Anamorphic 3:2 aspect ratio with a 2x lens

[ngoodlife]

Hi,

I'm starting doing anamorphic photography and EOSHD has been great helping me understanding this technic.

I'm shooting with a Nikon Df that have a 3:2 ratio. My anamorphic adapter is a Kowa Prominar 16-H 2x. 

To find the aspect ratio, I took a photo at home to a circular box and squeezed the image until it turned circular. It gave me a ratio of 2,82:1, as you can see in this image https://www.dropbox.com/s/bmq13xv97syuzx5/DSC_7602_2%2C82.jpg?dl=0

I read an article somewhere that talked about a value of 2,66:1. I tried that but the box resulted a little ovalized https://www.dropbox.com/s/qxmxy9qtn9iokgi/DSC_7602_2%2C66.jpg?dl=0

Is my aspect ratio correct? I have this doubt because I can't find anywhere what's the best ratio when we are shooting in 3:2. 

My first anamorphic images with a 2,82:1 ratio

https://www.flickr.com/photos/96852153@N00/sets/72157649089398262/

Thank you,

Nuno Boavida

 

[Hans Punk]

Nice pictures.

 

Without trying to complicate matters too much, the squeeze ratio 2x,1.5x,1.75x etc - is actually the measured amount when the lens is at infinity. So you may find that you have to adjust the ratio by eye sometimes (depending on focus distance) - to get the de-squeeze looking 'right'.

 

If you are mainly doing Anamorphic still Photography, the aspect ratio can be whatever you want.

 

I've personally found it beneficial to tweak ratios by eye, depending on the shot composition or lens  - For example, I often de-squeeze my 1.75x anamorphic footage as if it's 1.5x, as it is rarely focused for landscape/ infinity focus compositions. Anamorphic lenses can vary considerably in their squeeze effect depending on distance - so a mathematically 'correct' de-squeeze ratio should sometimes be taken with a pinch of salt IMHO.

 

The pictures on your Flickr look around 10-12% too tall in the vertical - so reducing the current height of your images by around 12% looks correct to me. If you wanted to correct the lens distortion that is evident on the edges, a Photoshop lens correction of +5 or +6 looks about right on those stills...but distortion is part of the joy of Anamorphic. 

 

Example using one of your images:

 

http://postimg.org/image/lpy3lwltz/

 

http://postimg.org/image/thetkgpzb/

[premini]

There's not a "best ratio", but usually "wide" movies are 2.4 or 2.35 

If you want to see a good video explaining ratios you can see....

[ngoodlife]

Thank you Hans and premini for the reply! 

I understand now why I had a 2,82:1 ratio in my test photos. The focus was made between infinity and minimus focus.

My goal is to have all the images with the same aspect ratio. So, maybe I will adopt the 2,35:1 ratio to be true cinemascope :)

[Izhar Ashdot]

A couple of short films shot with a GH4 in 3:2 with a Rectimascop 48/2x anamorphic lens.

 

 

 

Izhar

[Jozo Joe Zovko]

Hello,

You'll want to crop the sides of your original image to a 1.19:1 aspect ratio and then de-squeeze 2x from there.

This will get you the "2.40" aspect ratio that you are used to seeing in movies. It's what you are really after. 

Good luck :)

 

Jozo Zovko