Jump to content

SONY VENICE scaling image options


 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi, I'm a DIT based on Madrid, just preparing the shooting of a motion picture in which the DOP intends to be using the sony venice and anamorphic lenses, but with a 4:3 image crop on delivery.

I wonder if there's any way so to scale up the image both on viewfinder and sdi so that we can display the best part of the frame (which will be a 4:3 box inside a 2.35:1 box, so: very little usefull image will be available on screening and thus on the viewfinder, so I guess it could be painfull during the shooting).

I'm concerned about the operator and the director regarding they display options.

Up to now I have only found a possible solution that would be the use of a QTAKE machine so to zoom in the image and deliver the proper screening of the 4:3 at full heigh on a monitor, but still not the best option as processed image has a small delay on the output (and could be a pain if director wants to be near the actors), and still doesn't offer a solution for the display on the viewfinder.

Hope I've been clear with my concerns...

Captura de pantalla 2021-06-01 a las 18.10.07.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/3/2021 at 10:42 AM, Robin R Probyn said:

Shooting anamorphic but then cropping 4-3 for delivery ..?  are you sure he doesn't mean using a 4-3 crop on the sensor to shoot 2 x Anamorphic ..? 

Yes, I'm sure.

We shot some more test yesterday on a RED with monstro sensor.

This camera has a 8/9 sensor mode to use with anamorphic lenses, this means that the output will be full 16/9 image (with a x2 dequeeze option as the hole heigh of the sensor is used) with the benefits of using anamorphic lenses, I guess this was made for series shows or tv commercials that wanted to use anamorphic lenses but keeping the 16/9 aspect ratio on the delivery.

Well, my case is the same but with an aditional 4/3 aspect crop.

I have to say that the monstro 8/9 8K (or even 7K) will work for us, as the viewing conditions will be optimal (the hole heigh of the screen will be filled by the 16/9 output) while keeping the required 4k resolution of the footage.

My question still the same, as we haven't decided yet which workflow we will be using: is there any way you can think that we can scale the ouptut image if needed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member

That's crazy... 2X squeeze optics means the actual sensor area used to get 1.33 : 1 after desqueezing and cropping is a vertical 0.66 : 1 rectangle. Perhaps you should turn the camera sideways but then the lens would have to be mounted rotated 90 degrees as well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hi Dave, what is the thing you find crazy?

I'm going to send you the pictures of the test as I'm not sure to have been clear enough. 

In this first image you can see the image as it is delivered directly by the camera: 8 by 9 crop.

 

 

115365848_red8by98k.thumb.jpg.a066215e8d9a8b3af26b1a077dc8a88f.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member

Hi Sonia, 

I'm preparing a project exactly with the same camera and anamorphic lenses (hopefully not the same ones ha!) for a 1.33 aspect ratio in the final delivery. 

The best option for viewing the full 1.33:1 aspect ratio that we have come up with so far is the same as you came up with.

Did you do a test with the anamorphic aspect ratio deactivated but applying an anamorphic squeeze just through the qtake / videovillage?

Have a lovely day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hi Angel, we're trying to avoid qtake as processed images usually have some sort of delay, which might not be acceptable if the director wants to be on the set with actors.

Anyway, we'll return to that option if red monstro is rejected and have to go back to venice.

By the way, do you know if there's the option of dequeezing the image on monitor instead of on camera?

14 hours ago, Miguel Angel said:

Hi Sonia, 

I'm preparing a project exactly with the same camera and anamorphic lenses (hopefully not the same ones ha!) for a 1.33 aspect ratio in the final delivery. 

The best option for viewing the full 1.33:1 aspect ratio that we have come up with so far is the same as you came up with.

Did you do a test with the anamorphic aspect ratio deactivated but applying an anamorphic squeeze just through the qtake / videovillage?

Have a lovely day. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Robin R Probyn said:

..  why not just shoot 4-3  or anamorphic.. is there some reason to try to do both at the same time ..   seriously question not knocking the idea .. just cant get my head around it .. 🙂 

It's just a matter of monitoring the signal, but if we shot at 4/3 on venice the final resolution of our usefull image is not going to be enough (we need at least 4K), so we need to go to a different format, for example 6k 3:2, which will give us the desired resolution, but a nightmare of an image on viewfinder / monitors if we can't achieve the zooming of the image.

Captura de pantalla 2021-06-05 a las 13.43.45.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member

Forget all the scaling up and down issues for a moment. Max resolution on the Venice is 6048 x 4032.

That means your vertical resolution is limited to 4032. 

If your image has a 2X squeeze and you want the final unsqueezed image to be 4x3 (1.33 : 1), then your actual image area is half as wide, 2x3 (.6666 : 1).

This means the max area of the sensor you will be using is 2688 x 4032. You can think of that as a 2.7K image.

Doesn’t mean it won’t look good side-matted in a 4K deliverable (or blown-up to 4K, though there isn’t a 4x3 4K format.) But it wouldn’t meet Netflix’s 4K mandate for example unless they count the vertical resolution as 4K. Maybe they would…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, David Mullen ASC said:

Forget all the scaling up and down issues for a moment. Max resolution on the Venice is 6048 x 4032.

