Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Scorsese Promotes Widescreen Knowledge

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Scorsese Promotes Widescreen Knowledge (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Scorsese Promotes Widescreen Knowledge

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 06-22-2001 11:22 AM

Here is a link to an interesting article on a project to increase awareness of proper film composition:
Scorsese Promotes Widescreen Knowledge

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Eastman Kodak Company
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7419
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-22-2001 11:40 AM

I wish Dear MArtin would stop by Salt LAke City and help us make the local population aware that they are about to loose a gem of a theatre. Check out www.villatheatre.com
Mark @ GTS

| IP: Logged

Aaron Haney
Master Film Handler

Posts: 265
From: Cupertino, CA, USA
Registered: Jan 2001

posted 06-23-2001 04:36 AM

Scorcese's plan is definitely a good idea -- given recent news items (third item down) discussing how people still seem to prefer pan-and-scan over letterbox. I hope market pressures do not tempt studios into going cheap and providing only pan-and-scan versions of their films for home video release.

I used to think that, given how prevalent letterboxing seems to be these days, there was almost no reason reason for movies to be shot in Super-35 anymore. However, news items like the one I just linked to really make it clear how much further there is to go before letterboxing truly becomes widely accepted.

| IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 06-24-2001 01:00 AM

Filming with Super 35 does allow a director to see how the image will be composed for several different formats.

However, I think some directors use it just to avoid the strange distortions caused by anamorphic adaptors. So even if letterboxing became the norm, some directors would still use Super35.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 06-24-2001 04:09 AM

There have been many excellent Super 35 features shot. True Lies pops into my mind right away!
Mark @ GTS

| IP: Logged

Christopher Duvall
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 500
From: Denver, CO
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 06-24-2001 04:53 AM

I know this may sound like a dumb question to some of you film gurus out there...How can you tell if a film was shot in Super 35 or not? I know I can probably figure it out after the video tape or DVD is released but how could you find out on current movies?

------------------
Chris Duvall
General Manager
Regal Cinemas Colonnade14
Las Vegas, NV

| IP: Logged

John Walsh
Film God

Posts: 2490
From: Connecticut, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Registered: Oct 1999

posted 06-24-2001 08:54 AM

I don't know much about Super 35, but the only way I can think of (to tell if a scope feature was shot using it) is to watch for scenes where a light shines directly into the camera, like a spotlight or the sun. If the light "flare" is oval, then an anamorphic lens was used. If the flare is round, then a regular lens (meaning Super 35) was used.

| IP: Logged

Tao Yue
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 209
From: Princeton, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 06-25-2001 08:34 AM

Another anamorphic effect that I've noticed is unequal focus shifting, which becomes more apparent when a scene is filmed with the aperture wide-open, resulting in little depth of field. If you look at out-of-focus areas in the background, they're distorted vertically. In particular, street lights appear as vertical ovals. This only happens with anamorphic lenses -- spherical lenses cause out-of-focus street lights to look circular.

A famous example of this anamorphic effect occurs in _The Graduate_. When Ben is taking Elaine out on their first (forced) date, he's speeding along the highway. The car and its occupents are in focus, while the highway in front of them is out of focus. The highway lights in front of them show up as vertical ovals. I've also noticed this effect in _Finding Forrester_, in the scene in the baseball stadium.

I can't explain this effect. The horizontal ovals caused by lens flare make sense, since the light isn't getting compressed in filming, but is expanded in projection. However, vertical ovals would indicate that the anamorphic lens was adding MORE compression. Perhaps I'm just failing to look beyond the obvious, but could somebody else explain this effect to me?

Also, I've read somewhere that these effects occur with traditional designs of anamorphic lenses, such as those from Bausch & Lomb, Panavision, and J-D-C, but less with Technovision lenses. I've only seen one Technovision film, _The Last Emperor_, and didn't notice any anamorphic effects. Are there any anamorphic effects in _Apocalypse Now_? Or does the different lens design simply cause different effects that I'm not looking for?

