If you want even cooler lens distortions and are rendering with Cycles, changing the blender camera setting from perspective mode to Panoramic Fisheye Equisolid and it will give you natural in-camera barrel distortion as well. This paired with the ratio settings in both the camera and the squeeze ratio would give an awesome result! 👏
I’ve tried this before it definitely looks cool asf in some scenarios but for this I found it looked kinda off (I like that you can manually play around with the k values too)
When we render as the 2:1 squeezed and unsqueeze in the post pro isn't that also reduce the quality and details because it stretched image now, i think for the solution is if you want the final output to be 1080p when render 2:1 we need to double the resolution. At least we have a lot more information and data when we unsqueeze it.
I mean you can render at double resolution if you want, the concept tho is the same as how a lower resolution image with a good image is gonna look better than a super high resolution awful image, there’s more pros than cons to this method (in my opinion)
Do you know how to double the x size after rendering in compositor (within Blender)? But anyway, this tip is great. It renders much faster and gets a "retro" touch what I like very much. Also I tried having less samples, because I like that kind of noise. Update 1: when I save the render and load it in the image viewer I can resize manually. But a automated kinda way would be preferable. Update 2: You can scale 2x for the file output. Sadly 2x crops the image in the render viewer. Update 3: The render viewer can be configured (press n, view tab, display) to also change the aspect ratio.
It's probably better to use when you shoot some footage with real anamorphic lens and try to put VFX on it, it keep that dirty and bloomy look we use to have the lens flare must also be squeeze for more photoreal approach using 2.35 or 2.39 aspect ratio the other school is to use conventional spherical Lens and recrop in scope, that last one was use for recrope on scope and also on IMAX 1.90 aspect ratio with priority to the scope crop.
It won't give higher quality in Blender (nor does it with film, either). You should experiment with the different methods he suggests. It'd be important to be able to identify which one RENDERS anamorphic (half the horizontal resolution), versus which one is anamorphosed after rendering (preserving sample detail). The original idea was to fit twice the landscape area into the same 35mm square. In fact, the horizontal resolution (yes, it's still resolution on film) really is DECREASED by squashing it. You lose horizontal quality with anamorphic photography, but not enough to matter (film's resolution really is astonishingly high), and you get the benefit of a wide-screen result when you "unsquash" it without having to stitch together multiple film negatives (like Cinerama).
Such a simple thing but it makes works much more realistic. Thank you
If you want even cooler lens distortions and are rendering with Cycles, changing the blender camera setting from perspective mode to Panoramic Fisheye Equisolid and it will give you natural in-camera barrel distortion as well. This paired with the ratio settings in both the camera and the squeeze ratio would give an awesome result! 👏
I’ve tried this before it definitely looks cool asf in some scenarios but for this I found it looked kinda off (I like that you can manually play around with the k values too)
This is exactly what I was looking for.
awesome ideas! I never noticed the anamorphic slider in dof settings. thx!
When we render as the 2:1 squeezed and unsqueeze in the post pro isn't that also reduce the quality and details because it stretched image now, i think for the solution is if you want the final output to be 1080p when render 2:1 we need to double the resolution. At least we have a lot more information and data when we unsqueeze it.
I mean you can render at double resolution if you want, the concept tho is the same as how a lower resolution image with a good image is gonna look better than a super high resolution awful image, there’s more pros than cons to this method (in my opinion)
good info and never actually thought of it, great video insightful
happy to hear that!
Lovely result, nice work.
great vid
Interesting advice ! Thank you
:O faster renders
Do you know how to double the x size after rendering in compositor (within Blender)? But anyway, this tip is great. It renders much faster and gets a "retro" touch what I like very much. Also I tried having less samples, because I like that kind of noise.
Update 1: when I save the render and load it in the image viewer I can resize manually. But a automated kinda way would be preferable.
Update 2: You can scale 2x for the file output. Sadly 2x crops the image in the render viewer.
Update 3: The render viewer can be configured (press n, view tab, display) to also change the aspect ratio.
That’s cool I didn’t know you could change the viewport aspect ratio
In what panel can you change aspect ratio. I know you can set film height or senso. But aspect ratio is a camera thing or render output
It's probably better to use when you shoot some footage with real anamorphic lens and try to put VFX on it, it keep that dirty and bloomy look we use to have the lens flare must also be squeeze for more photoreal approach using 2.35 or 2.39 aspect ratio the other school is to use conventional spherical Lens and recrop in scope, that last one was use for recrope on scope and also on IMAX 1.90 aspect ratio with priority to the scope crop.
True I mean once you have to do anything with real footage it gets wayyy more technical
I suppose you unsqueeze the image with your postproduction soft? would it be better to unsqueeze it in the blender compositor?
Yes I use davinci resolve and just zoom it by 2x on the x axis
how to make vertical bokeh with 2x render ? should i put ratio to 4 ? and also do you add grain in blender composite and then also in the davinci ?
You just have to put ratio as 2 and you’ll get the effect no matter the render ratio, and I only add either digital grain or film grain not both
Wait, squash8ng data into a smaller frame, how can that be to get a better quality. They are literally stretching it out
It won't give higher quality in Blender (nor does it with film, either). You should experiment with the different methods he suggests. It'd be important to be able to identify which one RENDERS anamorphic (half the horizontal resolution), versus which one is anamorphosed after rendering (preserving sample detail).
The original idea was to fit twice the landscape area into the same 35mm square. In fact, the horizontal resolution (yes, it's still resolution on film) really is DECREASED by squashing it. You lose horizontal quality with anamorphic photography, but not enough to matter (film's resolution really is astonishingly high), and you get the benefit of a wide-screen result when you "unsquash" it without having to stitch together multiple film negatives (like Cinerama).
@@matthewhurley5117 I thing that checkbox or float value, renders the image in engine twice as wide and than scales it back to the input.
honestly not sure if i agree with you, i don't think i'm seeing what you're seeing, can you post the normal vs anamorphic renders?
just uploaded lmk what you think
@fgagnon.design can you post a render of something other than this already abstract looking item? Maybe something with two people?
I imagine this was not supposed to have this clickbait effect but just to let you know the thumbnail looks like booties
Bro, I'm corrupted or the thumbnail is Kim Kardashian 🍑 reference?!? 😂😂😂
You’re corrupted bucko
I don't see any difference.