That means your vertical resolution is limited to 4032. 

If your image has a 2X squeeze and you want the final unsqueezed image to be 4x3 (1.33 : 1), then your actual image area is half as wide, 2x3 (.6666 : 1).

This means the max area of the sensor you will be using is 2688 x 4032. You can think of that as a 2.7K image.

Doesn’t it won’t look good side-matted in a 4K deliverable (or blown-up to 4K, though there isn’t a 4x3 4K format.) But it wouldn’t meet Netflix’s 4K mandate for example unless they count the vertical resolution as 4K. Maybe they would…

Hi Dave, this is the way we've calculated our resolution:

let's say 4K is 4096 × 2160 so 8 847 360 pixels as total count, by shooting on venice 6k we will get a frameline with 2688 X 4032 pixels and 4/3 crop ratio, so 10 838 016 total pixels, so we thought this will be enough to match 4 k resolution (as pixel count matter). 

Do you think we are making a mistake in our reasoning?

By the way, we are thinking about changing to RED Monstro and 8K 8/9 sensor crop with 2x dequeeze option, that also will give us a total amount of pixels matching the 4K resolution (and using full heigh of the sensor).

What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Robin R Probyn said:

But doesn't Venice have a 4K 4-3 mode .. cant you just shoot that and spherical lenses ..why shoot anamorphic but 4-3 final aspect ratio .. Im sure Ive missed something here .. but ..? 

Hi Robin, this is just a choice based upon aesthetical criteria, anamorphic lenses have their own personality which is impossible to get through post processing (and I mean just in a reasonable post workflow, as it's going to be an indie movie), not only it's strange flares, but also the focus and chromatic aberrations such as the progressive lost of resolution and focus at the border of the image). It will be way easier to go for aespherical lenses, no doubt about it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member
1 hour ago, renfield sonia said:

Hi Dave, this is the way we've calculated our resolution:

let's say 4K is 4096 × 2160 so 8 847 360 pixels as total count, by shooting on venice 6k we will get a frameline with 2688 X 4032 pixels and 4/3 crop ratio, so 10 838 016 total pixels, so we thought this will be enough to match 4 k resolution (as pixel count matter). 

Do you think we are making a mistake in our reasoning?

By the way, we are thinking about changing to RED Monstro and 8K 8/9 sensor crop with 2x dequeeze option, that also will give us a total amount of pixels matching the 4K resolution (and using full heigh of the sensor).

What do you think?

If you’re happy with the results and it meets your distributor’s technical requirements, then go ahead!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, renfield sonia said:

Hi Robin, this is just a choice based upon aesthetical criteria, anamorphic lenses have their own personality which is impossible to get through post processing (and I mean just in a reasonable post workflow, as it's going to be an indie movie), not only it's strange flares, but also the focus and chromatic aberrations such as the progressive lost of resolution and focus at the border of the image). It will be way easier to go for aespherical lenses, no doubt about it!

ok thanks ,so its totally an aesthetic choice , I thought the 4K resolution requirement was some problem ..thanks and good luck with the shoot ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sustaining Member
On 6/5/2021 at 1:41 PM, renfield sonia said:

 

Hi Angel, we're trying to avoid qtake as processed images usually have some sort of delay, which might not be acceptable if the director wants to be on the set with actors.

Anyway, we'll return to that option if red monstro is rejected and have to go back to venice.

By the way, do you know if there's the option of dequeezing the image on monitor instead of on camera?

 

As far as I know you could de-squeeze the image in a monitor like a Small HD, if I can remember correctly they can do that but we haven't tested it as I'm not in Spain until June, 20th. 

Be careful with the resolution as @David Mullen ASC said.

I just finished shooting a mini series for a well known platform in Spain, we shot anamorphic 2:1 on the Alexa Mini in the drama part and it went well but for the interviews we used the option that the Alexa Mini has to shot on anamorphic 2K and we discovered that because we were cropping 2:1 we didn't reach the specifications in height, which is what they understood for 2K (that's what we had to deliver). They were very understanding in the end but it was a bit of a crisis moment 😅.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2021 at 9:32 AM, Miguel Angel said:

As far as I know you could de-squeeze the image in a monitor like a Small HD, if I can remember correctly they can do that but we haven't tested it as I'm not in Spain until June, 20th. 

Be careful with the resolution as @David Mullen ASC said.

I just finished shooting a mini series for a well known platform in Spain, we shot anamorphic 2:1 on the Alexa Mini in the drama part and it went well but for the interviews we used the option that the Alexa Mini has to shot on anamorphic 2K and we discovered that because we were cropping 2:1 we didn't reach the specifications in height, which is what they understood for 2K (that's what we had to deliver). They were very understanding in the end but it was a bit of a crisis moment 😅.

Thanks Miguel Angel, we'll end up by shooting 7K 8/9 on a RED monstro with x2 dequeeze factor which will give us a 16/9 image on which to crop to the final 4/3 image.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Forum Sponsors

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Film Gears

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Serious Gear

VidGear.com - Broadcast Video Warehouse

FJS International

CineLab

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...