Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Would I use a regular flat lens to project 1.77:1?

   
Author Topic: Would I use a regular flat lens to project 1.77:1?
Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004


 - posted 10-29-2008 08:50 PM      Profile for Justin Hamaker   Author's Homepage   Email Justin Hamaker   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If I'm going to be projecting at 1.77:1, would I use my regular flat lens with an aperture plate filed to 1.77:1?

 |  IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 10-29-2008 08:53 PM      Profile for John Wilson   Email John Wilson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
You'd need a larger lens than your 1.85:1 to do this properly as you need to make your image slightly smaller on screen. Masking would also need to be adjusted in addition to your new aperture plate.

What are you running? Can you not get away with 1.85:1?

 |  IP: Logged

Justin Hamaker
Film God

Posts: 2253
From: Lakeport, CA USA
Registered: Jan 2004


 - posted 10-29-2008 09:46 PM      Profile for Justin Hamaker   Author's Homepage   Email Justin Hamaker   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It's a loop of film that someone else is brining to our drive-in related to something they will be filming. Unfortunately I will not be able to see the film prior to the day it's going to be projected. Masking is not an issue since the drive-in screen doesn't have any. With our flat picture, the film just fills the screen top to bottom and the sides are black.

For what it's worth, this is a one time only deal so doing it "right" isn't as much of a priority as if we were going to be showing a movie to a paying audience.

 |  IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004


 - posted 10-29-2008 10:20 PM      Profile for Monte L Fullmer   Email Monte L Fullmer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
..then, you'd need a slightly longer lens to do 1.77/1 if your 1.85/1 fills to the top of the screen.

If you're doing a f:3.97 now for 1.85/1, at 400ft, you'd need something slightly over 4inches to do the task.

The 1.77/1 will flow over the top and the bottom masking line on the drive-in screen with your present lens.

 |  IP: Logged

John Hawkinson
Film God

Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 10-29-2008 10:22 PM      Profile for John Hawkinson   Email John Hawkinson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
To be clear, for common-height projection, you would like a lens that makes the same-sized image smaller on the screen, which is a longer focal length.

1.77 is taller than 1.85:1, so if your 1.85:1 image fills the screen completely, then running 1.77:1 will be off the top and bottom of the screen.

If you really "just want to see it on screen," you should be able to use your scope lens without the anamorphic attachment (assuming it is not an integrated anamorphic). Of course this will give you a substantially smaller image, but at least you'll be able to see the full thing.

A lot "depends." Obviously the right answer is to rent or borrow the correct lens. An alternative is to find a "MagnaCom" (more properly a "variable converter"), which is basically an adjustable zoom attachment. For some compromise in optical quality and potential loss of light, you'll be able to adjust your image size to fit your screen (well, within some limits).

Without additional equipment, your only choices are to run 1.85:1 with the top or bottom (or both) cropped, or to run your scope lenses (or academy, if you have them) with the image half the size it should be.

Monte: the notation "f/3.97" refers to the aperture, not to the focal length, and is pretty much independent of the focal length. You might indeed find a 4.00" (inch) focal length lens, but that is not f/4.00 (and generally f/ numbers don't have that much precision).

P.S.: Justin, what is your focal length?

--jhawk

 |  IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004


 - posted 10-30-2008 03:56 AM      Profile for Monte L Fullmer   Email Monte L Fullmer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Wow, did it again - got focal and inches turned around once more.

Thx "Mr. JHawk" for setting me straight.

Still, 400' to the screen from lens. That takes quite a bit of light to hit that distance.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)  
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

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.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.