DCP 2K Anamorphic Ratio, Resolution & Upscaling Question

[Bioskop.Inc]

I've been experimenting with different aspect ratios recently & just want some expert or more technical input - its not that I don't get it, just want to know some more:

DCP 2K Anamorphic Ratio (2.39:1) = 2048x858

Now if I shoot on a 16:9 sensor with a x1.5 Anamorphic lens then, once unsqueezed, I am getting - 2880x1080.

The closest official aspect ratio, for a x1.5 anamorphic lens, would be 2.66:1 (2872x1080) & that translated into DCP standards would be 2048x770 - just for info.

Now if you still keep the height of the DCP 2.39:1 figures, for a x1.5 anamorphic, you would get 2282x858 - meaning you'd bin 234 pixels.

So on a DCP 2.39:1 timeline (2048x858), I am able to pan left or right a little in order to create a small fake pan or re-frame slightly (no problems here - its better if you use a x2 anamorphic). So, in theory I should also be able to zoom in a little, since the original vertical pixel height was 1080, which has been squeezed into the new height of 858 - its possible, as i've been trying.

What I want to know is: "Am I loosing any resolution by doing this?" Technically or Numerically I shouldn't be & the only downside might be a touch loss of sharpness, but there shouldn't be right? Any loss in sharpness is an illusion & in fact its exactly the same image, at exactly the same sharpness?

Any input?

[Bioskop.Inc]

What I should have added, is that I'm using FCPX & it appears to automatically fit the 1080 height of the image into the new 858 height of the timeline, but the additional sides stick out.

So what is FCPX doing? Is it somehow squeezing the height into the new size and is that even possible - surely 858 pixels is 858 pixels?

Or is this so boring, that no one gives a shit? Too techy, for the techs?

[Zak Forsman]

I got very excited because I make DCPs and figured I'd be able to help, but sadly, I don't know anything about FCPX. If I had to guess, yes you should have room to spare. Any perceived loss of sharpness would only be from you losing the added benefit of downscaling from 1080px to 858px. Until you pass the 1:1 point, I would think you'd be okay.

[Bioskop.Inc]

1 hour ago, Zak Forsman said:

I got very excited because I make DCPs and figured I'd be able to help, but sadly, I don't know anything about FCPX. If I had to guess, yes you should have room to spare. Any perceived loss of sharpness would only be from you losing the added benefit of downscaling from 1080px to 858px. Until you pass the 1:1 point, I would think you'd be okay.

Cheers Zak, that's what I thought.

I just find it a bit weird that in FCPX it automatically downscales the vertical height, but as you said if you don't go past the 1:1 point it'll be just fine. So now i just have to calculate the percentage I can zoom in (FCPX uses % scale instead of No. of pixels).

Do you have any experience of upscaling from 2K to 4K - can you just do it in an NLE or do you need specialist software to achieve really good results.