Neel Potgieter Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 Hi everyone, I have a question thats been asked before, but I havent yet found the exact answer. Or lets say I'm not really entirely clear on what the best path is. So, we are going to shoot on ARRI MINI in anamorphic. Some ARRIRAW, some proress for higher frame rate, OpenGate. I plan to shoot OG 4:3 sensor mode. The client wants to take multiple formats from the shoot (car commercial) i.e 2.39:1 for main film, 16:9 extraction for web, and 1:1 for Instagram. We need to convince the client that its totally OK to shoot anamorphic and just extract the 16:9 from the footage. And this is where I am not sure... a) Is it even possible to have a 2K 16:9 image from a desqueezed anamorphic source? b) Is it better to take the 16:9 extraction from the UNSQUEEZED 4:3 and then desqueeze after, and if so c) how can one do that? What is the correct workflow. I assume its better to take the extraction before the footage is desqueezed to keep the max amount of pixels, right???? Any advice will be hugely appreciated!!! All the best to you all, Neel Potgieter dopParis France Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Greene Posted December 5, 2018 Share Posted December 5, 2018 The only way to get 16:9 image from the Anamorphic frame is to crop it, and pan and scan to create a usable frame. I think the thing to do here is finish your project in 4k from the Arri Raw to preserve whatever resolution you have. Then make your crop to 16:9 and reduce the size to 2k or HD if that's what your deliverable is. Certainly if you finish at 2048x858 (2k anamorphic), and then crop to 16:9, you will be left with less than 2k resolution as you'll only have 1518 pixels across the frame instead of 1920. I've just completed a film that we shot in this format, but recorded in 2k (2048x858) to save on the data load. It looks great on the cinema screen, but, if there is 16:9 extraction made for TV, it will be less than HD resolution by a bit. I don't think anyone will notice though. At least not in our market as it's not an American film project. So, if you want to see our film in glorious 2k, then get to the theater on December 27!!! :) :) :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted December 6, 2018 Premium Member Share Posted December 6, 2018 ARRIRAW 6:5 (not Open Gate) is 2578 x 2160 pixels, which gives you a 2.39 : 1 image when you use a 2X anamorphic lens and unsqueeze it. Since your image has a 2X squeeze, every other ratio you want will only use half the horizontal pixels compared to using a spherical lens, so in other words, whereas normally if you record 2578 x 2160 pixels, a 16:9 extraction would be 2578 x 1450 pixels, since you really are extracting a squarer 8:9 image and unsqueezing it later by 2X to 16:9, you'd be using something like 1920 x 2160 for 16:9. 16:9 UHD is 3840 x 2160 so basically you'd just have to double the horizontal resolution to create a 16:9 UHD version. Probably would look fine. Not sure if trying to get a 1:1 frame from a 2.39 : 1 composition is worthwhile, I think 1:1 extractions from 16:9 look pretty annoying (as I see 1:1 commercials for my work on "Marvelous Mrs. Maisel" show up online...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Connolly Posted December 6, 2018 Share Posted December 6, 2018 Agree with David. Extracting 1:1 from 2.39 might be a bit ugly framing wise - even if you might get away with the resolution. Shooting OpenGate spherical either with a common top line (or Fincher chart) would give you more flexibility to reframe. Or the other option depending on your schedule is in addition to the annamorphic coverage - get 4:3 spherical shots of your master wideshots - these will crop down to 16:9 and 1:1 better then a pan and scanned 2.39:1 frame. Or B camera with spherical lens on it. In terms of cropping - 2.39 to 1:1 - its going to be quite a drop. But its also an easy thing to test in Photoshop- any 2k 2.39:1 footage would give you a ballpark idea. Showing the client a demo is usually the best convincer and helps manage expectations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neel Potgieter Posted December 12, 2018 Author Share Posted December 12, 2018 Hi Bruce, David, and Phil, Thanks for the replies! I really appreciate it. David, you would shoot 6:5 rather than OG because we would loose the sides in any case? And if I understand correctly, you would do the extraction of the 8:9 and unsqueeze it after, is that right? Phil, with regards to the spherical element, I think we prefer to keep it to anamorphic where possible. For the 1:1 we are not really concerned. This is something the agency will take out after, any part of the frame that suits them, to do instgram commercials of 3 or 4 shots. It doesnt really impact us as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted December 12, 2018 Premium Member Share Posted December 12, 2018 There is no OG 4:3 -- Open Gate is 1.55 : 1. And if you are going to shoot everything with a 2X anamorphic lens, you're never going to use the sides of the sensor because that would be a 3.10 : 1 image. 6:5 is 1.20 : 1, so 2.40 : 1 unsqueezed. 4:3 is 1.33 : 1, so 2.66 : 1 unsqueezed. Whether the crop is done after the desqueeze is up to you and how you want to scale it. If you first upscale the horizontal to get rid of the 2X squeeze, then you're keeping maximum vertical resolution until you crop. This is all for your post house to figure out. They can rescale and crop to whatever dimensions you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now