paulkosmala wrote:paulkosmala wrote:Raphael Wood wrote:4:3 Shooting Mode so we can use 2x Anamorphic
Yes. Yes. Yes!
Wether it's a new size from the full frame sensor, or if it's a crop from the current image viewing area I don't care. The ability to use 2x anamorphic and get 2.35(2.4) would be fantastic. And if it's a crop of the current sensor image area - then there is no new technical strain - it would be (a little) less information.
Paul, I certainly support the desire for a 4:3 frame size. Using a 2x anamorphic squeeze, this provides a 2.66:1 aspect ratio for your raw image and deliverables.
You might want to reconsider your statement that you don't care if it is achieved by cropping the current active sensor (although you are right that may be easier to implement on the current version of the BMCC). You could crop from the 2400x1350 raw image or crop from a 1920x1080 ProRes or DNxHD image and either will allow you to generate final deliverables in an anamorphic widescreen style but neither will give you a quality true cinema widescreen version for theatre projection, in which your deliverable should be based on a 2K image (2048x1080 or 2048x858) format assuming my thinking below is correct:
You are familiar with how RED achieves a 4K debayered (with high quality colour) image from a 5K bayer sensor with only a 20% 'loss' of resolution. The BMCC aspires to do something similar with its 2.5K bayer sensor to generate a high quality debayered image in HD (1920x1080) with the same 20% loss.
If a future version of the BMCC (or in our dreams, miraculously via a firmware update to the current version) utilizes the full physical size of the sensor (2592x2192) and offers a 4:3 frame, the resultant raw image will be 2560x1920. Taking that 20% off for colour sampling, gives us a high quality colour image of 2048x1536. It's the 2048 that is really important here as there's room to sacrifice pixels on the vertical resolution. So at least using the full physical sensor horizontal resolution will give us the perfect size for a 2K theatrical release been without using an anamorphic lens or adapter.
In my mind using the full horizontal size of the sensor is quite important to get the best quality colour for theatrical release (surely that goal is implied in a cinema camera) without cropping away valuable pixels. Of course other scenarios work well with what you said originally if you only distribute on the web. It seems to me though over time, web and television will appreciate having a 2K image as well as televisions and computer screens increase their resolutions for the typical viewer.
When you use a 2x anamorphic lens, you have a lot of pixels to play with horizontally. But I suspect more people producing content would benefit from BMD using the full sensor width for all video purposes than the smaller number that will use anamorphic lenses to achieve their widescreen goals.
I hope this argument makes sense. I'm just working it through in my mind to determine where the priority should be if resources are constrained. I don't think BMD wants to implement a solution which will actually result in a degraded image due to cropping if they can avoid it. I'd love to see 4:3 but thinking it over using the full horizontal sensor size may be more important to a broader audience. And using the full horizontal adds less than 7% to the processing workload...
Comments?
Rick Lang
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD