|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Author
|
Topic: Anamorphic lens question
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!
Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 06-07-2008 07:21 AM
This is not entirely accurate.
Many macines have a single line for focus to denote when it is correct. Unlike an anamorphic attachment, which must be calibrated to the theatre in relationship to the prime lens, a prime lens will have one point that it is in focus for a given throw. Calibration of a prime lens is also pretty straight forward...when the image is as sharp as can be, it is in focus, for that lens. All other points along the projector's focus range are of no consequence.
The anamorphic, being a cylindrical device (as opposed to spherical) isn't so cut and dried. The astigmatism adjustment is only working on one plane, not all. Thus, you could rack it through its range and never achieve the best results.
Looking back through the history of the anamorphic lens and lenses in general you can see the origins of the distance markings. First off, I don't know of any lens that has a focusable ring that doesn't also have distance markings. The same goes for apertures (iris). Zooms, however do not always get the same sort of thing though some do that correspond to the EF of the setting.
Looking back a bit more into history...the B&L anamorphic and even the older Kollmorgan anamorphics (by Kasaka) were multi-turn distance rings. As such, without some sort of marking, one could be wildly off base and it would take several turns to figure out where you were.
Most, if not all "modern" anamorphics are single turn devices (except the Schneider compact "ES" anamorphic...but it doesn't use a "ring" so much as a screw).
The ISCO Ultra (decendant of the Kiptar), seemed to have a relatively accurate ring and was calibratable via set screw. The index line also always seemed to be on the vertical center of the image.
The Schneider anamorphics of the '80s certainly had "misleading" index lines and generally also had shifted lens elements such that one could forget about decent focus, regardless of where you set the astigmatism adjustment...it was internally astigmatized!
The current line of lenses by ISCO seem to have the index line most anywhere relative to the lens being set correctly though I often find the index line between the horz and vert centerline of the image plane (10-11 O'Clock as one were to look down the mouth of the lens from the theatre). Often, the index footage marking does not exactly correspond to actual distance when optimal focus is achieved.
Schneider seems to have for for a different approach...they now sport a vernier that has relatively little useful information other than knowing at which extreme the astigmatism is set to.
In the end however, the distance markings should be not be use as anything other than a ball park or as an indication of gross errors. If you have a projection throw of 80-feet and you think the image looks best with the astigmatism set to say 40-feet...then the odds are, you have either done a poor job of getting BOTH the vertical and horizontal fields in simultaneous focus, OR you have some sort of damage to your lens(es).
The difference between 78 and 80 feet though...exceed the precision of the markings for cinema use.
Steve
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|