iwander_lust Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Hi, I'm trying to unsqueeze my clips shot on a 2x anamorphic lens. However, I'm not sure how to do this. Im using final cut X, and there is no anamorphic preset. I also can't for the life of me find a way to change the aspect ratio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bioskop.Inc Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 In the Inspector box, goto Transform, then Scale & change theX axis to 200% to unsqueeze or the Y axis to 50% to squash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoneinapond Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 In the Inspector box, goto Transform, then Scale & change theX axis to 200% to unsqueeze or the Y axis to 50% to squash. Helpful. Do you know the percentage for 1.33x footage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bioskop.Inc Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I'm assuming you're asking how to get 2.35 with a x1.33 anamorphic: Unsqueeze = 126.5% Squash = 73.53% Might be out by a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoneinapond Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I'm assuming you're asking how to get 2.35 with a x1.33 anamorphic: Unsqueeze = 126.5% Squash = 73.53% Might be out by a little. Yes, and many thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIGICHombre Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 From SLR Magic: http://www.slrmagic.co.uk/amfilerating/file/download/file_id/1/ Several methods exist for un-squeezing and working with anamorphic footage in your editor or effects software. You could specify a project resolution of 2554x1080 and scale your footage to match the project's width (footage must be shot in 16:9 ratio). Or, if you're primarily interested in uploading to the web you could instead specify a project resolution of 1920x812 and scale your footage to match the project's height (footage must be shot in 16:9 ratio). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwander_lust Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 I've moved back to Final Cut 7, I'm new to editing and I find it much easier to use. (I might make the jump to adobe premiere) Buying my first anamorphic lens has really helped me start understanding my Canon 7D much better. I'm used to being on the other side of the camera, so all of it this is very new and exciting, perhaps a bit frustrating at times but still. This forum and it's members has been a great help to me as well. I'm shooting on a super takumar 50mm, with an isco ultra star. I can't seem to get the lens aligned properly, either that or I'm unsqueezing the footage wrong because the image is coming out a bit warped, almost fish eye. 1)I try to get the anamorphic lens as vertical as possible. This doesn't produce the best image. 2)I've tried the flare method - however the flare "horizontal line" seems to stay in place as I move the anamorphic glass around, it just gets skewed. So when I read to align the lens the flare line is horizontal, I can't for the life of me figure out what I'm doing wrong. 3)I'm using Final Cut pro 7, shooting on a 7D. The way I change the aspect ratio is start my sequence at 1920 x 720, then when I drag my clip on the timeline I change the aspect ratio to -50. (As per the the EOSHD anamorphic guide) for 2.66:1 to get a 1.5x squeeze. I also uncheck the "Anamorphic 16:9" box when creating my sequence. I'm linking a youtube video - It's out of focus but it shows 3 clips. I have an LED flashlight lighting into the camera, and it shows me moving the glass around trying to get the flare horizontal. The 2nd clip is the alignment I used by carefully eyeballing the anamorphic glass to be as vertical as possible on the taking lens - it still warps the image a little bit like a fisheye lens would. Hopefully this will help you guys give me an answer: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kado Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 anyone know the verticle squeeze of an isco 54? its not really 1.5x (75% y squeeze) but its closer to 1.4x, imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhessel Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 anyone know the verticle squeeze of an isco 54? its not really 1.5x (75% y squeeze) but its closer to 1.4x, imo. I have one, tested it and found it to be a little over 1.41. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kado Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 I have one, tested it and found it to be a little over 1.41. oh nice. thanks. how much do you squeeze the footage by vertically? 59%? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bioskop.Inc Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Best squeeze for the 54 is 2.66, which is 66.86%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Cunningham Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Does it perhaps change across the focal range and perhaps this is the source of discrepancy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twocik Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 iwander_lust Try using leveled tripod. Next find a horizontal object like a table to set the lens level, remember nothing is perfectly flat/leveled. This method will get you close enough. I'd also make sure your lens is connected flush up against the adapter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwander_lust Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 tried that, it seems as if the vertical lines are warped. is this supposed to happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kado Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Best squeeze for the 54 is 2.66, which is 66.86%. i'll try this out, thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bioskop.Inc Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Does it perhaps change across the focal range and perhaps this is the source of discrepancy? I really think that the stretch figures x1.5 or x2 on these adaptors isn't an exact science & maybe best seen as a guideline. But yes, focal range can affect the image in some cases & a good compromise is to conform it to 2.66:1 (no need to get too anal about it). Also, after shooting a lot looking at 16:9 squashed footage, I find that my eyes play tricks on me & objects just start to look odd when unsqueezed if i don't walk away before reviewing the footage. Rudolf 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwander_lust Posted March 5, 2014 Author Share Posted March 5, 2014 screwing around, learning premiere pro and magic bullet looks so excuse the poor color correction: notice how the vertical lines seem a bit slanted to the right? and I'm not sure but it seems to me as if the whole video is tilted to the right also, what seems to be the best way to export anamorphic footage? (codecs/output) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bioskop.Inc Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 notice how the vertical lines seem a bit slanted to the right? and I'm not sure but it seems to me as if the whole video is tilted to the right also, what seems to be the best way to export anamorphic footage? (codecs/output) You don't seem to have aligned your anamorphic lens properly, so you need to rotate it so everything looks straight. If your lens flares then this is the best way to make sure its aligned properly - horizontal flares should be in line with the top/bottom of the screen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhessel Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I have tested mine at 58mm and 85mm and the results were pretty much the same at 1.41 stretch factor - at least with my lenses and setup - that would be a 70.9% squeeze. I have found several other reports online that confirm this as well. Unfortunately that gives you an akward 2.5 aspect ratio that I have been cropping down to 2.4 or 2.35, taking advantage of the extra resolution for slight reframing. Sometimes you can get away with using 1.5 but I noticed that 1.5 didn't look right when shooting people which is why I tested to begin with. I find that 1.41 looks way better in those situations and I can't bring my self to use 1.5 anymore since I know it is wrong. Rcorrell 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twocik Posted March 12, 2014 Share Posted March 12, 2014 Download this and print it out on white paper. Tape the sheet on all 4 sides flat to a wall or door. Make sure the sheet & tripod are leveled (I used a big square ruler if that helps). Line up the bottom of your view finder to the black boxes on the sheet and adjust until the lens looks about leveled. When testing my recent build I discovered not only was my glass misaligned by 2° but the front element wasn't flush with the step. In so many words I could see that my image was very soft & the focus was slightly shifted. So I took it apart and clean, greased, recalibrated everything. Now the image is razor sharp and clean. Need any help I can walk you thru it. Art V. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.