Author Topic: ASPECT RATIOS  (Read 1965 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ordet

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 119
  • we're spinning
  • Respect: 0
ASPECT RATIOS
« on: March 04, 2004, 03:54:37 PM »
0
What is the difference between 2:35:1 and 2:40:1 aspect ratios?
Is one Super 35 mm and the other anamorphic lenses?
were spinning

prophet

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 426
  • Respect: +12
ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #1 on: March 04, 2004, 07:23:11 PM »
0
i think 2:35 is with lenses and 2:40 is just a differnt wider stock.
We gonna do a little Q&A Mr. Worley, and at the risk of sounding redundant please... make your answers Genuine...

Ordet

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 119
  • we're spinning
  • Respect: 0
ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2004, 07:30:17 PM »
0
Loved your story by the way.

Instead of Japanese ketchup could be Japanese avocado.
were spinning

cowboykurtis

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1671
  • Respect: +8
Re: ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2004, 07:48:36 PM »
0
Quote from: Roman Cibeles

Is one Super 35 mm and the other anamorphic lenses?


correct
...your excuses are your own...

prophet

  • The Meeting with the Goddess
  • ***
  • Posts: 426
  • Respect: +12
ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2004, 08:40:49 PM »
0
didnt know that i saw some 2:70 or something on some russian cameras.
We gonna do a little Q&A Mr. Worley, and at the risk of sounding redundant please... make your answers Genuine...

Ravi

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4865
  • Respect: +88
Re: ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #5 on: March 05, 2004, 01:59:34 PM »
0
Quote from: Roman Cibeles
What is the difference between 2:35:1 and 2:40:1 aspect ratios?
Is one Super 35 mm and the other anamorphic lenses?


Both numbers are used interchangeably aren't they?  AFAIK, Super35 or anamorphic doesn't make a difference like that in aspect ratio, since the release prints for a Super 35 film are anamorphic.

cowboykurtis

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1671
  • Respect: +8
Re: ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #6 on: March 05, 2004, 02:08:21 PM »
0
Quote from: Ravi
Quote from: Roman Cibeles
What is the difference between 2:35:1 and 2:40:1 aspect ratios?
Is one Super 35 mm and the other anamorphic lenses?


Both numbers are used interchangeably aren't they?  AFAIK, Super35 or anamorphic doesn't make a difference like that in aspect ratio, since the release prints for a Super 35 film are anamorphic.


incorrect
...your excuses are your own...

Ravi

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 4865
  • Respect: +88
ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #7 on: March 05, 2004, 02:49:25 PM »
0
An excerpt from an old post at rec.arts.movies.tech on groups.google.com:

Quote
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=2.35:1+2.40:1+super+35+group:rec.arts.movies.tech&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-
8&group=rec.arts.movies.tech&selm=19970618173501.NAA18664%40ladder01.news.aol.com&rnum=1

The 2.35:1 ratio eventually settled on for CinemaScope, Panavision,
etc. was altered in the early 70s to 2.40:1 to help keep
film splices from being projected.

The 1995 Panavision catalog specifies the anamorphic projection
aperture at .838 inches by .700, giving a ratio of 2.394:1. The catalog
rounds this up to 2.40:1, but some posters in this group round it
to 2.39:1. In the same catalog, the "Super Panavision 35mm" (super 35)
extracted area is specified as .945 X .511, yielding 2.398:1, which
rounds closer to 2.40:1.

Link

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 229
  • Respect: +3
ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #8 on: April 12, 2004, 09:45:33 AM »
0
I think it's funny that people always type 2:35:1.  That would mean 2 by 35 by 1.  Where's the third dimension?!  I used to wonder about this, and then saw on FCP that it was 2.35:1.  Then the clouds cleared and the world made sense  :wink:

cowboykurtis

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1671
  • Respect: +8
ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #9 on: April 12, 2004, 10:46:46 AM »
0
i was recently researching anamorphic vs. super 35mm. the depth of anamorphic is wonderful -- also what the sphereical lenses do with highlights and flares is such a greast look -- however the actual shooting process is excrutiating -- as fincher would put it shooting anamorphic is nothing short of archaic -- i know a process that fincher uses is shooting super 35 and doing a digital anamorphic pull in post -- anyone have any insight on this process?
...your excuses are your own...

mutinyco

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1476
  • Respect: +2
    • http://www.crossoverfollowing.com
ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #10 on: April 12, 2004, 12:01:23 PM »
0
The new Panic Room DVD offers a good explanation of super-35.
"I believe in this, and it's been tested by research: he who fucks nuns will later join the church."

-St. Joe

Ordet

  • The Vision Quest
  • **
  • Posts: 119
  • we're spinning
  • Respect: 0
ASPECT RATIOS
« Reply #11 on: April 13, 2004, 05:45:08 PM »
0
Quote
I think it's funny that people always type 2:35:1. That would mean 2 by 35 by 1. Where's the third dimension?! I used to wonder about this, and then saw on FCP that it was 2.35:1. Then the clouds cleared and the world made sense

That's true 2.35:1 it made sesne to me in astronomy class while explaining scales. I still type 2:35:1. Looks cool

Does this mean that Spy Kids 3D is ..... :shock:
were spinning

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy