Posted by Vincent at ac91b6c1.ipt.aol.com on August 07, 2000 at 03:21:27:
In Reply to: Vincent (If you can help): Lenses question posted by IrishBob on August 05, 2000 at 17:50:06:
: 1. Jeff Cronenweth(DP of Fight Club) said that he used Spherical lenses to shoot 'Fight Club', he said that these gave depth to the blacks and gave more focus to things farther away(Im a huge fan of David Fincher, especially the look of the movies Se7en and Fight Club). I know that anamorphic lenses give a different look and I wondered if you knew the differences between the two and the different look(s) they achieve. (Also, what lenses did DP Dave use to film The VA flicks?)
Anamorphic lenses tend to have a somewhat "softer" look than spherical, and actually are a bit less sharp. They are also double the focal length of the corresponding spherical lens (due to the anamorphic element in the lens), and also aren't as fast as spherical lenses- for theese two reasons, anamorphic is often sited as having less depth of field than spherical (although with lots of light and wide-angle lenses you can get good depth in anamorphic- JAWS is a film that comes to mind). Anamorphic is also finer-grained than spherical Super-35 when composed for 2.40:1, due to the larger overall negative area (an anamorphic frame measures roughly 18mm tall by 21mm wide, whereas the 2.40:1 area of Super-35 is arounf 10mm tall by 24mm wide).
All the VA flicks were shot using spherical lenses- CLERKS in standard 16mm, CHASING AMY in Super-16mm, MALLRATS is standard 1.85:1 35mm, and DOGMA in Super-35, the same format used to shoot FIGHT CLUB (and GLADIATOR, and CASINO, and all of James Cameron's films since THE ABYSS, etc.).
: 2. And also, I tried to find out what dictates aspect rario, is it the processing, the lenses, or the stock?
It's the lenses and how the image is composed within the frame. Anamorphic will always be 2.4:1, and Super-35 can be either 1.85:1 or 2.4:1 depending on what the D.P. and director choose.
Vincent