shooting for 35mm blow up

[Kristy Tully]

I am prepping a documentary in Los Angeles that will have a theatrical release. Having read every topic and discussion I can on this forum, I've come to understand it's debatable whether the anamorphic adaptor is better than the 16:9 squeeze or shooting 4:3 and taping off and matting it in post. I do plan on doing some tests to see if the anamorphic adaptor adds too much front weight or other unseen pratical trouble, also to see how limiting it is on the zoom. So, I am wondering if anyone knows of a post house or lab that would show me demos of these different options. Thanks in advance. My head is spinning.

[David Mullen ASC]

You'll get more pixel resolution by using an anamorphic adaptor compared to cropping 4x3, but I don't know if it's worth the hassle.

 

If you do shoot in 4x3 instead, don't bother cropping & squeezing it to 16x9 anamorphic SD in post. You don't gain any information and the people transferring it to 35mm just end up unsqueezing it anyway. They would just transfer the 4x3 image to 35mm Academy 1.37 and let the projector mask it to 1.85 (which should work fine if you composed for cropping 4x3 to 16x9 / 1.85.)

[Kristy Tully]

Thanks david, I know you are repeating yourself, as I've read you helping others out on the same topic. (SO thanks for your patience) Also, Thanks for the post tip. I wish I could find some prints of each.

I thought I remembered seeing a projection of November at the DGA dv event-and that it was great, but Ms. Screiber informed me last night that that was a HD projection, as the film print isn't ready yet.