1920x800 aspect ratio calculator
![Xbox one chat problems](https://loka.nahovitsyn.com/11.jpg)
![1920x800 aspect ratio calculator 1920x800 aspect ratio calculator](https://viewportsizer.b-cdn.net/wp-content/uploads/aspect-ratio-calculator-1.jpg)
I'd love to hear from those of you with lenses on this subject. I think I understand this stuff in theory, but I don't have a pile of anamorphic adapters that I can actually test it out on. It'd be important when filming to mark somehow what will be chopped off so you can frame your shot accordingly.
#1920X800 ASPECT RATIO CALCULATOR FULL#
With full coverage lenses, I suppose this method also gives you some handles that you can "pan-scan" if need be. the extra stuff hanging off the sides will not be visible. Then I would just adjust the scale of the clip until it just barely fills the whole 2.39:1 frame. For the squish down method where the horizontal resolution stays at 1920, your vertical resolution would be 803, or maybe round off to 800.)ĭrop your clips in, then you "de-anamorphisize" I think by setting the aspect ratio of your clips to -100, or at least that's what I recall from some raw Sankor footage that my friend gave me to play around with. (For 2.39:1, if you want to keep 1080 vertical resolution, the horizontal resolution would be 2580 wide. A good place to start would be setting your FCP sequence to your intended final resolution.
![1920x800 aspect ratio calculator 1920x800 aspect ratio calculator](https://cdn.ilovefreesoftware.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/aspect_ratio_calculator-003a.png)
Well, you have to stretch the footage by 2X whatever you do, because the anamorphic is 2X. even if you loos a bit of horizontal resolution, remember the footage still maintains full 1080 lines vertical, which will keep it looking sharp, even when stretched.ĭoes anyone know how much more you gain when cropping like this? Using my example of a Kowa, could it be good down to 25mm with the sides cropped to 2.39:1? If cropping 2X anamorphic footage down to 2.39:1 allows the use of an even slightly wider "taking" lens, then I would encourage anamorphic junkies out there to start experimenting with this strategy. This doesn't really help you "get wider" for narrative work in which you are framing up people, where extra vertical field of view is what actually matters. A 35mm taking lens with an anamorphic adapter on front may have twice the field of view horizontally, but vertically it is still a 35mm field of view (70mm equivalent on GH2). While this is true in the horizontal sense of the term, it is not true in the vertical sense. What many people get excited with when thinking about anamorphic lenses (especially the 2X crop sensor GH2 crowd) is that the anamorphic gives a wider field of view. (For example, a Kowa 8Z/16H in 3.55:1 is good down to a 35mm "taking" lens on GH2.)īut if I'm cropping off the sides of my final product to 2.39:1, I would assume I should be able to use a bit wider of a taking lens, even if it vignettes on 16:9, as long as I'm able to crop out the vignette on the sides when trimming down to 2.39:1 from 3.55:1. I have found plenty of info on how wide of "taking" glass the various 2X anamorphic lenses can utilize without vignetting, but only when used at 3.5:1. When I get an anamorphic, I plan to have my final product be either 2.39:1 (or occasionally 2.75:1 if I'm feeling gutsy).
![1920x800 aspect ratio calculator 1920x800 aspect ratio calculator](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/vIlXmBaJxoI/maxresdefault.jpg)
ĢX anamorphic lenses provide a very wide 3.55:1 aspect ratio when shooting in 16:9. Hey, all! Perhaps someone could do a quick test for me or maybe you already know.
![Xbox one chat problems](https://loka.nahovitsyn.com/11.jpg)