resolution and anamorphic adapter
 

hi -

i've been using the dvx-100a for some time now with the anamorphic lens. i've been impressed with the anamorphic's resolution gain in widescreen, but i've also disliked the deeper depth-of-field and the inability to go full tele or full wide.

that said, here's my question. i'm fairly certain that the DVD spec is 720x480, regardless of what you are shooting on. is this correct? if so, then would there be any point to use the anamorphic lens for DVD production? in all reality, a 35mm blowup of anything i'm shooting at the moment is unlikely. if i'm just going to produce a DVD, is the extra resolution gained from using the anamoprhic taken into account, since the spec is limited to 720x480?

All DV is 720x480, whether it's 16x9 or 4:3. When changing aspect ratios, the pixel count doesn't change, but the way the pixels are interpreted does change (they go from being "tall" to being "fat").

Yes the anamorphic will give you more resolution for a widescreen DVD, but if you're making a 4:3 DVD then there'd be no point in using the anamorphic adapter.

When you say 4:3 DVD I'm assuming you mean letterbox, and my question is -- why would you want to do that? I think you'd be crazy not to shoot anamorphic and encode the DVD to do the letterboxing on the fly for 4:3 televisions. You'll be glad you did in a few years when HDTVs are more commonplace. The only reason to letterbox the footage yourself is for VHS.

"i'm fairly certain that the DVD spec is 720x480, regardless of what you are shooting on". Well, if you shoot on PAL equipment Daniel, you shoot 720 x 576, and those 94 lines sure come in useful. It's like having 20% extra vertical resolution in every frame.

The cylindrical element of the anamorphic doesn't alter the focal length of your lens much, and not at all in the vertical direction, so DOF shouldn't alter in any way. I'd say keep using it for DVD production, as DVDs can be played through very big 16:9 screens and it's here where the resolution gains of using an anamorphic come into play.

tom.

<<<-- Originally posted by Marco Leavitt : When you say 4:3 DVD I'm assuming you mean letterbox, and my question is -- why would you want to do that? I think you'd be crazy not to shoot anamorphic and encode the DVD to do the letterboxing on the fly for 4:3 televisions. You'll be glad you did in a few years when HDTVs are more commonplace. The only reason to letterbox the footage yourself is for VHS. -->>>
Brain freeze. I was thinking of things like instructional videos, Tae-Bo and Pilates and stuff like that, which are distributed on DVD and full-screen -- but then why would you even think of using the anamorphic? Sorry -- brain warped out there.

As far as anamorphic DOF: the anamorphic itself doesn't affect DOF, but the limitations it imposes on you certainly do. With the anamorphic adapter you can't use wide-open apertures and long focal lengths -- you can't do the combinations that let you get shallow DOF looks. So basically every shot you get with the anamorphic is a deep-DOF shot, because otherwise you won't have enough DOF to overcome the astigmatism and bring both the vertical and horizontal planes into focus in the camera.

If you need shallow-DOF shots and you're using a DVX100A, it's probably better to pull the anamorphic off and use Squeeze mode for those shallow-DOF shots.

I tested extensively with the anamorphic adaptor on my pal dvx100a and viewed the image projected onto a scrêen that was about 4 meters across. I honestly couldnt sêe the difference. I was lơoking for a difference and couldnt tell. So if you werent lơơking for it you definitely wouldnt sêe it. On a tv set there is no difference.
Now for film output I have no idea. Me and some friends tried to convince a lab to show us some fơotage transfêrred from the dvx to film but they didnt give us the time of day. I imagine it would make a difference but really this camera was to give a film lơok on tv's not to save shơoting on film.