Hey thanks!

😇❤️

hey thanks so much! more to come 😊

Hey thanks so much :) I will keep them coming 😊

I used the bulge tool for years before trying lens correction in resolve. There is also lens correction in fusion. They are all similar, but usually one comes out on top for each different lens.

Hey thanks so much! I’m happy that I’m the first one you turned on notifications for. I’ll make sure to make the next one a banger 😂. Check CVP, they gotta have it. I like the GJ 50.

Thank you thank you 😊

thank you 😊

Yo! Thank you! It was great working with you. Thanks for everything you did. Your team was incredible. One of the hottest shoots I’ve ever been on lol. Constant sweating. Loved it. You in Orlando?

@@BlaineWestropp1 Thanks! Of course man, it was such a pleasure, and it was brutally hot lol. I am actually based in Tampa. If you're ever around again, would love to grab a coffee or beer if you have time!

Cool! Will definitely hit ya up next time I’m down there. Heading to Miami in a few days.

Me too. It’s really cool

Looove it! Amazing times

Thank you. More to come 😊

Thank you! Will need to test this, but isn’t the squeeze in resolve only working for when the lens is mounted properly? I’ll have to test. When I was shooting the footage came in desqueezed bc I left it on in camera.

@@BlaineWestropp1 to make it work you have to shoot vertically but mount the lens normally (horizontally), also to keep the horizontal flares and bokeh. For example: Shooting in 4k vertically (2160x3840) with an 1.5x anamorphic lens, you will end up in a pixel ratio of 3240x3840. When you create the vertical timeline with this ratio and tick the desqueeze box of your clip (1.5x) it will automatically desqueeze it correctly when you drag it into the timeline. I hope my explanation can be understood correctly :) This is an example for 16:9 sensors. If you have a 3:2 sensor and shoot vertically with a 2x anamorphic lens, then you end up with a 4:3 image, which is even nicer actually!

Thank you :)

Me too. More to come.

Lemme know if you want to borrow one!

​@@BlaineWestropp1 damn thanks man! i'll be happy to take you on that offer when I visit the US. Really happy you show almost all the roles of being in this industry.

Thank you :) yep you can definitely get away with a lot more 2x lenses if delivering 2:1. I’ve recently started loving 2:1. How did you like the round fronts?

I agree. I also think this lens does fine at 2.9. On some other lenses the improvement from stopping down is much more apparent.

Deakins like the true to life approach. Likely based on his start in the doc world. I also think this could be due to large budgets. Keep the image clean. Anamorphic can be distracting, but, I do like it. Also, Cookes in my experience have very much pincushion. I need to try the aivascope. I’ve seen some beautiful images from the aivascope. Maybe I get my hands on one soon…

@@BlaineWestropp1 agreed! Guess deakins has always hated artifice but ironically when shooting docs anamorphic was the first thing i went for and actually twisted the element during the shot( it was an adapter on a taking lens so weirdly the shot would go from out of focus and twist into focus. Used sparingly it worked well. I was definitely into making custom set ups back then and adding elements to existing lens) And thinking about it deakins is know for his deakiniser lens. btw i love anamorphic too and tilt shift (canon range seem very underused) bits of stocking or glass (lensbaby) on lens even lens wacking but these days its so easy to do so much in post. I remember shooting on film cameras with a massive bellows tilt shift lens way back when over 30 years ago and it was amazing. Very much like the deakiniser but i guess thats a good example of convergent evolution but using quite different processes though the creative results are surprisingly similar as an effect. Surprisingly intuitive to adjust the image plane with a bellows device. Like a 10x8 large format camera. That is exactly what the aviascope images squared up remind me of. Very paolo roversi. Guess that was the inspiration for using it. Guess i slightly ODed on that look but it still works. I think you’ll like the aviascope twisted up as a square frame for sure. I think in reality because of post a lot of these more analog optical lens affects do need idata to be part of the design at the high end but there’s a debate i guess about how naturalistic or abstracted any image should be. Any effect is signposting intent and it’s interesting to see anamorphic as an affect rather than a simple way to get a wider frame say as a 21mm but have the distortion characteristics of a 42mm so a lot easier on the face especially in two shots. As always a very timely and excellent post. Thx again.

Love native barrel distortion on spherical lenses ❤️. Would love to see footage from that.

@@BlaineWestropp1 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Zqpgmcemmb7ZlI0.html kzfaq.info/get/bejne/g7Zki8SeqbXcimw.html these two sitting setups were shot with the 35mm. It's subtle but I surely like better than stock.

Yes! Great point and thank you :)

@@BlaineWestropp1 also worth mentioning where to set the pixel aspect ratio in the metadata if it's not imported, but any, love seeing this

I’ll see what I can do

Can definitely create problems. I didn’t mention it but I didn’t mean to not mention it. Was never an issue for me. If the stretch was off I would fix in post. Of course this is definitely something you do not want in a lens.. and good to know.

😇😇 sup dude.

Sure thing! Also, yes it is harder to rotate non PL mount lenses. I can’t say if that would work or not. But if you do do it… report back. Just be careful!

😇

Yep. I really want an aivascope!

Hey thanks! I like anamorphic. Also like spherical. Anamorphic is good in only one scenario, when you get approved to shoot it. Spherical can be used for anything. So if you had one lens set, and wanted to use that set on a variety of projects, I’d go spherical then do anamorphic for 2nd set. But if you have spherical that you can use, try out anamorphic! I like the dzo vespids and they are my most recommended set to buy. Great look. Great price, solid lenses.

nope. im a barrel guy.

Barrel vibez

Will check out. Last time I checked on this I felt it being identical to the OFX distortion in color page. Is it better?

@@BlaineWestropp1 u mean lens distortion in OFX color page? it's different. the Color Page use the RGB value idk what scenarios needed for that, the lens distort is way better in fusion tab with the bunch of adjustments. I always use the fusion tab to make the anamorphic distort and bringing the information that being cropped by 2.39:1 aspect back to the frame.

Cool thanks. Will check out!

Hmmm was it blurry? Would have to see a frame to know for sure. Feel free to link a frame here or message me on ig.

I have only used the 50. I like it. They are on sale right now, so now could be a good time! They have pincushion distortion which I am not fond of, but I fix that in post.

@@BlaineWestropp1 thanks for the quick response! Love your work bro. Thanks for the gems you share

🫡

The are coming. Just ordered another big batch. Lol.

the Alexa mini LF sensor is 36.70 x 25.54 mm, so about 1.44:1, rounded to 3:2. the Alexa 35 is 27.99 x 19.22, which is a close aspect ratio to the LF. in the menus on both camera's it is called 3:2.

Ok thanks for clarifying

@@OrangeBrick8 🫡

Both will provide vastly different looks!

😂