Anamorphic stretching on Man Of Steel? What is this!? UGH! (1 Viewer)

[Radioman970]

 

[Brian Dobbs]

I will admit I see no difference between the BD and the way it looked in theaters, but I would think it would be fairly easy to check. We have a Blu-ray 3D, Blu-ray, bonus disc with the "Maximum Movie Mode", and the DVD. One film, four seperate discs, four unique video encodes. If the stretching appears the same across all four, it seems very unlikely to be an error.

Watch the "Journey Of Discovery" (a.k.a. Maximum Movie Mode).

From time to time, the actors will appear next to when their characters appear on screen. There's a difference between they way they look. A very noticeable difference. I.E. They look WIDE in the film and normal on BTS video.

 

[Brian Dobbs]

The screengrabs posted over at DVD Beaver are not encouragind sadly ...

If not the same issue as HOTN, then what is it?

 

[Brian Dobbs]

I will admit I see no difference between the BD and the way it looked in theaters, but I would think it would be fairly easy to check. We have a Blu-ray 3D, Blu-ray, bonus disc with the "Maximum Movie Mode", and the DVD. One film, four seperate discs, four unique video encodes. If the stretching appears the same across all four, it seems very unlikely to be an error.

So you're saying it looked stretched horizontally in the theater?

 

[Reed Grele]

In the Man of Steel universe, George Reeves would look like this:

 

[Geoff_D]

I see nothing wrong with Man of Steel whatsoever. Yes, there is distortion, but, unlike The Big Country, MoS was actually shot anamorphic and the distortion is par for the course, especially if the DoP has used an older series of lenses (which they sometimes do, precisely because they like the specific performances of that glass, slight 'mumps' and all).

I'm guessing y'all don't have Big Trouble in Little China or Star Trek Into Darkness in your BD collections? Those two are prime examples of squished-looking anamorphic shows.

 

[FoxyMulder]

IMDB lists lots of lenses used for the film, it might not be accurate, anyone with knowledge can take a look though and comment.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0770828/technical
Camera Arriflex 235, Panavision C- and E-Series Lenses Arriflex 435 ES, Panavision C-, E-Series, ATZ and AWZ2 Lenses Panavision Panaflex Millennium XL2, Panavision C-, E-Series, ATZ and AWZ2 Lenses

 

[Geoff_D]

The C-Series is the oldest of Panavision's anamorphic lineup. Some DoP's know specific lenses so well that they will request them by serial number.

 

[Brian Dobbs]

I see nothing wrong with Man of Steel whatsoever. Yes, there is distortion, but, unlike The Big Country, MoS was actually shot anamorphic and the distortion is par for the course, especially if the DoP has used an older series of lenses (which they sometimes do, precisely because they like the specific performances of that glass, slight 'mumps' and all).

I'm guessing y'all don't have Big Trouble in Little China or Star Trek Into Darkness in your BD collections? Those two are prime examples of squished-looking anamorphic shows.

So it is possible this distortion was caused by the lenses used to film the movie? How can distortion be acceptable?

 

[Citizen87645]

Distortion can be acceptable if that's the nature of the optical hardware being used and the director of photography is OK with it, or even wants it.

All lenses and formats have their pros and cons. It comes down to what people are willing to live with and / or the benefit that overshadows the shortcomings.

 

[Geoff_D]

So it is possible this distortion was caused by the lenses used to film the movie? How can distortion be acceptable?

Visible distortion has been part of the anamorphic process since its inception in the middle of the last century (or thereabouts). Admittedly, you won't see it look the same way across every anamorphic show (or even every shot within such a show) because of the idiosyncracies of the lenses themselves and how they are used re: lighting, focus and so on.

It's kinda ironic that Panavision et al have worked for years to create newer sets of anamorphic glass that match better in terms of sharpness and colour, with superior coating that minimises other contentious artefacts like lens flares ("What's dis blue streak on my picture?? Mah TV's broken!" etc), and yet most modern filmmakers continue to use those older, slightly 'mumpier' lenses and have flares going all over the place!

 

[Stephen_J_H]

Anamorphic "mumps" seems a plausible explanation. Note how in every capture, the character is dead centre, or just slightly off-centre. I would be curious as to whether or not the same squishing is present in shots where the actor is in the left or right third of the frame. If not, it's "mumps".