Personal View site logo
Official Low GOP topic, series 3
  • 1008 Replies sorted by
  • ehrehr
    Cool. Thanks for the great patches.

  • bricolobricolo
    Do you mean that with your new patch we can now shoot in a higher résolution than the normal HD and that it is a 2.35 frame?!!! And without anamorphic lenses. (i'm not sure i really understand the anamorphism)
    More than 2k ?
    That's a revolution if it works well, isn't it?
    With this we can hope to make some really interresting things regarding the color grading and the vfx?
    If i'm right i hope you can fix the problems?
  • ehrehr
    @bricolo The aspect ratio when shooting with the patch is 2.37:1 but if you shoot without an anamorphic (1.33) the image will be squished...people look short and fat. You would need to stretch in post to get them back to normal. Shooting WITH an anamorphic the proportions are correct right out of the camera.

    I don't know the answer to any of the other questions

  • B3GuyB3Guy
    someone should do one that squished the OPPOSITE for people without anamorphics. this way, when we correct the footage, we get oval bokeh without anamorphic.
  • fatpigfatpig
    @B3Guy: no, we wouldnt. sadly, it is just like if you squished your recorded image, and then stretched it back again.
  • bricolobricolo
    @driftwood
    Was I wrong in my previous Question?
    @FGCU and many others could be very interested I think.
  • johnnymjohnnym
    @driftwood

    I'll test it today. One question though as i don't have a 1.33x anamorphic, shall I just make the resolution 1920x1080 ?
    Will thoroughly test VGA mode though. Thanks.
  • JDNJDN
    @driftwood. Great day shooting yesterday w/Quantum 2. No problem spanning on 95mbps sandisk cards. Some screen grabs attached, including one where I really closed down the aperture to see what would happen -- can't believe the details that were still present in the shadows. Incredible. Thanks man!

    Greg1.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 346K
    Greg2.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 267K
    greg3.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 408K
    greg4.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 379K
  • driftwooddriftwood
    @JDN looks good, thanks for the feedback, I take it these were all H setting 24p?
  • driftwooddriftwood
    @johnnym Yes, of course, feel free to experiment with frame sizes on mjpeg mode.
  • driftwooddriftwood
    @bricolo no, we can indeed shoot 2k on mjpeg, the question is the v/h resolution; some people think that this is upscaled, I'm still not sure about that.
  • JDNJDN
    @driftwood, yep, all H in 24p -- the closeup of the vial is ETC with a 50mm f1.4 FD prime.
  • johnnymjohnnym
    I'm having doubts VGA mode will ever be useable. It feels like going back too far, having driftwood's AQ settings to work with.
    I just tested your VGA settings, @driftwood. Indeed the best i've seen so far, but still so ugly compared to AVCHD, that for now i think i'll just put my anamorphics to rest, and shoot 16:9 and crop it. :)
  • LittleDLittleD
    @jdn
    iso please?
  • disneytoydisneytoy
    Driftwood, am I correct with the Anamorphic hack we are seeing the destretched image (assuming you are using a lens adapter) on the rear screen? Or external monitor? Not having tried the wider hack, what if anything is output via HDMI to a 1080p monitor. One of my biggest issues when shooting with a Sankor 16D 2x is I can't really see the proper proportions of the frame until post.
  • NamelessNameless
    @Driftwood
    This was shot using the Seaquake patch:

    Hats off to all involved when it comes to the gh2 developments.

    I cant wait to try Quantum on the weekend!!!
  • paglezpaglez
    New Quantum Beta 3 First test with my new Sandisk 64 GB SDCX.
    24 P H Mode: Span correctly. The image quality is similar to V2
    1050 i. Not tested yet
    24 P Variable Mode (80%): It crashes at 9 seconds
    MJPEG (2560x 1080): First record: ok.
    MJPEG (VGA) Mode: I get a 848x480 size file (?).

  • JDNJDN
    @LittleD sorry about that ISO 160, f1.4 - 3 on the 25 and 50mm primes; wide intv shot at 2.5 on the 14mm prime. Most shots lit with 3 312 LED lights in small or extra small photoflex softboxes.
  • driftwooddriftwood
    @paglez Sure you didnt check your own frame sizes for VGA?
  • driftwooddriftwood
    Guys, anamorphic users. We'll provide an anamorphic squeezed version AND a unsqueezed version. Please tell me what frame sizes you need.

    Nick
  • paglezpaglez
    @Driftwood:
    I have untouched your patch and VGA frame size in Windows Media Player and Premiere is 848x480
  • driftwooddriftwood
    @paglez thats odd, Ill look into it.
  • bricolobricolo
    @driftwood
    The bigger, the better.
    But i might ne wrong!
  • lukavilukavi
    @driftwood
    i'm still new to the anamorphic scene, but I gather from my research that the ratios 2.35:1 and 2.66:1 seem popular. I guess it's also part of the reason that 1.33x and 1.5x ana lenses cost the most, with dslrs shooting 16:9. 2x ana lenses cost the least, but work well with 4:3 (VGA-ish) vcams to obtain a 2.66:1 resultant ratio. All these are without cropping, of course (no wasted pixels).

    I'd be grateful for the largest stable frame size for 4:3 aspect ratio, to unsquish to 2.66:1 after anamorphing
  • driftwooddriftwood
    @lukavi thanks for the feedback.

    @all Any more anamorphic requests?
This topic is closed.
← All Discussions