Aspect Ratios 2.35:1 vs 1.85:1 vs 1.77:1 ( 16:9 )

hello and welcome to the first video of DP cinema talk today I'd like to talk about the advantages and disadvantages or pros and cons if you will of aspect ratio choices namely 2.35:1 vs.1.85:1 or in other words 16:9 and so with 2.35:1 what are some of the advantages well the most distinct advantage that I can think of as long as you're not shooting in scope or anamorphic is you get the top and bottom of your frame chopped off now this may initially seem like a bad thing but usually in the goal of film is not to cram as much detail into each shot as possible and I'd like to go into depth into that discussion in another video at a later stage but for now suffice to say that the the top and bottom portions of the image being recorded affords more editing options in post as far as framing goes and I'll illustrate that with some examples right now so let's say that you have a simple shot lets start it with a simple shot where the character in focus you know stands up sits down or generally does something that requires a camera adjustment usually through a pan via a fluid head or similar so since we want to frame the subject in most cases the conventional way via the eyeline just simply an imaginary line approximately two-thirds of the way up the top of the image unless there is another reason not to and it's not a hard and fast rule it arguably makes for a more pleasing frame to the viewer making them less aware or less conscious that they are watching a film and so the camera hopefully fades away into the ether and and they just the audience just gets caught up in in what's going on in front of them so in that sense even with these fundamental filming basics you know following your characters properly and framing them properly can really help ease the audience into each shot and getting the audience comfortable with with the shots now if your film is being cropped down from 16:9 to 2.35:1 then you have additional framing options in post to tweak the eyeline among other things and get it get it just right in fact in general if you have the luxury of shooting with a high res sensor let's say 4k and above and I think it may be worth pulling the camera back or if you prefer using a slightly wider lens and tighten those shots in post now you may be instantly thinking oh we're losing resolution that and if you were shooting directly in 1080p and your output is 1080p then you definitely have to consider that as an immediate issue but if your acquisition resolution is way above your final output resolution then you could end up with a much better end result I think allowing yourself that freedom with your editor in post another advantage that could be argued in several ways is how you compose your shot and how that translates from the screen to your audience in subtle ways so apart from the framing advantage above and below you have the advantage to frame the actual subjects differently in 2.35:1 as opposed to 16:9 a take the MCU or medium close I want to say medium close this is where we have the subject in frame up to shoulder height so we see their shoulders we see their face maybe the top of their head is out of frame depends on how far we are in and then blend selection but usually that is what we have in frame you can frame one subject in medium close at 16:9 comfortably fantastic if you have lots of dialogue on single characters shooting over the shoulder with a bit of dirt grateful Locked reverse shots you have two characters facing each other in a diner that shot begs for medium close on both characters and you can comfortably frame that at 2.35:1 and you won't get their legs under the table yet your frame would still give them enough distance that the audience doesn't feel uncomfortably close and you know we're also cutting off needless information like the ceiling of the diner and we know we don't need to see what's under the table again and so which is just distracting information so now if you have an eye shot an eye shot it's simply you know two characters side-by-side unless you want them almost rubbing shoulders you need to pull back to a mid shot on each one to get them comfortably in frame at 16:9 and when I say comfortably I mean you would want their faces in 4:3 zone and this has nothing to do with cinematography at this point and it you know everything to do with considerations for the distribution of your film you know how does this shot look with a 16:9 crop are we chopping off characters if this is shown on TV unfortunately even though we have this wide Vista like frame in 2.35:1 often it's going to be underutilized simply for the fact that in many cases you want the film to be viewable at 16:9 for various reasons so 2.35:1 is also considered to be far more cinematic than 16:9 and I'm going to hazard a guess and say that this is because being earthbound creatures we have this thing in the distance of our frame known as the horizon line and it's a horizontal line with where the sky and the ground converge and I mean there is no quote unquote Verizon line or a vertical equivalent I mean I just made that word up obviously so 2.35:1 allows you to frame something epic it could be soldiers running horses ships cars a city a landscape in the distance and you don't only emphasize the scale by the fact that the horizon takes up such an enormous enveloping streak across the screen but as you move away from the horizon in the vertical direction up towards the top and the bottom edge of the frame you are especially in the lower part of the frame by implication getting closer and closer to the camera since the ground is obviously going to be closer to the camera to the point that if you did have optical coverage and you were able to see lower and lower you'd eventually be staring at the camera tripod on the ground point-blank and you know 2.35:1 allows us to frame the scene so we are distancing our audience from the action the ground immediately in front of the audience can be framed completely out of view so the visual reference points as far as the viewer is concerned is quite far is going to be further than in a 16:9 frame where you've got more vertical space so to get the same effect if you were shooting a 16:9 you'd probably have to frame the horizon line along the lower third to get some a similar effect the final thing about 2.35:1 I know I'm harping on about 2.35:1 this is definitely the last point I'll make and that is with the xcu or extreme close-up at 2.35:1 you can push the camera in so close that you simply have the subjects eyes covering the entire frame that's it there's nothing more in your face as it's well it's quite literally in your face when you were watching this as a viewer used at pivotal moments in a film can be very very expressive and can help greatly with assisting the audience to take in what is what is happening to the character on the screen and emphasize whatever emotion they are experiencing so let's move on to 1.85:1 or since there are so close to each other I'll just refer to this aspect ratio as 16:9 so what are some of the advantages well most screens will be 16:9 you know you've got you are maximizing the viewing area that the viewers display so that's that's the final end now at the acquisition end most camera sensors are at 16:9 for video so that's your maximizing the sensor input data so if your goal is to produce the the most detailed most crisp image so let's say you you're shooting a documentary or you're shooting sports then this is probably the best way to go so let's say your goal is to produce something cinematic you know if you're on top of your game 1.85:1 or 16:9 can be breathtakingly cinematic just as an example you know Steven Spielberg has shot most of his films in 1.85:1 you know Jurassic Park, Saving Private Ryan even James Cameron when he made Aliens as opposed to Ridley Scott's Alien which was in 2.35:1 Aliens if you go back and look that is actually in 1.85:1 and it is epic Aliens was it an epic tour de force if you want to shoot in 16:9 and create something epic you can it might be a little more difficult but it by no means diminishes the ability of 16.9 to produce something fantastic so that's it that's those are all the reasons I could come up with if you have any other points that you have thought of during this talk maybe you found something interesting about either aspect ratio that I've missed you know probably missed many things but if you've got some valuable piece of information you'd like to share please share it with us in the comments please rate this video if you if you liked it and subscribe to the channel and thanks for watching

Channel: DPCinemaTalk

Views: 186,744

Keywords: film making aspect ratio tutorial, aspect ratio for dummies, aspect ratio in Hollywood, aspect ratio in cinematography, anamorphic filmmaking, cinema aspect ratios tutorial, film making aspect ratio explained, camera aspect ratio tutorial, aspect ratio in film explained, aspect ratio walkthrough, cinematography inside look, why aspect ratio is important, how aspect ratio is used, aspect ratio in film, why is aspect ratio important, aspect ratio in movies, Aspect Ratio

Id: g0scR-CbzpU

Length: 11min 39sec (699 seconds)

Published: Wed Aug 26 2015