--
Tao Yue
MIT '04: Course VI-2, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Projectionist, MIT Lecture Series Committee

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 06-25-2001 08:45 AM

John Walsh is correct that one of the most obvious "give-aways" that an anamorphic lens was used on the camera is that out of focus speculars (e.g., headlights, christmas tree lights, candle flames, chandelier lights) will tend to have an oval halo, rather than circular ("oval of confusion" vs. "circle of confusion"). Some dislike that look, but I find it interesting. Recent films shot with anamorphic lenses include "Moulin Rouge" and "Pearl Harbor".

| IP: Logged

Evans A Criswell
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1579
From: Huntsville, AL, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 06-25-2001 09:34 AM

Personally, I found the anamorphic distortion (vertical elongation of out-of-focus objects in the backgrounds) to be very visually appealing in "Moulin Rouge", especially the red lights on the windmill in the background of many scenes. To me, it said, "We cared enough to put in the extra effort to use anamorphic lenses and get as much resolution out of the film as possible."

------------------
Evans A Criswell
Huntsville-Decatur Movie Theatre Info Site

| IP: Logged

Tao Yue
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 209
From: Princeton, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 06-25-2001 09:53 AM

I think we're discussing two different anamorphic effects. John Walsh mentioned lens flare, which occurs when light shines directly into the camera. To use _The Graduate_ again as an example, there's a scene when Ben's car is approaching the camera. The headlights look like horizontal ovals. As he said, this would occur if a light were shining directly into the camera.

However, what I (and later Evans) noted as out-of-focus effects appear as vertical ovals -- specifically, out-of-focus points are twice as soft vertically as horizontally (and therefore four times as soft vertically on the film because of the 2:1 compression). This is not flare, and the lights don't have to be shining directly at the camera for the effect to occur. They don't even have to be lights -- in the baseball field scene in _Finding Forrester_, for example, everything out-of-focus in the background looks elongated vertically.

I've always been curious about this effect, as I've been able to rationalize the lens flare but not the vertical ovals (see my previous post). I'm sure if I sat down and analyzed the situation optically, I'd be able to work it out, but it isn't as intuitive as the lens flare effect.

--
Tao Yue
MIT '04: Course VI-2, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Projectionist, MIT Lecture Series Committee

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 06-25-2001 10:16 AM

I don't think the ovals are "flare", they are probably a form of geometric distortion or lens aberration. Probably vary with the specific design of the anamorphic lens. Tak Miyagishima of Panavision would be one of the experts here:
http://www.cameraguild.com/technology/formats.htm
http://www.cameraguild.com/technology/protecting_vision.htm
http://www.adobepremiereworld.com/article/mainv/0,7220,119721,00.html

| IP: Logged

Tao Yue
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 209
From: Princeton, NJ
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 06-25-2001 04:06 PM

I realize that out-of-focus ovals are not a type of lens flare. However, anamorphic lenses DO flare differently than spherical lenses. They're two different effects that indicate anamorphic photography. At first, I myself didn't believe that these were two different effects -- when I read something talking about lens flare in an anamorphic picture, I thought, "Oh, vertical ovals." But then I saw lens flare and realized that it was horizontal. I'm sure both effects are caused by the same factor in the design of anamorphic lenses, but they do look different and provide two different ways of determining how a picture was shot.

This site describes a software package designed to add lens flare to digital images, and comes with screen shots. Anamorphic lens flare is a feature of the program, probably because it is so unique.
http://the-internet-eye.com/reviews/August99/Knoll_lens_pro/default.htm

------------------
Tao Yue
MIT '04: Course VI-2, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Projectionist, MIT Lecture Series Committee

| IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 06-25-2001 09:30 PM

It has been mentioned on another thread, but the easiest way to determine if a 'scope' print is real anamorphic or Super-35 is to look at the leaders: Super-35 prints will have all the images and writing on the leaders 'stretched' as they too go through the optical printing process that creates the scope image from S-35 negatives. Genuine anamorphic prints have completely normal looking leaders.

35mm 'blow-downs' from 65mm negs also can have the 'stretched' leaders as well.

Aaron

| IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 06-26-2001 03:27 PM

Seeing the "squeeze" on the leader assumes the leader was part of the original cut Super-35 negative that had the "squeeze" introduced during anamorphic optical printing. If the leader was added after the anamorphic stage of printing, circles would still be circles on the print.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.