Any Techniscope Streched View Directors Viewfinder or Patent, Design Paper to print in 3D.

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

I love the streched Techniscope Panaroma Shots of Spagetti Westerns.

 

I am looking for a directors finder or a patent or paper to give me design tips to print with 3d printer.

 

please help,

 

Thank you for reading,

 

Mustafa Umut Sarac

Istanbul

[David Mullen ASC]

But Techniscope movies weren't stretched, they were shot with ordinary spherical lenses and the 2-perf camera aperture cropped the image to scope. Any directors finder can show you 2.35 frame lines.

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Hello David,

 

Thank you for your reply , If I am not wrong , they take 12x35 mm and than print 24x35mm , my english is struggling to describe , but if it is not streched , may be expanded from 2 perf to 4 perf.

 

I want a viewfinder which will simulate that effect , I know they are very expensive but printing a worse version with 3 d printer from clear acrylic would be very funny.

 

Is there such a viewfinder , its patent or its research paper exists.

 

Thank you ,

 

Umut

Edited July 30, 2014 by Mustafa Umut Sarac

[David Mullen ASC]

The 2-perf frame was squeezed horizontally by 2X in post -- not expanded (except vertically I guess) -- to put it onto a 4-perf 35mm dupe negative for making scope prints. Anamorphic projection removed the 2X squeeze. So the Techniscope image was never expanded, it was the opposite, it was squeezed and enlarged (i.e. stretched vertically) to fill 4-perf 35mm and then corrected back to normal during print projection, i.e. the squeezed image was expanded back to normal. It was never a square image expanded to widescreen because then everyone would look very fat.

 

But why do you want a director's finder with a 2X horizontal image squeeze? Just to look at skinnier people and objects??? It serves no practical purpose because that's not what the final product will look like, no audience sees the image squeezed by 2X and Techniscope did not employ anamorphic photography so it wouldn't even give you a preview of what Techniscope looked like.

 

Besides, you could just get a lens finder (the type that is just a ground glass and PL-mount) and put a 2X anamorphic lens on it. But otherwise, if this is just for composition, a regular director's finder would give you the 2.35 frame lines marked with the anamorphic or Super-35 spherical focal lengths.

 

What would have some practical value would be a lens finder that took the 2X squeeze out of the image when an anamorphic lens was mounted to the finder, for director's who didn't want to look at a squeezed image -- many lens finders have that feature actually.

 

Unless you are talking about a finder that stretched everything out by 2X to make the image wider -- again, what would be the point of that except to correct for anamorphic lenses on the finder? To make everything and everyone look fat?

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Hello David ,

 

Thank you for your reply,

 

You are right , I am extremelly new to subject.

 

I saw a spagetti western and Clint was travelling with an horse and others in a rocky valley at the end of the movie. I saw it may be 15 or more years ago . Every one is so thin and long.

 

I want that effect , I dont know its exact terminology or technology but someone told me it was 2 perf to 4 perf expansion.

 

Can you help me ?

 

I want to carry a viewfinder - diy or used , I cant buy new and diy is faraway more funny and cheap may be - to view everyone as that movie.

 

Thank you ,

 

Umut

[David Mullen ASC]

That only happens on TV when they have a 2.35 movie with titles going across the whole frame and they don't want to letterbox the title sequence, so they squeeze it to fit onto a 4x3 TV screen (or if transferring from an anamorphic source, they leave the squeeze in for that shot.) But no one would transfer or show a whole movie squeezed-looking, that would be a mistake.

 

It happens with old movies being transferred to 4x3 video that either were shot in a 2X anamorphic process like CinemaScope/Panavision, or were shot in 2-perf spherical Techniscope and converted to 4-perf anamorphic and that scope print was all that was available for the video transfer.

 

But like I said, no one would be stupid enough to transfer the whole movie to video that way, just title sequences that would be cropped badly in a pan & scan transfer. Otherwise, most of the movie would be panned & scanned, the 2.35 image cropped to fit on a 4x3 TV screen. So I'm not sure why you want to emulate the look of a scope movie that was transferred incorrectly to 4x3 video.

 

Anyway, you'd need an anamorphic lens on your finder or camera to squeeze the image optically. There are anamorphic adaptors with a less extreme 1.3X squeeze on the market, designed to go in front of normal lenses and add a 1.3X squeeze, which is the amount of squeezing you'd need to fit a 16x9 image onto a 4x3 sensor, or a 2.35 image onto a 16x9 sensor.

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

David,

 

Thank you very much for your reply. My friends at APUG informed me about tv factor at the same time with you..

 

I think it was not good idea but additional 1.3x lens does not harm

 

I want to record giant scene in to the film. I think LOMO would help. Look good bad ugly final moments , its a monster size view.

 

I looked to LOMO Anamorphic lenses and they are cheap and built like a tank. Can I attach these monsters to a Film SLR camera where viewfinder cropped to Techniscope format and do what Spagetti Director did ?

 

Is there a slide scan taken with these lenses and comparatively with normal camera lens.

 

Would be the frame oval or rectangular ? Will there be vignetting or chromatic aberration ? Is Baltar better than LOMO ?

 

Umut

[David Mullen ASC]

Techniscope used normal lenses!

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Lomo 35 nap2 3m 56/2 f:80-110

 

I bought above, what is your suggestion for film camera , I have pentax k mount slr.

 

Umut

[David Mullen ASC]

Don't know.