frame, both an optical squeeze and a digital squeeze can give excellent results.

 

I always point out whenever optical versus digital comparisons are being discussed, that you can usually get more difference between a good DI and a bad DI than you can between a good DI and a good optical dupe. Similarly, there are good optical dupes and bad ones.

 

I would say that other considerations are more important in your choice of an optical or a digital route for post production: such as cost, how much you want to take advantage of digital effects, dgital grading etc. And whether you use a lab that has expertise in what they set out to do, and uses the best possible equipment to do it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

what they call these type of lenses? I found these lenses are unusal in the shape some thing different, The middle element is big in size and other elements in both ends are small in size compared to the middle. Sorry iam really unable to explain it detailed.

[John Pytlak RIP]

what they call these type of lenses?  I found these lenses are unusal in the shape some thing different, The middle element is big in size and other elements in both ends are small in size compared to the middle.  Sorry iam really unable to explain it detailed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

They are ANAMORPHIC printing lenses.

 

An anamorphic lens usually has cylindrical elements that have a different magnification in the horizontal and vertical direction. Here are some links to manufacturers of anamorphic lenses:

 

http://www.schneideroptics.com/projection/...on/anamorphics/

 

http://www.iscoprecisionoptics.com/Downloa...EUR_01_2005.PDF

 

http://www.iscoprecisionoptics.com/Downloa...EUR_01_2005.PDF

 

http://www.iscooptic.de/Downloads_new/spec...EUR_01_2005.PDF

 

The ISCO Cinemascope Printing System is designed for

the use in optical printers.

With the combination of the anamorphic basic unit with 2

of 7 additional lenses, it is possible to convert Cinemascope

films into other film formats.

All common film formats like Widescreen 1:1.85 or 70 mm

Todd-AO can also be converted into the Cinemascope format.

 

And more background information:

 

http://jkor.com/peter/super35compare.html

 

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/squeeze.htm

 

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingcs1.htm

[L K Keerthi Basu]

thats really helpful